030005_INSPECTIONS_20171231

Division of WaterrResotirOnservation
t,. -
Facility Number � - � 0 Division of Soil and R'ate
0 Other Agency
Type of Visit: _Aiom Hance Inspection 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: Arrival Time: Departure Time: e / County: At a t/Region: WI -U
Farm Name: Q,r rnC' o Owner Email: l
� 1 57-34 3t`
Owner Name: Phone: C—1 Cui+O n
Mailing Address: _�� ] �j Q.t� U 'En n 1 Ce NC
Physical Address: k
Facility Contact: S Title: Phone:
�� 33 d r t iq s P e
Onsite Representative: ategratar: e.edms° N (o r5 b
17-!;U''9Certified Operator: Te'n - �� � Certificationer: ! O Ca a 87 3
Back-up Operator:
Location of Farm:
Latitude: 3& O
Certification Number:
t s r t Longitude: Q Q OZy t l
From- WSA-o v U5 S;�_ N l =-Z q W1 :r-77 55 � g W � Nc4wy I$ S. Far M
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
Discharp_es and Stream Impacts
Design Current
Wet Poultry Capacity Pop.
La er
Non -Layer
Design Current
Dry Poultry Capacity Pop.
Layers
Non -Lavers
Pullets
Turkeys
Turkey Poults
Other
Design Current
Cattle Capacity Pop.
Dairy Cow
O
Z
Dairy Calf
Dairy Heifer
Dry Cow
Non -Dairy
Beef Stocker
Beef Feeder
Beef Brood Cow
1. Is any discharge observed from any part of the operation?
❑ Yes
% olNo
❑ 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
No
P<
❑ NA
❑ NE
3. Were there any observable adverse impacts or potential adverse impacts to the waters
M Yes
❑ No
❑ NA
❑ NE
of the State other than from a discharge?
Page 1 of 3 21412015 Continued

Facili Number: - 0 jDate of Inspection: 7
Waste Collection & Treatment
4. Is storage capacity (structural plus storm storage plus heavy rainfall) less than adequate? ❑ Yes X"'No ❑ NA ❑ NE
,1_( a. If yes, is waste level into the structural freeboard? ❑ Yes ❑ No ❑ NA ❑ NE
yj Structure 1 Structure 2 Structure 3 Structure 4 Structure 5 Structure 6
Identifier: W06 t&_
Spillway?:
Designed Freeboard (in):
Observed Freeboard (in): �J V
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?
❑ Yes 9 No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes XNo ❑ NA ❑ NE
If any of questions 4-6 were answered yes, and the situation poses an immediate public health or environment 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 WN, ❑ 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 PNo ❑ 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 P�No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Excessive Ponding ❑ Hydraulic Overload ❑ Frozen Ground ❑ Heavy Metals (Cu, Zn, etc.)
❑ PAN ❑ PAN > 10% or 10 lbs. ❑ Total Phosphorus ❑ Failure to Incorporate Manure/Sludge into Bare Soil
❑ Outside of Acceptable Crop Window ❑ Evidence of Wind Drift ❑ Application Outside of Approved Area
12. Crop Type(s): Fe_5 G UCH. *y ('�G iiY1.. \ GCbQ Lf%C>V
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 CZNA ❑ NE
acres determination?
17. Does the facility lack adequate acreage for land application? ❑ Yes t 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 �fNo ❑ NA ❑ NE
20. Does the facility fail to have all components of the CAWMP readily available? If yes, check �(Y e s 0 No ❑ NA ❑ NE
the appropriate box.
❑WUP Checklists ❑ Design 14Maps ❑ Lease Agreements ❑Other:
21. Does record keeping need mprovement`? �e J , ❑ Yes JZ No ❑ NA ❑ NE
Waste ApKst
'on ekly Freeboard [Waste Analysis Soil Analysis j� 3441 ie w4 ❑ Weather Code
Rainfallcking Crop Yield ❑ 120 Minute Inspections �] Monthly and 1" Rainfall Inspections
1Ax
22. Did the facility fail to install and maintain a rain gauge? ❑ Yes Czf No ❑ NA ❑ NE
23. If selected, did the facility fail to install and maintain rainbreakers on irrigation equipment? ❑ Yes ❑ No rS�KA 0 NE
Page 2 of 3 21412015 Continued

Facili Number: 0,3 jDate of Inspection: Q
24. Did the facility fail to calibrate waste Appication equipment as required by the permit? ba Yes ❑ No ❑ NA ❑ NE
25. Is the facility out of compliance with permit conditions related to sludge? If yes, check ❑ Yes ❑ No C;�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 ZNo ❑ NA ❑ NE
27. Did the facility fail to secure a phosphorus loss assessments (PLAT) certification? ❑ Yes allo ❑ 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? !!!!ll�����TTTT
29. At the time of the inspection did the facility pose an odor or air quality concern? ❑ Yes 9No ❑ 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) IN
31. Do subsurface tile drains exist at the facility? If yes, check the appropriate box below. ❑ Yes -0 No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Application Field ❑ Lagoon/Storage Pond ❑ Other:
32. Were any additional problems noted which cause non-compliance of the permit or CAWMP? X Yes ❑ No ❑ NA ❑ NE
33. Did the Reviewer/Inspector fail to discuss review/inspection with an on -site representative? ❑ Yes �' o ❑ NA ❑ NE
34. Does the facility require a follow-up visit by the same agency? ❑ Yes FeNo ❑ NA ❑ NE
Comments (refer to question #): Explain any YES answers and/or any additional recommendations or any other comments.
U,se,4rawings of facility to better explain situations (use additional pages as necessary).
4- a,b t1 50.1 f8-5f7 YlQ �o pie"%OI 1,t nc1ueA i rt 'o e-) Z1r�C
c !, e-` V- s� 5 rn c$ S a b t h e� �v c A aQ ? N °+ �{ �-t o &NeC_tL_ rN e��o
r �
96410 C_�ibra_}- on f(sc 3,660�rzi a ab 7 Bali brc�-�-iontee 3 SU q cif. Cont�
1 .1
J. Seth M, # � In 5 h-eQ�v► o Re -as e vvt.c_r n +&, i In Io
D 0 r1 C4_ '( l r b c e'A eA i n ';�_C) T 62-
aD 1'70
La v, re�e-e_l ve_ S L-:) sty 8+n to t ra-'kY�`*�a_+ i S
hoer v� - rn o r� r-� c �► v�- a-s bas . AC, re
�# 2 q f a.o 1�
r/Inspector Name: Q t
Reviewer/Inspector Signaturel,d,�
Page 3 of 3
Phone:(
Date: s I f Z r 2-0 l 7
T
2/4/2015

Division of Water Resource
Facility Number ®- 9-Division of Soil and Water Servation
0 Other Agency j f A
Type of visit: Compliance Inspection 0 Operation Review 0 Structure Evaluation 0 Technical Assistance
Reason for Visit: (e Routine 0 Complaint 0 Follow-up 0 Referral 0 Emergency 0 Other 0 Denied Access
Date of visit: Arrival Time: OF zd3bDeparture Time: County: Region: i )5P-10
Ij
Farm Name: I E s m `` �-�1 FCI ry� Sh(�' Owner Email:
c J1! g O [oS �
Owner Name: ,7 i r �2. Phone:vL �dS a
Nailing Address:
Physical Address: ��-7 f F L.,r i V Ant : En n ice-, NC UZ
Facility Contact: T'P_� cL Title: Phone:
Onsite Representative: �e�a r✓ [(�}-� 5-m- Iv y Integrator: 10 Vr �3
Certified Operator: J-eV1Cx Certification Number:
Back-up Operator:
Certification Number:
e
Location of Farm: Latitude: 1 ?� 60 1 YZ 1 l
3�, � S � Longitude:
14vjt 2-1 N1 70Ktrld�e. t tI � L t0_r16f2-
W� �u iN
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.
Layer
Non -La er
Design Current
Dry PoultrV 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.
Dairy Cow
Dairy Calf
Dairy Heifer
Dry Cow
Non -Dairy
Beef Stocker
Beef Feeder
Beef Brood Cow
❑ Yes '5�,Ko ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes.,❑ No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes ❑ No ❑ NA ❑ NE
[:)Yes ❑ No
No
❑ Yes �
❑ Yes��No
❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ NA ❑ NE
Page 1 of 3 21412015 Continued

Facility Number: 03 - Q5 • Date of Inspection:
Waste Collection & Treatment
4. Is storage capacity (structural plus storm storage plus heavy rainfall) less than adequate? ❑ Yes No ❑ NA ❑ NE
a. If yes, is waste level into the structural freeboard? ❑ Yes �❑ No ❑ NA ❑ NE
Structure 1 Structure 2 Structure 3 Structure 4 Structure 5 Structure 6
ID
Identifier:-o 1j _
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
(i.e., large trees, severe erosion, seepage, etc.) r
6. Are there structures on -site which are not properly addressed and/or managed through a ❑ Yes WNo ❑ 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 rNo
o ❑ NA ❑ NE
8. Do any of the structures lack adequate markers as required by the permit? ❑ Yes ❑ 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? T
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):
0,( V) Go�i �1r1
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 allo ❑ NA ❑ NE
16. Did the facility fail to secure and/or operate per the irrigation design or wettable ❑ Yes ❑ No Da1GA ❑ NE
acres determination?
17. Does the facility lack adequate acreage for land application`?
18. Is there a lack of properly operating waste application equipment?
Required Records & Documents
19. Did the facility fail to have the Certificate of Coverage & Permit readily available?
❑ Yes No ❑ NA ❑ NF.
❑ Yes XNo ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes t�(No
20. Does the facility fail to have all components of the CAWMP readily available? If yes, check N Yes ❑ No
the appropriate box.
El WUP Checklists ❑Design Map ❑ LeaeAgreements ❑Other:
2 . Does record keeping lie:? XYes ❑ No
Waste Ap W 1 - Freeb rd Waste Analyst Soil Analysis
Rainfall CL&o n T Crop Yield 120 Minute Inspections Monthly and l" Rainfall Inspections
22. Did the facilt o 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
❑NA ❑NE
❑ NA ❑ NE
�NA ❑ NE
Weather Code
❑ NA ❑ NE
Cq..T:A ❑ NE
Page 2 of 21412015 Continued

Facility Number: V,j - Date of Ins ection: I
24. Did the facility fail to calibrate waste application equipment as required by the permit? ❑ Yes 1� 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 6No ❑ NA ❑ NE
27. Did the facility fail to secure a phosphorus loss assessments (PLAT) certification? [] Yes No ❑ NA ❑ NE
Other Issues
28. Did the facility fail to properly dispose of dead animals with 24 hours and/or document
❑ Yes
156 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
Zjro ❑ NA ❑ NE
If yes, contact a regional Air Quality representative immediately.
30. Did the facility fail to notify the Regional Office of emergency situations as required by the
❑ Yes
0 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
VNo ❑ 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 #): Explain any YES answers and/or any additional recommendations or any other comments.
Use drawines of facilitv to better explain situations (use additional paizes as necessarv).
(.21415oi 14-�s�s e ozo ,�w„ 5 �, ao E No+ AoAds have. eU rr�s�t
e Cali brat` 0t1 der 31 E oo u e- 02 0 1 3 f5d,�a - due G 1 7.
W a!5 M ck* i,M (3Lx lLe+ _ vex 4 t ej 7 N0+\ye-_b
4- Ol to q j zo 1 S; 11,1
APp1f Ca ,015 au—, t-ro,-Y\ 5ur-P_&e, u a+erp
al Pt Sef ! R C l u j e_ Cuq- Zh I In J o l
®vim N ©r\+Cb 2-0Z r r
4A r r c'�5
& s 401-
Som li cc -1c� v� o lr -+0 cC r r\ 't 0_ ' u~ 1 O
KC-1 j
5 4-
Reviewer/Inspector Name: ItUljsCL Phone:, 336" 7-76 -- Q19
Reviewer/Inspector Signature,.,
Page 3 0 }�j� i
�- Date:

■ Division of Water Resources
❑ Division of Soil and Water Conservation
❑ Other Agency
Facility Number: 030005 Facility Status: Active Permit: AWC0300,05� � 0 Denied Access
Inpsection Type: Structure Evaluation Inactive Or Closed Date:
Reason for visit: Emergency County: Aileghany Region: Winston-Salem
Date of Visit: 10/0512015 EntryTime: 01:15 pm Exit Time: 1:45 pm Incident #
Farm Name: Billy Smith Farms inc Owner Email: [e-mail]
Owner: Billy Smith wenls tu;c A M Phone: [phone]
Mailing Address: W� 0arl Smitl%-2;t752 BarrettiRd Erinice?NC'28623r'
Physical Address: 371 Early Rd Ennice NC 28623
Facility Status: ❑ Compliant Not Compliant Integrator:
Location of Farm: Latitude: 36' 32' 51" Longitude: 81° 00' 24"
Farm location: US Hwy 421 north to 1-77 north. NC HWY 21 north to Sparta. North on NC Hwy 18 and left onto Early Road. Farm on
right.
Question Areas:
Waste Col, Stor, & Treat
Certified Operator: B Carl Smith Operator Certification Number: 21441
Secondary OIC(s):
On -Site Representative(s): Name Title Phone
24 hour contact name Rhonda Smith Phone
On -site representative Rhonda Smith Phone
Primary Inspector: N
Inspector Signature: _
Secondary Inspector(s):
Phone: 1(334,77(o- "1617
Date: 1 of s-1 o I S"
P, A A A, 6 t Idd
Inspection Summary:
Waste level rose above maximum liquid mark on September and Chase Smith called DVVR. Waste level was 12-18 inches below
maximum liquid marls before storm. Plans to pump Friday (October 9) onto small grain.
page: 1

r
Permit: AWC030005 Owner - Facility : Billy Smith Facility Number: 030005
Inspection Date: 10/05/15 Inpsection Type: Structure Evaluation Reason for Visit: Emergency
Waste Structures
Disignated Observed
Type Identifier Closed Date Start Date Freeboard Freeboard
Waste Pond WASTE POND 18.00 42.00
Waste Collection Storage & Treatment
Yes
No Na Ne
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 (I.e./ large
❑
0 ❑
❑
trees, severe erosion, seepage, etc.)?
S. Are there structures on -site that are not properly addressed and/or managed through a
❑
MED
❑
waste management or closure plan?
7. Do any of the structures need maintenance or improvement?
❑
M ❑
❑
8. 00 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?
page: 2

Division of Water Quality '
Facility Number - 0 Division of Soil and Water Conservation
0 Other Agency
Type of Visit: Compliance Inspection Q Operation Review O Structure Evaluation 0 Technical Assistance
Reason for Visit: tyRoutine 0 Complaint 0 Follow-up 0 Referral 0 Emergency 0 Other 0 Denied Access
Date of Visit: l 3 Arrival Time: a Departure Time: l , County: Region:
o � yFarm Name: 191011 MI Tlr► J� s caner E ail:
Owner Name: 1 Mr Phone: G 5-/— 2 I
Mailing Address: `/0 6A tr . Sry,•� i Z �S� Xarre- H 9d , F/t 296 2 3
Physical Address:
Facility Contact:
371. 5arl
•
mn /Gc
, 0e- 2C& 2-3
i_
6A
Se",�
co r L
Title:
it
S 41it'h 10 g�� 4& 6 n YN I C'& I toL
Phone:
Onsite Representative: J on g
tl C,c �� ; Inte rotor:
Certified Operator:
Back-up Operator:
Location of Farm:
" 7 z(
Swine
L/A,r 1 S M %lt Certification Number:
Certification Number:
Latitude: �4 3 Z 5 Longitude:
L garI R
/AAA — Alt., tv.l
Design Current Design Current
Capacity Pop. Wet Poultry Capacity Pop.
Layer
Nan -La er
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 Pnnitry Canacity Pan -
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)
c. What is the estimated volume that reached waters of the State (gallons)?
Cattle
411° 40`241""
Design Current
Capacity, Pop.
Dairy Cow
717�D
Dairy Calf
Dairy Heifer
Dry Cow
Non -Dairy
Beef Stocker
Beef Feeder
Beef Brood Cow
❑ Yes 0 No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes ❑ No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes ❑ No ❑ NA ❑ NE
d. Does the discharge bypass the waste management system? (If yes, notify DWQ) [—]Yes [:]No ❑ NA ❑ NE
2. Is there evidence of a past discharge from any part of the operation? ❑ Yes No ❑ NA ❑ NE
3. Were there any observable adverse -impacts or potential adverse impacts to the waters ❑ Yes No ❑ NA ❑ NE
of the State other than from a discharge?
Page I of 3 21412011 Continued

Facility Number: 3 jDate of Inspection: 2 IS 3
Waste Collection & Treatment
4. Is storage capacity (structural plus storm storage plus heavy rainfall) less than adequate? ❑ Yes tNo ❑ NA ❑ NE
a. If yes, is waste level into the structural freeboard? ❑ Yes ❑ No ❑ NA ❑ NE
Structure 1 Structure 2 Structure 3 Structure 4 Structure 5 Structure 6
Identifier: .L F. a -
Spillway?:
Designed Freeboard (in):
Observed Freeboard (in):
5. Are there any immediate threats to the integrity of any of the structures observed? ❑ Yes VNo ❑ 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 P/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 N
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 l0 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): .5,-C.L c? roatb' 5:164, Ce fn S,'1
13. Soil Type(s):
14. Do the receiving crops differ from those designated in the CAWMP? ❑ Yes �0 No ❑ NA ❑ NE
15. Does the receiving crop and/or land application site need improvement? ❑ Yes VNo O NA ❑ NE
16. Did the facility fail to secure and/or operate per the irrigation design or wettable ❑ Yes ❑ No NA ❑ NE
acres determination?
17. Does the facility lack adequate acreage for land application?
18. Is there a lack of properly operating waste application equipment?
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 j. No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes X.
❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes
XNo
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Yes
XNo
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Other:
21. Does record keeping need improvement? If yes, check the appropriate box below. ❑ Yes XNo
❑ Waste Application ❑ Weekly Freeboard ❑ Waste Analysis ❑ Soil Analysis ❑ Waste Transfers
❑ Rainfall ❑ Stocking ❑ Crop Yield ❑ 120 Minute Inspections ❑ Monthly and 1" Rainfall Inspections
22. Did the facility fail to install and maintain a rain gauge? ❑ Yes -No
23. If selected, did the facility fail to install and maintain rainbreakers on irrigation equipment? ❑ Yes ❑ No
❑NA ❑NE
❑ Weather Code
❑NA ❑NE
9NA❑ NE
Page 2 of 3 21412011 Continued

Fa6li Number: - Q r Date of Ins ection: } 1 L
24. Did the facility fail to calibrate waste application equipment as required by the permit? ❑ Yes XNo ❑ NA ❑ NE
25. Is the facility out of compliance with permit conditions related to sludge? If yes, check ❑ Yes ❑No ANA ❑ 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?
27. Did the facility fail to secure a phosphorus loss assessments (PLAT) certification?
Other Issues
28. Did the facility fail to properly dispose of dead animals with 24 hours and/or document
and report mortality rates that were higher than normal?
29. At the time of the inspection did the facility pose an odor or air quality concern?
If yes, contact a regional Air Quality representative immediately.
30. Did the facility fail to notify the Regional Office of emergency situations as required by the
permit? (i.e., discharge, freeboard problems, over -application)
31. Do subsurface tile drains exist at the facility? If yes, check the appropriate box below
❑ Application Field ❑ Lagoon/Storage Pond ❑ Other:
❑ Yes XNo
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Yes ); No
A
Prn
❑ NE
❑ Yes XNo
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Yes XNo
❑ Yes 4No
❑ Yes No
❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ NA ❑ NE
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 XNo ❑ NA ❑ NE
34. Does the facility require a follow-up visit by the same agency? [::]Yes No ❑ NA ❑ NE
Comments (refer to question ##): Explain any YES answers and/or any additional recommendations or any other comments.
Use drawings of facility to better explain situations (use additional pages as necessary).
AC;14 vG-,&,, 2,013 ,5�, �31 �E , .SUr,
/! f, crt j ;n 1e; (r'4 1 r:VVV)J;J
4 tti L3U lrt�%1' e� �G� 2012, C � • �f :�C C vG P J ,
�l %r
3. ,� C✓A S,1 - /'t4jw. k -(ram l � I�; t7 m4-
W,V rC
11.3 AN
`%!z= Ili/lb4
Reviewer/Inspector Name: &ktok V 1 j' 1 __ Phone: 633
Reviewer/Inspector Signature: Date: &2-1 Di 3
Page 3 of 3 21412011

Division of Water Quality 1p
Facility Number - Q Division of Soil and Water Conservation
0 Other Agency
Type of Visit: TT Compliance Inspection U Operation Review O Structure Evaluation p Technical Assistance
Reason for Visit: UO Routine 0 Complaint 0 Follow-up 0 Referral 0 Emergency 0 Other 0 Denied Access
Date of Visit: Arrival Time: Z.J. Departure Time: 2 •'! County: Region: Wry 0
Farm Name: `•+•+ y, stwi ftr rOttMS . ��� • Owner Email:
Owner Name: I h �" Ae4 Phone:
Mailing Address: 70 „: Z+ sZ 19al ee# Ko[, ri/1 r► + ]�G 2�% 3
Physical Address: �r%� /� al f ry R , , +1 n' , �j c�Z
�� II PN _dFacility Contact: C �W S� p( �b1wdq iM+ Title: Phone:
Onsite Representative: 54 e' ?�0" Integrator:
Certified Operator: C�i S M r ter Certification Number:
Back-up Operator: Certification Number:
Location of Farm: Latitude:l� 3Z� '� Longitude:
►�.�i 2I fix- JCfJq/_, R. L,41e Rnel L Curled 1 d I
—0 & � A %vv 1041 iL C-,, (I gd,
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
Design Current
Wet Poultry Capacity Pop.
Layer
Non -La er
Design Current
Dry Poultry Capacity Pop.
Layers
Non -Layers
Pullets
Turkeys
Poults
,,Turkey
Other
Discharges and Stream Impacts
1. Is any discharge observed from any part of the operation?
Discharge originated at: ❑ Structure ❑ Application Field ❑ Other:
Design Current
Cattle Capacity Pop.
Dairy Cow
ZOD
f (0 2__
Dairy Calf
Dairy Heifer
Dry Cow
Non-Dal
Beef Stocker
Beef Feeder
Beef Brood Cow
❑ Yes No ❑ NA ❑ NE
a. Was the conveyance man-made?
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ NA
❑ NE
b. Did the discharge reach waters of the State? (If yes, notify DWQ)
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ NA
❑ NE
c. What is the estimated volume that reached waters of the State (gallons)?
d. Does the discharge bypass the waste management system? (If yes, notify DWQ)
❑ Ye ❑ No
❑ NA
❑ NE
2. Is there evidence of a past discharge from any part of the operation?
Yes ❑ No
❑ NA
❑ NE
3. Were there any observable adverse impacts or otrp ential adverse impacts to the waters
Yes ❑ No
❑ NA
❑ NE
of the State other than from a discharge?
Page 1 of 21417011 Continued

Facili Number: 63 - Q • Date of Inspection:
Waste Collection & Treatment
4. Is storage capacity (structural plus storm storage plus heavy rainfall) less than adequate? Yes ❑ No ❑ NA ❑ NE
a. If yes, is waste level into the structural freeboard? ❑ Yes ❑ No ❑ NA ❑ NE
Structure 1 Structure 2 Structure 3 Structure 4 Structure 5 Structure b
Identifier:P
Spillway?:
Designed Freeboard (in):
Observed Freeboard (in):
/j ppppp i�
5. Are there any immediate threats to the integrity of any of the structures observed? ❑ Yes 0 No ❑ NA ❑ NE
(i.e., large trees, severe erosion, seepage, etc.)
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? 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
Xu,n,
❑ No
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Excessive Ponding ❑ Hydraulic Overload ❑ Frozen Ground ❑ Heavy Metals (
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
"ver
12. Crop Type(s): C"' ^ If lQt M }-erc-'
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
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
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:
21. Does record keeping need improvement? If yes, check the appropriate box below. ❑ YesI
No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Waste Applicatioty_ Z ❑ Weekly Freeboard ❑ Waste Analysis ❑ Soil Analysis 0 Waste sfers ❑ Weather Code
[:]Rainfall ❑ op g ❑ Crop Yield ❑ 120 Minute Inspections ❑ Monthly and 1" Rainfall Inspections
22. Did the facility fail to install and maintain a rain gauge? ❑ Yes j-No ❑ NA ❑ NE
23. If selected, did the facility fail to install and maintain rainbreakers on irrigation equipment? [—]Yes j❑ No NA ❑ NE
Page 2 of 3 21412011 Continued

Facility Number: 03 - Date of inspection:
24. Did the facility fail to calibrate waste application equipment as required by the permit? ❑ Yes V0 No ❑ NA ❑ NE
25. Is the facility out of compliance with permit conditions related to sludge? If yes, check ❑ Yes ❑ No X NA ❑ NE
the appropriate box(cs) 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
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? LZ-0-7 F--�) 4 l r" l
29. At the time of the inspection did the facility pose an odor or air quality concern? ❑ Yes No ❑ NA ❑ NE
If yes, contact a regional Air Quality representative immediately.
30. Did the facility fail to notify the Regional Office of emergency situations as required by the Yes ❑ No ❑ NA ❑ NE
permit? (i.e., discharge, freeboard problems, over -application)
31. Do subsurface tile drains exist at the facility? If yes, check the appropriate box below.
❑ Application Field ❑ Lagoon/Storage Pond ❑ Other:
❑ Yes XNo ❑ NA ❑ NE
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 #): Explain any YES answers and/or any additional recommendations or any other comments.
Use drawings of facilitytobetter explain fsituations (use additional pages as necessary).
(T1J 24'f � Q��! $ I 01Q `� Alt oil 4/9a/iff"YOP
1]%I W/ J_P VV f q p� � , %: Zd13� At)rC� due 4�� �rl d e � 20J 4, Ls.
�t. , 1�
� enci ,
�7r �s ti Mtn r� C�c �iO 'AA c�h G o� g! /�� a &Aef Mill,
Doge ye+ S1 5-0yt1 dce. S
1J�,Ix�!- �.,.e by oZec7 ff..
d r, d tvL x 1. �� 'I
At A&(P444
��, �� +� �
� � ; �y^3'FK OV+..f .CyJ T�Dhn A'' YJ�`S OWd.
2� Zvi ' '. 2, LAAL
. rv.Q V iA [Yln N%i M1 (v0 days 41 tj,, a00. �'tlP�s. �i> ISt i fb C
1V2o,4 = Y. V )bA
Reviewer/Inspector Name: Pcktzk WkUl (�, ,S ,{ hone: (33G)
Reviewer/Inspector Signature: �.�1�� Date: ?�
Page 3 of 3 21412011

Division.of Water --Quality
Facility Num' ber D3 - O O Division of Soil4nd Water Conservation :<
O Other Agency '
(Type of Visit: Compliance Inspection U Operation Review Q Structure Evaluation Q Technical Assistance
sit: I
Reason for ViRoutine O Complaint O Follow-up O Referral O Emerizencv O Other O Denied Access
Date of Visit: 8 f j+ Arrival Time: p n. Departure Time: County: Al - Region: W6. K 6
I
Farm Name: �,+ t tt _ �'�+ � r0.,M s - �n G' Owner Email:
414
Owner Name: jPhone: Z
Mailing Address: % �� �5�,91�,, ZJ �2 ]3arf,e-* f�d. , 1:_:� F'ew 1V G z�&
Physical Address: 37 �4r�t� �,� j� rlii;cL f� C ZQ(QZJ
Facility Contact:
'u✓t d�► S1� Title:
Onsite Representative: Cif yi S,N►,
Certified Operator:
Back-up Operator:
Location of Farm:
Latitude: Sri a 3 a/
14,� 2-1 d•, P. ;x rl�e / ft L,'fle r, Ke y L_ �.E�Cy rd.
Swine
Wean to Finish
Wean to Feeder
Feeder to Finish
Farrow to Wean
Farrow to Feeder
Farrow to Finish
Gilts
Boars
Other
Other
Phone: Via' Z 05-7
Integrator:
Certification Number:
Certification Number:
�i Longitude: $ G 00 24
Design Current Design Current
Capacity Pop. Wet Poultry Capacity Pop.
I [ L
ayer
on -Layer
Design Current
Dry Pnultry Canadty Pnn_
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)
c. What is the estimated volume that reached waters of the State (gallons)?
Design Current
Cattle Capacity Pop.
Dairy Cow
7-0 O
Dairy Calf
Dairy Heifer
Dry Cow
Non -Dairy
Beef Stocker
Beef Feeder
Beef Brood Cow
❑ Yes XNo ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes ❑ No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes ❑ No ❑ NA ❑ NE
d. Does the discharge bypass the waste management system? (If yes, notify DWQ) ❑ Yes ] No ❑ NA ❑ NE
2. Is there evidence of a past discharge from any part of the operation? ❑ Yes ANo ❑ 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? �X
Page I of 3 21412011 Continued

Facili Number: 63 - o _5� Date of Inspection: ]
Waste Collection & Treatment
4. Is storage capacity (structural plus storm storage plus heavy rainfall) less than adequate?
❑ Yes
gNo
[DNA
❑ NE
a. If yes, is waste level into the structural freeboard?
❑ Yes
❑ No
❑ NA
❑ NE
Structure 1} Structure 2 Structure 3 Structure 4
Structure 5
Structure 6
Identifier: 04A fond
Spillway?:
Designed Freeboard (in):
it
Observed Freeboard (in):
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.) 1
19
6. Are there structures on -site which are not properly addressed and/or managed through a
❑ Yes
X 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 VNo ❑ NA ❑ NE
maintenance or improvement?
Waste Application
10. Are there any required buffers, setbacks, or compliance alternatives that need ❑ Yes XNo ❑ NA ❑ NE
maintenance or improvement?
11. Is there evidence of incorrect land application? If yes, check the appropriate box below. ❑ Yes 9No ❑ 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): 5;u Ad jrxtr, A a,� , Lo fA J, �4 �G f-o-i caj e-
� y
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
jNo
❑ 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
X]No
❑ NA
❑ NE
IS.
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
❑ NE
the appropriate box.
❑ WUP ❑Checklists ❑ Design ❑ Maps ❑ Lease Agreements ❑Other: XNo
21. Does record keeping need improvement? If yes, check the appropriate box below. ❑ Yes ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Waste Application ❑ Weekly Freeboard ❑ Waste Analysis ❑ Soil Analysis ❑ Waste Transfers ❑ Weather Code
❑ Rainfall ❑ Sto� g ❑ Crop Yield ❑ 120 Minute Inspections ❑ Monthly and V Rainfall Inspections
22. Did the facility fail to install and maintain a rain gauge? ❑ Yes )_4No ❑ NA ❑NE
23. If selected, did the facility fail to install and maintain rainbreakers on irrigation equipment? ❑Yes No s0 NA ❑ NE
Page 2 of 3 21412011 Continued

Facility Number: - 63 - O 5- Date of inspection:
24. Did the facility fail to calibrate waste application equipment as required by the permit? ❑ Yes 0 No ❑ NA ❑ NE
25. Is the facility out of compliance with permit conditions related to sludge? If yes, check ❑ Yes ❑ No X 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?
27. Did the facility fail to secure a phosphorus loss assessments (PLAT) certification?
Other issues
28. Did the facility fail to properly dispose of dead animals with 24 hours and/or document
and report mortality rates that were higher than normal?
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
❑ Yes No
❑ Yes XNo
❑ Yes KNo
❑ Yes 9No
❑ Yes A No
❑ Yes j No
❑ Yes No
❑ Yes bdNo
❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ NA ❑ NE
❑NA ❑NE
❑NA ❑NE
❑ 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
ibetter explain situations
(use additional pages as necessary).
Z1. So;l rwl fr [�V J:t?On J6M-t4dbLr.v2 QAi-,-d YrG� -fir co O )
p
,�t��l. K44AMZ­j ,. 7�a"f 41- tz 7/jZo
'
- R'Zo>V 2a11ja-.QG.l ;" -3/ fte-x- cL-LY 6,4L 2416, jro, C./p'Z . W r'14 Ci r. i�n� CA116te'. e , 0, 366D? ,- -3 1 $73 Sw1 d ".-j J4,,- Oc, " 201 � /r
32 , � )AA d cep � M) e, i4- - lve,& AeO `�t 1 AJr f?.t c / �11,p«J�+i 1"1n vac Y~fic-� a f �n',Ql `t u
7/:U) 4= 10, Z /� 4
lal.zor3 = ?,21L N, 5'_,5'10j
Reviewer/Inspector Name: �R-eY 1 G K ! 6' k !� Phone:
Reviewer/Inspector Signature: ' �`Date: ZoC
Page 3 of 3 2141201,

�. A Division of Water<Quality. '
Facility Number D3 - C7 Division of Soil and Water Cotation '
Other Agency
Type of Visit: Compliance Inspection 0 Operation Review O Structure Evaluation Q Technical Assistance
Reason for Visit: Routine Q Complaint O Follow-up O Referral O Emergency 0 Other O Denied Access
Date of Visit: C l Arrival Time: 2' Departure Time: Y y County: Region: WSAI)
Farm Name: i ! ti 5 M r'tti I CirMf Lri c Owner Email:
r J ��,r Gs7� s�SzI
Owner Name: � i r f tf 4- 511E�' !•C•ti �SMd i Phone: CH 4.r AC.A)
Mailing Address: C1D
Physical Address: 3 71 F' r1 Lr �� F
Facility Contact: KilOVASMr'ii1 Title:
Onsite Representative: I
0 G Z,yG Z3
Phone:
Integrator: �--
Certified Operator: 6:" [ SA& s' Certification Number:
Back-up Operator: Certification Number:
Location of Farm: Latitude: 1f a O ! 7—if
'36 3 Z � Longitude:
'F�x 1-1,10 42 r L ;-f1 e ;.t e ,i Ee-r7 RJ:
09, 1Rd,
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.
Layer
Non -La er
Design Current
Dry Poultry CaDaeity Pon.
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)
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?
Cattle
Design Current.
Capacity Pop.
Dairy Cow
Z©C�
Dairy Calf
Dairy Heifer
Dry Cow
Non -Dairy
Beef Stocker
Beef Feeder
Beef Brood Cow
❑ Yes XNo ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes
❑ No
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Yes
❑ No
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Yes ❑ No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes No 0 NA 0 NE
❑ Yes No ❑ NA ❑ NE
Page 1 of 3 21412011 Continued

Facili Number: 03 - Q Date of Ins ection: g
Waste Collection & Treatment
4. Is storage capacity (structural plus storm storage plus heavy rainfall) less than adequate? ❑ Yes No
a. If yes, is waste level into the structural freeboard? ❑ Yes ���`❑��� No
Structure I Structure 2
Identifier:
Spillway?:
Designed Freeboard (in):
Observed Freeboard (in):
❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ NA ❑ NE
Structure 3 Structure 4 Structure 5 Structure 6
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?
❑ Yes No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes No ❑ 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 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 9No ❑ NA ❑ NE
maintenance or improvement?
11. Is there evidence of incorrect land 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 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 Jc"'A� lYtAA eal fr1.o,
13. Soil Type(s):
14. Do the receiving crops differ from those designated in the CAWMP?
❑ Yes No
❑ NA
❑ NE
l5. 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
❑ NE
18. is there a lack of properly operating waste application equipment?
❑ Yes
No
❑ NA
❑ NE
Required Records & Documents
l9. Did the facility fail to have the Certificate of Coverage & Permit readily available?
❑ Yes
No
❑ NA
❑ NE
20. Does the facility fail to have all components of the CAWMP readily available? If yes, check
❑ Yes
No
❑ NA
❑ NE
the appropriate box.
❑ WUP ❑ Checklists ❑ Design ❑ Maps ❑ Lease Agreements
❑Other:
21. D s record keeping need improvement?
W ste Application Weekly Freeboard Waste Analysis oil Analysis
❑ Yes No
❑ NA ❑ NE
eather Code
;Rainfall
EIS9ng Crop Yield Monthly and V Rainfall
Inspections
22. Did the facility faail to install and maintain a rain gauge?
❑ Yes
JdNo
❑ NA
❑ NE
23. If selected, did the facility fail to install and maintain rainbreakers on irrigation equipment? ❑ Yes ❑ No 9NA ❑ NE
Page 2 of 3 21412011 Continued

Facility Number: d 3 -C> S • Date of Inspection: C
24. Did the facility fail to calibrate waste application equipment as required by the permit? ❑Yes kNo
❑ 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 VNo ❑ NA ❑ NE
27. Did the facility fail to secure a phosphorus loss assessments (PLAT) certification? [] Yes [] 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 the 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 la(I No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes [y No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes 0 No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes XNo ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes
r7l No
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Yes
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 drawings of facility to better explain situations (use additional pages as necessary).
ey" 1 > C� f.! rq n c c (�U .►� z-o r Z , f r G�zs�.
MP
6/0S/.z
la. 2
s/os/,-jf.�16N
Reviewer/Inspector Name: ��i L k4 1 4 (It, l
Reviewer/Inspector Signature
Page 3 of 3
Phone: 030,721
Date: 6 7 ZO 1 Z-
2/4/2011

I
Division of Water Quality '
Facility Number [p - O Division of Soil and Water 00ervation
O Other Agency
Type of Visit: 1q
Compliance Inspection 0 Operation Review Q Structure Evaluation p Technical Assistance
teason for Visit: x Routine ( Complaint Q Follow-up 0 Referral 0 Emergency 0 Other 0 Denied Access
Date of Visit: I M Arrival Time: O j Departure Time: County: af 6p)aa Region: 06l-6
Farm Name:KIlju ,:�,mdja rarmS+zlVC,f Owner Email:
Owner Name: j 'f' S� 1 r 1 SM r Phone: 7 — SiSo2 ! 1fij e&r1,4 i_r6tJ 9
Mailing Address: C p C-6 '5M r. GP-
Physical Address: 3 - EUt-LA � • , mill n I G� ,��/
Facility Contact: �ko nr4 p_ s jell iy\ Title:
Onsite Representative:
Certified Operator: Ca r l N1I* \
acd- (o 2 -3
Phone:
Integrator:
Certification Number:
Back-up Operator: Certification Number:
Location of Farm: Latitude: 36 �I If Longit de: g is
WC, 4toj al NOr-1 N , . orj n F6Kri8e, CSz Iq" 2 0►4o S12 q 3 IDoA�
Le- 4 o n+& E� �.0 2d � 52. l q44 YAM. � E-l1' i � 18 . ie'4 0 w+o rz-L' 1.11 lq w � Is
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.
I a La er
Non -La er
UU Y'�ry
Layers
Non -Layers
Pullets
Turkeys
Turkey Poults
Other
Design Current
Discharl!es 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 adverse impacts to the waters
of the State other than from a discharge?
Design Current
Cattle Capacity Pop.
LLia 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 ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes ( No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes T No ❑ NA ❑ NE
Page 1 of 3 21412011 Continued

Facility Number: - Q jDate of Inspection:
p
Waste Collection & Treatment
4. Is storage capacity (structural plus storm storage plus heavy rainfall) less than adequate?
❑ Yes
rX No
❑ NA
❑ NE
a. if yes, is waste level into the structural freeboard?
❑ Yes
❑ No
❑ NA
❑ NE
Structure 1Structure 2 Structure 3 Structure 4
0,SD+P_, f On3
Structure 5
Structure 6
Identifier:
Spillway?:
Designed Freeboard (in):
Observed Freeboard (in):
5. Are there any immediate threats to the integrity of any of the structures observed?
❑ Yes
No
❑ NA
❑ NE
(i.e., large trees, severe erosion, seepage, etc.)
6. Are there structures on -site which are not properly addressed and/or managed through a
❑ Yes
No
❑ NA
❑ NE
waste management or closure plan?
If any of questions 4-6 were answered yes, and the situation poses an immediate public health
or environmental threat,
notify DWQ
7. Do any of the structures need maintenance or improvement?
Yes
❑ No
❑ NA
❑ NE
8. Do any of the structures lack adequate markers as required by the permit?
❑ Yes
No
❑ NA
❑ NE
(not applicable to roofed pits, dry stacks, and/or wet stacks)
9. Does any part of the waste management system other than the waste structures require
Yes
❑ 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): 0AAAJ - J0 &I t s 0 % Au.4
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? ❑ Yesj�fNo
❑ NA ❑ NE
16. Did the facility fail to secure and/or operate per the irrigation design or wettable ❑ Yes ❑ No NA ❑ NE
acres determination? 0
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 A No
❑ Yes ZNo
❑ Yes It No
❑ Yes 4 No
❑ Other:
21. oes record keeping neegiprovement? i ❑ Yes No ❑ N ❑ NE
Waste Application eekly Freeboard aste Analysis Soil Analysis eather Code
[Rainfall [Kccking Crop Yield Monthly and 1" Rainfall Inspections
❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ NA ❑ NE
22. Did the facility fail 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 19 NA ❑ NE
Page 2 of 3 21412011 Continued

Facility Number: Q - Q Date of Inspection: s
24. Did the facility fail to calibrate waste app 0ation equipment as required by the permit? ❑ Yes No
25. Is the facility out of compliance with permit conditions related to sludge? If yes, check ❑ Yes No
the appropriate box(es) below.
❑ Failure to complete annual sludge survey ❑ 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 [R`j No
27. Did the facility fail to secure a phosphorus loss assessments (PLAT) certification? ❑ Yes 7E] No
Other Issues
❑NA ❑NE
NA ❑NE
❑NA ❑NE
NA ❑NE
2& Did the facility fail to properly dispose of dead animals with 24 hours and/or document
❑ Yes
P 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
PfNo
❑ 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)
31. Do subsurface tile drains exist at the facility? If yes, check the appropriate box below.
❑ Yes
`P 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
6No
❑ NA ❑ NE
33. Did the Reviewer/Inspector fail to discuss review/inspection with an on -site representative?
❑ Yes
[A No
❑ NA ❑ NE
34. Does the facility require a follow-up visit by the same agency?
❑ Yes
TT �(No
❑ NA ❑ NE
Comments (refer to question #): Explain any YES answers and/or any additional recommendations or any other comments.
Use wings of facility to better explain situations (use additional pages as necessary).
4. a.al o Cal brak'.or'� ez lv (e�-�d ? i to g n �� n� e -�
b. Ck
t
lt�si s _ ll (� �Fas.� !\j
- AWIk' Al
Reviewer/Inspector Name:
Reviewer/Inspector Signature:
Page 3 of 3
Phone: -7 71 —5 2
Date:
21412011

hmo anr;—
Facility Number t'i� I Q j
Division of Water Quality
Division of Soil and Water
O Other Agency
rvation
1:00pm
IType of Visit �C�mpliance Inspection 0 Operation Review 0 Structure Evaluation 0 Technical Assistance I
Reason for Visitf Routine 0 Complaint 0 Follow up 0 Referral 0 Emergency 0 Other ❑ Denied Access
Date of Visit: l(Q 1 D Arrival Time: d Q Departure Time. Mounty: lftet Region: +' "
Farm Name: 81 / SM ' Q I - �% Owner Email:
Owner Name: _ A; 1iU �- Shi r NW Sr�� Phone:
Mailing Address: 9 v+ red# 2, 9'(, 2
Physical Address:y�� �n 1 cp,
Facility Contact: 0 Title: Phone No:
Onsite Representative: PAILDrdo Integrator: �
S I
Certified Operator: Operator Certification Dumber:
Back-up Operator: Back-up Certification Number:
Location of Farm: Latitude: ®o Longitude: r,?T n �
No, �'Wy02 nd o tU�" o o7_V e 14a� i tordo r�5.3
Kq h+ ©n+ 1439 , Leo OA40 Eb�r- k4 14,q0) w
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
❑ Layer
❑ Non -La er
Other
❑ Other
Dry Poultry
❑ Layers
❑ 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)
Design Current
Cattle Capacity Population
Ebairy
Cow
1,,2100
1 I -TO
Dairy Calf
❑
Dairy Heifer
❑
Dry Cow
❑
Non-Dai
❑
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?
Purge 1 of 3
❑ Yes 1N0
4J
❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes
❑ No
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Yes
❑ No
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Yes
❑ No
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Yes o ElNA ElNE
ElYes t
o ❑ NA ❑ NE
12128104 Continued

Facility Number: — • Date of Inspection M
Waste Collection & Treatment
4. Is storage capacity (structural plus storm storage plus heavy rainfall) less than adequate? ❑ Yes kNo ❑ NA ❑ NE
a. If yes, is waste level into the structural freeboard? ❑ Yes ❑ No ❑ NA ❑ NE
Structure 1 Structure 2 Structure 3 Structure 4 Structure 5 Structure 6
Identifier: St"e t't�r
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
XNo ❑ NA ❑ NE
through a waste management or closure plan`?
If any of questions 4-6 were answered yes, and the situation poses an immediate public health or environmental threat, notify DWQ
7. Do any of the structures need maintenance or improvement? ❑ Yes
�No ❑ NA ❑ NE
8. Do any of the stuctures lack adequate markers as required by the permit? ❑ Yes
No ❑ NA ElNE
X
(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 ElNA ElNE
maintenance or improvement?
Waste Application
10. Are there any required buffers, setbacks, or compliance alternatives that need ❑ Yes
No ❑ NA ❑ NE
maintenance/improvement?
1 l . Is there evidence of incorrect application? If yes, check the appropriate box below. ❑ Yes
No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Excessive Ponding ❑ Hydraulic Overload ❑ Frozen Ground ❑ Heavy Metals (Cu, Zn, etc.)
❑ PAN ❑ PAN > 10% or 10 lbs ❑ Total Phosphorus ❑ Failure to Incorporate Manure/Sludge into Bare Soil
❑ Outside of Acceptable Crop Window ❑ Evidence of Wind Drift ❑ Application Outside of Area
12. Crop type(s)
13. Soil type(s)
14. Do the receiving crops differ from those designated in the CAWMP?
❑ Yes
No ❑ NA
❑ NE
15. Does the receiving crop and/or land application site need improvement?
❑ Yes
No ❑ NA
❑ NE
16. Did the facility fail to secure and/or operate per the irrigation design or wettable acre determination ?
❑ Yes
❑ No 9 NA
❑ NE
17. Docs the facility lack adequate acreage for land application?
❑ Yes
No ElNA
[INE
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):
a
Reviewer/Inspector Name l I(' I Phone: bZb
Reviewer/Inspector Signature: lkda& i LDate: o
Page 2 of 3 1212 104 Continued

Facility Number: V-Q� *of Inspection O
Required Records & Documents
19. Did the facility fail to have Certificate of Coverage & Permit readily available? ❑ Yes ❑ NA ❑ NE
20. Does the facility fail to have all components of the CAWMP readily available? If yes, check ❑ Yes No ❑ NA ❑ NE
the appropriate box.
❑ WUP ❑Checklists El Design ❑Maps ❑Other ,.,_,
21. DoeWre.cord keeping need imp vement? 1 ❑Yes LyZ ❑ NA ❑ NE
teApplic on Wee Freeboard Waste 7Mspe�cfi.n,011aonthly
is aste Transfers
Rainfall stocking Crop Yield 120 Minute and I" Rain Inspections Bather Code
22. Did the facility fail to install and maintain a rain gauge?
23. If selected, did the facility fail to install and maintain rainbreakers on irrigation equipment?
24. Did the facility fail to calibrate waste application equipment as required by the permit?
25. Did the facility fail to conduct a sludge survey as required by the permit?
26. Did the facility fail to have an actively certified operator in charge?
27. Did the facility fail to secure a phosphorus loss assessment (PLAT) certification?
Other Issues
28. Were any additional problems noted which cause non-compliance of the permit or CAWMP?
29. Did the facility fail to properly dispose of dead animals within 24 hours and/or document
and report the mortality rates that were higher than normal?
30. At the time of the inspection did the facility pose an odor or air quality concern?
If yes, contact a regional Air Quality representative immediately
31. Did the facility fail to notify the regional office of emergency situations as required by
General Permit? (ie/ discharge, freeboard problems, over application)
32. Did Reviewer/Inspector fail to discuss review/inspection with an on -site representative?
33. Does facility require a follow-up visit by same agency?
❑ Yes
❑ Yes
❑ Yes
❑ Yes
❑ Yes
❑ Yes
*o
❑ No
�fNo
❑ No
0 No
[)(No
❑ NA ❑ NE
O�NA ❑ NE
❑NA [:I NE
5fNA ❑ NE
[I NA ❑NE
El NA ❑NE
❑ Yes
l�No
El NA
El NE
El Yes
X,No
El NA
El NE
❑ Yes
XNo
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Yes
X No
❑ NA
Cl NE
❑ Yes
X]No
ElNA
ElNE
ElYes
fNo
❑ NA
❑ NE
Additional Comments and/or Drawings:
o� dad1 bra+loo due aolo ( off. l
J
vZ j, Rongq- o��oSar
6L"
LAD
o 4)13110
L5I-)=T-7 /�s.N/000rP. 71a�J09 o,lalbs•N/
Page 3 of 3 12128104

r
o�0F VIAT yoG Incident Report
o -c
Report Number. 201001654 ` DV, a 01 d - PC -- 0579
Incident Type: Non -Compliance Reporting
On -Site Contact:
Category: APS - Animal
First/Mid/Last Name:
C15c-iaint Started j01122/2010
--
Company Name:
County: Alleghany
Phone:
City: Ennice
Pager/Mobile Phone: /
Farm #: 003-0005
Responsible Party:
Reported By:
Owner:
First/Mid/Last Name:
Permit` AWC030005
Company Name:
Facility: Billy Smith Farms Inc
Address:
First Name: Billy
Middle Name:
City/State0p:
Last Name: Smith
Phone:
Address Co Carl Smith 2152 Barrett Rd
Pager/Mobile Phone: I
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:
Latitude:
Position Accuracy:
Longitude:
Position Datum:
Location of Incident: Early Road
Address:
City/State/Zip
Report Created 05/14/10 12:39 PM Page l

Cause/Observation:
Action Taken:
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
Directions:
Comments:
Conveyance:
Estimated Number of fish?
(Above Ground or Under Ground)
Water Supply Wells within 1500ft : Unknown Groundwater Impacted : Unknown
. Access to Farm ■ Animal Population Spray Availability
. Structure Questions
Report Created 05/14/10 12:39 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 Plan Due Date
Waste Pond WASTE POND 18.00
Event Type Event Date Due Date
Incident closed
Requested Additional Information
Report Received
Referred to Regional Office - Primary Contact
Report Entered 2010-05-11 01:10:28
Incident Start 2010-01-22 08:00:00
Report Created 05/14/10 12:39 PM
❑ Yes ❑ No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes
❑ No
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Yes
❑ NO
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Yes
❑ No
❑ NA
ONE
❑ Yes
❑ No
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Yes
❑ No
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Yes
❑ No
[DNA
❑ NE
❑ Yes
❑ No
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Yes
❑ No
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Yes
❑ No
[DNA
❑ NE
❑ Yes
❑ No
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Yes ❑ No ❑ NA ❑ NE
Plan Recieved Date Level OK Date
Comment
Page 3

0
Standard Agencies Notified:
Agency Name Phone First Name M.I. Last Name Contact Date
Other Agencies Notified:
Agency Name Phone First Name M.I. Last Name Contact Date
DWQ Information:
Report Taken By: Report Entered By: Regional Contact:
Melissa Rosebrock
Phone:
Date/Time: 2010-05-11 01:10:28 PM
Referred Via:
Did DWQ request an additional written report?
If yes, What additional information is needed?
Report Created 05/14/10 12:39 PM Page a

Facility Number Q
' v L- a
Division of Water Quality
Division of Soil and Water Conservation
0 Other Agency
Ow
Type of Visit Compliance Inspection 0 Operation Review 0 Structure Evaluation 0 Technical Assistance
Reason for Visit (Xi Routine 0 Complaint 0 Follow up 0 Referral 0 Emergency 0 Other ❑ Denied Access
Date of Visit. Arrival Time: ® Departure Time: County: Region:
Farm Name: .,, 1� �A�; �/l_S t Tn C _ _ Owner Email:
i G i
Owner Name: �/t��� Vi �_ cl i I Q�-�/•,s, �y�, ,r Phone: 6-� 7 ` p �1 I
Mailing Address: `�' b � I . AA1, �tJ I � 1 S� 8&-I M4 � - ! � 1� v11 ce
.� 1
Physical Address: 1 n Ce
Facility Contact:
Onsite Representative: �nnAA
Certified Operator:
Title:
Phone No:
Integrator: jj
(� `1 13 b 1�
Operator Certification Number: ks:s
Back-up Operator: Back-up Certification Number:
Location of Farm: Latitude: lM° 3 Longitude: ®° �
N � �{ t hd- o n o� r � e L� a �- ► h� o n to `
14 675 4- r u i�I O� �3 . L f on � 1 `��Id
Design Current Design Current Design Current
Swine Capacity Population Wet Poultry Capacity Population Cattle Capacity Population
❑ Wean to Finish E ❑ La er Dairy
❑ Wean to Feeder i ❑ Non -Layer
El Feeder to Finish
El Farrow to Wean ! Dry Poultry
El Farrow to Feeder
El Farrow to Finish
El Gilts
❑ Boars
Other
❑ Other _
❑ La ers
Non -La ers
❑
El Pullets
❑ Turke s
❑ Turke Poults
❑ Other
Discharges & Stream Impacts
1. Is any discharge observed from any part of the operation'?
Discharge originated at: ❑ Structure ❑ Application Field El Other
a. Was the conveyance man-made?
Discharges & Stream Impacts
1. Is any discharge observed from any part of the operation'?
Discharge originated at: ❑ Structure ❑ Application Field El Other
a. Was the conveyance man-made?
Cow
Number of Structures: a
I
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 p(J No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes
❑ No
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Yes
❑ No
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Yes
❑ No
❑ Yes'No
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Yes
Plo
❑ NA
❑ NE
12128104 Continued

•
Facility Number: Q 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. 1f yes, is waste level into the structural freeboard?
❑ Yes
❑ No ❑ NA ❑ NE
Structure 1 St ccure 2 Structure 3 Structure 4
Identifier: w 05e�e- Pon
Structure 5 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
o El NA ❑ NE
(ie/ large trees, severe erosion. seepage, etc.)
////
!
6. Are there structures on -site which are not properly addressed and/or managed
❑ Yes
�Ko ❑ 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
th at, notify DWQ
7. Do any of the structures need maintenance or improvement?
❑ Yes
7No ❑ NA ❑ NE
8. Do any of the stuctures lack adequate markers as required by the permit?
❑ Yes'VU
❑ 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?
I. Is there evidence of incorrect application? If yes, check the appropriate box below.
❑ Yes
No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Excessive Ponding ❑ Hydraulic Overload ❑ Frozen Ground ❑ Heavy Metals (Cu, Zn, etc.)
[]PAN ❑ PAN > 10% or 10 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
❑ NA
❑ NE
15. Does the receiving crop and/or land application site need improvement?
❑ Yes
o
❑ 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
ElNA
ElNE
I8. Is there a lack of properly operating waste application equipment?
ElYestN�o
❑ NA
❑ NE
Comments (refer to question #): Explain any YES answers and/or any recommendations or any other comments.
Use drawings of facility to better explain situations. (use additional pages as necessary):
Reviewer/Inspector Name Phone:
Reviewer/Inspector Signature: 44 a 2 1 WLn k Date:
r . L 1 12128104 ` Cdntinued

Facility Number: Date of Inspection �1
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 f2No .❑ NA ❑ NE
the appropriate box. ❑ WUp ❑ Checklists ❑ Design
g El Maps [I Other
21. D s record keeping need improvement? If yes, check the appropriate box 'elow. ❑ Yes /No❑ NA ❑ NE
,/Waste Applicat' n R We kly Freeboard L� Waste Analysis S,o.�,,i_,l,, Analysis ❑fie-ffaoslers
IJ Rainfall Stocking Crap Yield ng 09'Monthly and 1" Rain Inspections�eather
22. Did the facility fail to install and maintain a rain gauge?
23. If selected, did the facility fail to install and maintain rainbreakers on irrigation equipment?
24. Did the facility fail to calibrate waste application equipment as required by the permit?
25. Did the facility fail to conduct a sludge survey as required by the permit?
26. Did the facility fail to have an actively certified operator in charge?
27. Did the facility fail to secure a phosphorus loss assessment (PLAT) certification?
Other Issues
28. Were any additional problems noted which cause non-compliance of the permit or CAWMP?
29. Did the facility fail to properly dispose of dead animals within 24 hours and/or document
and report the mortality rates that were higher than normal?
30. At the time of the inspection did the facility pose an odor or air quality concern?
If yes, contact a regional Air Quality representative immediately
31. Did the facility fail to notify the regional office of emergency situations as required by
General Permit? (ie/ discharge, freeboard problems, over application)
32. Did Reviewer/Inspector fail to discuss review/inspection with an on -site representative?
33. Does facility require a follow-up visit by same agency?
Additionalu and/or Drawings:
i
r.
❑ Yes VNo ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes ,WNo
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes o
❑ Yes No
NA ❑ NE
❑ NA ❑ NE
�KNA ❑ NE
❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes XNo
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Yes
No
K
❑ NA
ElNE
ElYes
LJ1 No
L
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Yes
No
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Yes
XNo,
❑ NA
❑ NE
ElYes
No
❑ NA
❑ NE
�Lj opt W ouf = �7.3 x 6s - N / I con
-7la o'j I . II = 0, 7,2 1,65. N%t000 W.

Division of Water Quali
Facility Number L - — Division of Soil and Water Conservation J PM
- 0 Other Agency 1
Type of Visit * -to mpiiance Inspection 0 Operation Review 0 Structure Evaluation 0 Technical Assistance
Reason for Visit W RoutiiK , 0 Complaint 0 Follow up 0 Referral 0 Emergency 0 Other ❑ Denied Access
1 County: f h Qn g U Date of Visit: Arrival Time: Departure Time: Coun Re ion: � RO
Farm Name: K//1��I Lq S M 1 VartYi 5 ,- hG Owner Email: y
Owner Name: rJ f U S hl r P'ti- S 1% Phone: LO S _ 5a �R yZon Q
Mailing Address: el o Ca r{ Gar 1-H1 a 1,5 oa Rarr-e-i� I � Cron (C 2 r ('1)�-
Physical Address: E qr N R6 cl d I E n r)toe j (,23
II e. °i�"1 a ��- 3 g 8 3
Facility Contact: onJ 0. or Cl bntle: Phone No:
Onsite Representative: A Q Integrator,
Certified Operator: Gd`J l or) dr Ccx- I � Operator Certification Number:
Back-up Operator: Back-up Certification Number:
Location of Farm: Latitude: [Wo ®l 0ig Longitude: ®o 00 , ICJ
11
N0 941->1 .11 N a Fjghf ono FFok r j .,o 14 as tht on+o * r4
P.i h+ on+o _� 3 `j Le �4 on+0 Ea-r ( ['1 &6)
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
❑ Non -Layer -I
Other
❑ Other E
Dry Poultry
❑ Layers
❑ Non -Layers
❑ Pullets
❑ Turkeys
❑ urkey Pouets
❑ 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 Current
Cattle Capacity Population
—Dairy Cow
p
El Dair Calf
❑ Dairy Heifer
❑ Dry Cow
❑ Non -Dairy
❑ Beef Stocker
❑ Beef Feeder
❑ Beef Brood Co
c. What is the estimated volume that reached waters of the State (gallons)?
Number of Structures: M
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 Co ❑ NA ❑ NE
Page I of 3 12128104 Continued

Facility Number: Q a Date of Inspection D
Waste Collection & Treatment
4. Is storage capacity (structural plus storm storage plus heavy rainfall) less than adequate? ❑ Yes )(No El NA El NE
a. If yes, is waste level into the structural freeboard? El Yes ❑No ❑ NA ❑ NE
Str{_ccttur 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
i 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 El NA ❑ NE
through a waste management or closure plan?
J
If any of questions 4-6 were answered yes, and the situation poses an immediate public health or environmental threat, notify DWQ
7. Do any of the structures need maintenance or improvement? ❑ Yes
�No ❑ NA ❑ NE
8. Do any of the stuctures lack adequate markers as required by the permit? ❑ Yes
No ❑ NA ❑ NE
(Not applicable to roofed pits, dry stacks and/or wet stacks)
9. Does any part of the waste management system other than the waste structures require ❑ Yes
No ❑ NA ❑ NE
maintenance or improvement?
Waste Application
10. Are there any required buffers, setbacks, or compliance alternatives that need ❑ Yes
�No ❑ NA ❑ NE
maintenance/improvement?
I. Is there evidence of incorrect application? If yes, check the appropriate box below. ❑ Yes
❑ No ❑ NA P(NE
❑ Excessive Ponding ❑ Hydraulic Overload ❑ Frozen Ground ❑ Heavy Metals (Cu, Zn, etc.)
❑ PAN ❑ PAN > 10% or 10 Ibs ❑ Total Phosphors ❑ 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
PX
❑ NA
El NE
15. Does the receiving crop and/or land application site need improvement?
El yes
No
❑ NA
El 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
Nf.No
❑ NA
❑ NE
18. Is there a lack of properly operating waste application equipment?
❑ Yes
lNo
❑ 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):
o
�. Velje-inL,�on on Ja-m o '�
m
�
i i C�nr�,o t d e +er-nn 1 n v rA-t 1 was P[ Qn . G'o p S cu- at�r v_a-a es q-
f'n r Ct e.c_tL
nY-v isi4.
�•
Reviewer/Inspector Name
i©C Phone: —11 Sa 39
Reviewer/Inspector Signatur :
Date: Ila o
Page 2 of'3
12/2d/U4 Continued

Facility Number: — Q Date of Inspection d •
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 M4 ❑ NA ❑ NE
the appropriate box. ❑ WUp [] Checklists ❑ Design ❑Maps El Other
21. m rovement? 1 LldYes ❑ No ❑ NA ❑ NE
W ste Applic;need�i
neekl -Freeboard Waste Analysis oil An lysis ❑ ctstiart
Rainfall Stockin rop Yield ❑ pd'Monthly and V Rain Inspections we,
Code
b"
22. Did the facility fail to install and maintain a rain gauge? ❑ Yes ro El NA ❑ NE
23. If selected, did the facility fail to install and maintain rainbreakers on irrigation equipment? ❑ Yes ❑ No J�NA ❑ NE
24. Did the facility fail to calibrate waste application equipment as required by the permit? ❑ Yes ko ❑ NA ❑ NE
25. Did the facility fail to conduct a sludge survey as required by the permit? ❑ Yes ❑ No JXNA ❑ NE
26. Did the facility fail to have an actively certified operator in charge? ❑ Yes 1A No ❑ NA ❑ NE
27. Did the facility fail to secure a phosphorus loss assessment (PLAT) certification? ❑ Yes Pd 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 ❑ YesNo ❑ 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 KNo ❑ NA ❑ NE
If yes, contact a regional Air Quality representative immediately
31. Did the facility fail to notify the regional office of emergency situations as required'by ❑ Yes �(No ❑ NA ❑ NE
General Permit? (ie/ discharge, freeboard problems, over application)
32. Did Reviewer/Inspector fail to discuss review/inspection with an on -site representative? ❑ Yes % No ❑ NA ❑ NE
33. Does facility require a follow-up visit by same agency? ❑ Yes *o ❑ NA ❑ NE
Additional Comments and/or Drawings:
I Sma1{ ra+n co vex- tided to . CoOt hs u---> rlQ an l+ hO c1J
a Ui b�'a�ron due_ a &Ir) ©c_�ber a6c8.
��. UOP jXe1d5
S focy-t o r N re co r�j5
I kayN tech . 5Pec+ ��i 5 15 re v1 51 n 0-n aA-� I S f nn e.
� P
C,ro P oL N I rU e-r) &A 1�
awe be, n V P d a-A-eA _ `JJ
21 9 j 1 g j o kb+ee ol_n 00 4 s IS =$ 3� s �� l i on
Page 3 of 3 12128104

Division of Water Qualit3
Facility Number �S� Division of Soil and Water 'onservation I P M
O Other Agency
Type of Visit (� C.[ompliance Inspection 0 Operation Review 0 Structure Evaluation 0 Technical Assistance I
Reason for Visitl`d. Routine 0 Complaint 0 Follow up 0 Referral 0 Emergency 0 Other ❑ Denied Access
Date of Visit: Arrival Time: � � Departure Time: ;'j��� County: Region: �Lo
Farm Name: I Y\ Owner Email:
Owner Name: _ 1 i I UI `i 5 h Lr l t/I l Phone: (p-5 - Cav-r N
Mailing Addres • q-D a1 Sa Ba-rre-14 Pa - E n n I c. e . KC a -6
Physical Address 'r•._ -J a' 6�� ►` ` L- n n ice /Uc- a ' 6
Facility Contact:M_-bn___0r---,,Title: Ph N- o I 7 -3 9 0-7
04 X3 04lJ .j
Onsite Representative:j� I
Certified Operator: —8 ► _ _C� l m i
Back-up Operator:
Location of Farm:
ILL H-Wy o(t ".
�-� onit --14 }y39
Swine
Wean to Finish
Wean to Feeder
Feeder to Finish
Farrow to Wean
Farrow to Feeder
Farrow to Finish
Gilts
Boars
Other
❑ Other
Latitude:
Cn-k) Fo�c r idcj e_
LeP+ orb-}, �r t v 2d
Integrator:
Operator Certification Number: a Y r
Back-up Certification Number:
o [�l Longitude: [mom,
D ' ,
VS3
C1gg6)_
Design Current Design Current
Capacity Population Wet Poultry Capacity Population
❑ Layer
❑ Non -Laves
Dry Poultry
❑ Layers
❑ Non -Layers
❑ Pullets
❑ Turkeys
❑ Turkey Poults
❑ Other
Discharges & Stream Impacts
1. is any discharge observed from any part of the operation?
Discharge originated at: ❑ Structure ❑ Application Field ❑ Other
a. Was the conveyance man-made?
b. Did the discharge reach waters of the State? (If yes, notify DWQ)
Design Current
Cattle Capacity Population
&airy Cow
ZWO
Dairy Calf
❑ Dairy Heifei
❑ 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: ELI
d. Does discharge bypass the waste management system? (If yes, notify DWQ)
2. Is there evidence of a past discharge fr part of the operation?
3. Were there any adverse impacts or otential dverse impacts to the Waters of the State
other than from a discharge?
3 5 e e orr) er- o� to-f- has b-e -n fin cd
t
❑ Yes �No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes
❑ No
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Yes
❑ No
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Yes
❑ No
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Yes
eN0
❑ NA
❑ NE
Yes
El No
❑NA
El NE
12TntinuedIVi e, +
V

Facility Number: V�� ® 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?
Structure 2 Structure 3 Structure
❑ Yes
4 Structure
❑ No ❑ NA ❑ NE
5 Structure 6
Sr trucctur I
Identifier: V-�J
Spillway?:
Designed Freeboard (in):
Observed Freeboard (in):
5. Are there any immediate threats to the integrity of any of the structures observed?
❑ Yes
kNNo ❑ NA ❑ NE
(ie/ large trees, severe erosion, seepage, etc.)
6. Are there structures on -site which are not properly addressed and/or managed
❑ Yes
<O ❑ 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
T 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
o ❑ NA El NE
(Not applicable to roofed pits, dry stacks and/or wet stacks)
7No
4. Does any part of the waste management system other than the waste structures require
El Yes
❑ 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?
1. Is there evidence of incorrect application? If yes, check the appropriate box below.
❑ Yes
No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Excessive Ponding ❑ Hydraulic Overload ❑ Frozen Ground ❑ Heavy Metals (Cu, Zn, etc.)
❑ PAN ❑ PAN > 10% or 10 1bs ❑ 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) WJ In
13. Soil type(s)
14. Do the receiving crops differ from those designated in the CAWMP?
Yes
❑ No ❑ NA ❑ NE
tX
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
)6 No ❑ NA ❑ NE
18. Is there a lack of properly operating waste application equipment?
❑ Yes
9�No ❑ NA ❑ NE
Comments (refer to question ft 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):
N)e42A +-6 aM S mA-1 i g rar`i h Co ver
+,C) LO v P .
N p be a� �
5
Reviewer/inspector Name
Phone:
Reviewer/Inspector Signature:
Date: At
off-
(�Dne6 - b mom 54)r'� by-0016 1eaNeS
12128104
on came
Continued

Facility Number: Q — Q Date of Inspection ITT
Required Records & Documents NO
19. Did the facility fail to have Certi cate of Coverage & ermi eadily available'? Yes ❑ No ❑ NA ❑ NE
20. Does the facility fail to have all components of the CAWMP readily available? If yes, check ❑ yes LVNo ❑ NA ❑ NE
the appropirate box. ❑ WUP ❑ Checklists r ` ❑ Design El Maps ❑Other
21. 6Diacility
kind i rovement? �c w. es ❑ No ❑ NA ❑ NE
Wee y Freeboard aste Analysis Soil Oonthly
ysis ❑ s ❑ on
Crop Yield a I" Rain Inspectio Weather Code
22. fail to install an am a rain gauge? El Yes UC ❑ NA ❑ NE
23. If selected, did the facility fail to install and maintain rainbreakers on irrigation equipment? ❑ Yes ,❑ NN NA ❑ NE
24. Did the facility fail to calibrate waste application equipment as required by the permit? El Yes L1�'No ❑ NA ❑ NE
25. Did the facility fail to conduct a sludge survey as required by the permit? ❑ Yes 0 No X NA ❑ NE
26. Did the facility fail to have an actively certified operator in charge? ElI( Yes No ❑ NA ❑ NE
27. Did the facility fail to secure a phosphorus loss assessment (PLAT) certification? ❑ Yes ❑l No KNA ❑ 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 El Yes 'o ❑ NA [-I 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 9No ❑ NA ❑ NE
33. Does facility require a follow-up visit by same agency? ❑ Yes XNo ❑ NA ❑ NE
Additional Comments and/or Drawings:
a Hai i b ra o n? b u e- cj6 n oc4 - a,00g ,
Fda,
I . s1 as job LA,aS-te_ a nQ I v s is -- 10 . 4 bs N/ 1600
ncr� i n rQeo ra s . �w Q t0 Ser,d w
. Na prop , tQ_ re r-0� for orha� in aoo� p
1vaea to t -o rd v-wa.5ter l e,ve_1 (_U rem baar-d} � h w e_e,6L . v
@)Se,0_ sec h lain 5t o ra.; n c a V,e r r
s r :�� -
PA t� tom+ � 1 is� e as�— n o.-r- 7 t v
p u ��t f-e Lor��
viw- � vv,
rAl r)
12128104
MUST- e-s-_6 61) s h Ay__ass' y'\ eu r v e- A (1,m5s Toad - o �"s 14 - ik)aes "

s
Division of Water Quality
n Division of Soil and Water Conservation
❑ Other Agency
Facility Number: 030005 Facility Status: Active Permit: AWC030005 ❑ Denied Access
Inspection Type: Compliance Inspection Inactive or Closed Date:
Reason for Visit: Routine County: PI_Ieghany Region: Winston-Salem _
Date of Visit: 11/23/2QO6 Entry Time:17.30 P�pi Exit Time: 02:30 PM Incident #:
Farm Name: Billy Smith Farms Inc Owner Email:
Owner: Billy Smith
Mailing Address: Co Cad Smith 2152 Barrett f2d _ _ _ _ nni NC 28625
Physical Address:
Phone:[phone]
Facility Status: ❑ Compliant ❑ Not Compliant Integrator:
Location of Farm: Latitude: 6'32'51" Longitude: 81 "00'24"
Farm location: NC HWY 21 north. Right onto Foxridge Rd. (1422). Right onto #1453. Right onto #1439. Left onto Early Road (# 1440).
Question Areas:
Discharges & Stream Impacts
Records and Documents
Certified Operator: B Carl Smith
Secondary OIC(s):
N Waste Collection & Treatment
jj Other Issues
W Waste Application
Operator Certification Number: 21441
On -Site Representative(s): Name Title Phone
On -site representative Carl Smith Phone: 33"57-3983
24 hour contact name Carl Smith Phone: [phone]
Primary Inspector:
Inspector Signature:
Secondary Inspectoi
Inspection Summary:
3. Suggest repairing and re -seeding lot next to creek at curve in road.
7. Embankment looks much better.
21. Need to complete yeild records.
24. Operator has till end of year to complete calibration.
Phone:
Date:
a2J
Page: 1

0 •
Permit: AWC030005 Owner -Facility: Billy Smith Facility Number: 030005
Inspection Date: 11/23/2006 Inspection Type: Compliance Inspection Reason for Visit: Routine
Regulated Operations Design Capacity Current Population
Cattle
O Cattle -Milk Cow 200 120
Total Design Capacity: 200
Total SSLW: 280,000
Type Identifier Closed Date Start Date Designed Freeboard Observed Freeboard
�Iste Pond WASTE POND 18.00 54A0
Page: 2

Permit: AWC030005 Owner - Facility: Billy Smith Facility Number : 030005
Inspection Date: 11/23/2006 Inspection Type: Compliance Inspection Reason for Visit: Routine
Discharges S Stream Impacts Yes No NA NE
1. Is any discharge observed from any part of the operation? ❑ ■ Cl ❑
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)
❑
■
❑ n
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
❑
0011
discharge?
Waste Collection, Storage & Treatment
Yes
No
NA NE
4. Is storage capacity less than adequate?
❑
■
❑ ❑
If yes, is waste level into structural freeboard?
n
5. Are there any immediate threats to the integrity of any of the structures observed (l.eJ 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 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
❑
■
n n
improvement?
Waste Application
Yes
No
NA NE
10. Are there any required buffers, setbacks, or compliance alternatives that need maintenance or
❑
■
01 ❑
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)? ❑
Page: 3

Permit: AWC030005 Owner - Facility: Billy Smith
Facility Number: 030005
Inspection Date: 11/23/2006 Inspection Type: Compliance Inspection
Reason for Visit: Routine
Waste Application
Yes No NA NE
PAN?
❑
Is PAN > 10%110 lbs.?
Q
Total P205?
❑
Failure to incorporate manure/sludge into Mare soil?
❑
Outside of acceptable crop window?
❑
Evidence of wind drift?
❑
Application outside of application area?
❑
Crop Type 1
Corn (Silage)
Crop Type 2
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 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?
18. Is there a lack of properly operating waste application equipment?
Records and Documents
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.
Fescue (Hay)
❑■❑❑
0 E D 0
❑■❑❑
❑■❑❑
Yes No NA NE
❑■❑❑
❑ ■ ❑ ❑
Page: 4

•
1-1
Permit: AWC030005 Owner - Facility: Billy Smith
Facility Number: 030005
Inspection Date: 11/23/2006 Inspection Type: Compliance Inspection
Reason for Visit: Routine
Records and Documents
Yes No NA NE
Checklists?
❑
Design?
❑
Maps?
❑
Other?
Q
21. Does record keeping need improvement?
■ Cl ❑ ❑
If yes, check the appropriate box below.
Waste Application?
❑
120 Minute inspections?
Q
Weather code?
n
Weekly Freeboard?
Q
Transfers?
❑
Rainfall?
n
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?
❑
■
n
❑
23. if selected, did the facility fail to install and maintain a rainbreaker on irrigation equipment (NPDES only)?
Cl
■
Q
❑
24. Did the facility fail to calibrate waste application equipment as required by the permit?
■
Cl
n
n
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?
❑
■
❑
n
Other Issues
Yes
No
NA
NE
28. Were any additional problems noted which cause non-compliance of the Permit or CAWMP?
❑
■
❑
n
29. Did the facility fail to properly dispose of dead animals within 24 hours and/or document and report those
❑
■
❑
Q
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
❑
■
Q
Q
Quality representative immediately.
Page: 5

Permit: AWC030005 Owner -Facility: Billy Smith
Facility Number: 030005
Inspection Date: 11/23/2006 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?
n ■
n
n
32. Did Reviewer/inspector fail to discuss review/inspection with on -site representative?
n ■
❑
n
33. Does facility require a follow-up visit by same agency?
n ■
n
n
Page: 6

Q
"Division of'Wat&- uality f n
Facility Number (�S` O Division of Soil and Water`Loteservation ` M
Other Agency
Type of Visit
Compliance Inspection
0 Operation Review 0 Structure Evaluation
0 Technical Assistance
Reason for Visit
4 Routine 0 Complaint
0 Follow up 0 Referral 0 Emergency
0 Other ❑ Denied Access
Date of Visit: N Arrival Time: eparture Time: ® County: Q V)4 Region: sZC�
Farm Name: u i 111 A iM I fi Fa Ir Wt 5 .1 n C " Owner Email:
�J
Owner Name: _ I 1 4 n 1 rlP Sall iVlL _ Phone: � s �a
Mailing Address: CA[ � / ��U M °� a °� Ba rb(° ft 04. , En n 1 c co�oZ3
C_- � 3
Physical Address: 1 'S � �' �� (.� � L r r~'i I C Q / lV a � �
Facility Contact: l ,�Itt t1 11 nr d-OLr 1 of Title: Phone No: 6S -7 q7
Onsite Representative: 2 Integrator:
Certified Operator: S_�n.l`fin Operator Certification Number:
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
Back-up Certification Number:
Latitude: o Longitude:
Design Current Design Current
Capacity Population Wet Poultry Capacity Population
❑ La er
❑ Non -Layer
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)
Design Current: .
Cattle Capacity Population
Dai Cow
a 0 a
Q
El Dairy Calf
❑ Dairy Heifer
❑ Dry Cow
❑ Non-Dai
❑ 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 b6 No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes
❑ No
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Yes
❑ No
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Yes
❑ No
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Yes
No
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Yes
No
❑ NA
❑ NE
Page I of 3 12128104 Continued

Facility Number:Q — OS I• Date of Inspection 1 a
Waste Collection & Treatment
4. Is storage capacity (structural plus storm storage plus heavy rainfall) less than adequate?
❑ Yes
X No
❑ NA ❑ NE
a. If yes, is waste level into the structural freeboard?
❑ Yes
❑ No
❑ NA ❑ NE
Structure I Structure 2 Structure 3 Structure 4
Structure
5
Structure 6
Identifier:
Spillway?:
Designed Freeboard (in):
Observed Freeboard (in): S
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 No El NA El 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 ElYes �No ❑ NA ❑ NE
maintenance or improvement?
Waste Aoolication
A
10. Are there any required buffers, setbacks, or compliance alternatives that need ElYesNo ❑ NA ❑ NE
maintenance/improvement?
11. Is there evidence of incorrect application? If yes, check the appropriate box below. ❑ Yes *No ❑ NA ❑ NE
El Excessive Ponding El Hydraulic Overload El Frozen Ground El 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
12. Crop type(s)
13. Soil type(s) v
14. Do the receiving crops differ from those designated in the CAWMP?
❑ Yes
ZI No ❑ NA
❑ NE
15. Does the receiving crop and/or land application site need improvement?
❑ Yes
ONO ❑ NA
❑ NE
16. Did the facility fail to secure and/or operate per the irrigation design or wettable acre determination ?
❑ Yes
❑ No NA
❑ NE
17. Does the facility lack adequate acreage for land application?
Yes
N ❑ NA
[I NE
18. Is there a lack of properly operating waste application equipment?
El 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):
Reviewer/Inspector Name C A^ A Phone: -7-7 — o�
Reviewer/Inspector Signature Date: a
Page 2 of 3 " 12128104 Continued

-Facility Number: leate of Inspection
Reauired Records & Documents
19. Did the facility fail to have Certificate of Coverage & Permit readily available? ❑ Yes No ❑ NA ❑ NE
20. Does the facility fail to have all components of the CAWMP readily available? If yes, check ❑ Yes No ❑ NA ❑ NE
the appropriate box. ❑ WUP ❑ Checklists ❑ Design El Maps El Other
21. Do record keeping need improvement? 1 acv. ❑ YesNo ❑ NA ❑ NE
Waste Application MVee reeboard Waste Analysis 2il Analysis
��ainfhll Stocking Crop Yield nrMonthly and V Rain Inspections vVeather Code
22. Did the facility fail to install and maintain a rain gauge? ❑ Yes W No ❑ NA ❑ NE
23. If selected, did the facility fail to install and maintain rainbreakers on irrigation equipment?
❑ Yes ❑ No
t36NA
❑ NE
24. Did the facility fail to calibrate waste application equipment as required by the permit?
Yes ❑ No
❑ NA
❑ NE
25. Did the facility fail to conduct a sludge survey as required by the permit?
Yes ❑ No
t�NA
❑ NE
26. Did the facility fail to have an actively certified operator in charge?
❑ Yes *o
❑ NA
❑ NE
27. Did the facility fail to secure a phosphorus loss assessment (PLAT) certification?
❑ Yes ❑ No
LJNA
❑ NE
Other Issues
28. Were any additional problems noted which cause non-compliance of the permit or CAWMP?
❑ Yes [1No
❑ NA
❑ NE
29. Did the facility fail to properly dispose of dead animals within 24 hours and/or document
❑ Yes IVNNo
❑ 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 XNo
[INA
❑ NE
If yes, contact a regional Air Quality representative immediately
31. Did the facility fail to notify the regional office of emergency situations as required by
❑ Yes No
❑ NA
❑ NE
General Permit? (ie/ discharge, freeboard problems, over application)
32. Did Reviewer/Inspector fail to discuss review/inspection with an on -site representative?
❑ Yes No
❑ NA
❑ NE
33. Does facility require a follow-up visit by same agency?
❑ Yes qNo
❑ NA
❑ NE
Additional Comments and/or Drawings:
i o/ l,v b . I I ft)-S
✓��-
U
ve -hcl end �f � e eetit
ke —
Page 3 of 3 12128104

Division of Water Quality
❑ Division of Soil and Water Conservation
❑ Other Agency
Facility Number. 030005 Facility Status: Active Permit: AWC03QO05 ❑ Denied Access
Inspection Type: Complignce lf)soection Inactive or Closed Date:
Reason for Visit: BoutineCounty: Alleahany . Region: n-
Date of Visit: 04/28/2005 Entry Time: 10:15AM Exit Time: 12;15 PM Incident #:
Farm Name. Billy Smith Farms Inc Owner Email:
Owner: Billy Smith
Phone: [phone]
Mailing Address: Co Carl Smith 2152 Barrett Rd EaDice
Physical Address:
Facility Status: ❑ Compliant ❑ Not Compliant Integrator:
Location of Farm: Latitude: 36032'51" Longitude: 81°00'24"
Farm location: NC HWY 21 north. Right onto Foxridge Rd. (1422). Right onto #1453. Right onto #1439. Left onto Early Road (#
1440).
Question Areas:
0 Discharges & Stream Impacts 0 Waste Collection & Treatment 0 Waste Application
0 Records and Documents 0 Other Issues
Certified Operator: B Carl Smith
Secondary OIC(s):
On -Site Representative(s): Name
On -site representative Clayton Smith
24 hour contact name Carl Smith
Primary Inspector: Wlissa M Rosebr ck
Inspector Signature:
Secondary Inspector(s):
Inspection Summary:
Operator Certification Number: 21441
Title Phone
Phone: [phone]
Phone: [phone]
Phone: [phone]
Ex1.383
Date:
Phone:
Phone:
3. and 9. Need to fence off the comer areas of the lots below the road to allow vegetation to establish. This should help to control
run-off from the hill. MUST contain the manure at the heifer barn. There is evidence that the waste has started washing from the barn
towards the creek.
21. Went over new permit requirements with Clayton Smith. 2005 soil samples have been taken but not sent in yet. As a follow-up,
there was a waste analysis for the Sept. 2004 applications. Need to obtain waste sample within 60 days for April 25, 2005 applications.
21. Operator needs assistance matching tracts, fields, and acreages to the WUP.
31. There was evidence that the manure level had been above the maximum. MUST contact DWQ when this occurs.
1211104 waste analysis= 7.4 lbs. N/1000 gal.
Page: 1

Permit: AWC030005 Owner -Facility: Billy Smith Facility Number: 030005
Inspection Date: 04/28/2005 Inspection Type: Compliance Inspection Reason for Visit: Routine
Regulated Operations Design Capacity Current Population
Cattle
Cattle - Milk Caw 200 145
Total Design Capacity: 200
Total SSLW: 280,000
Waste Structures
ype Identifier Closed Date Start Date Designed Freeboard Observed Freeboar
taste Pond WASTE POND
Page: 2

•
E
Permit: AWC030005
Owner - Facility: Billy Smith
Facility Number : 030005
Inspection Date: 04/2612005 Inspection Type: Compliance Inspection Reason for Visit: Routine
Discharup,5 & Stream Impacts YPs No NA NE
1. Is any discharge observed from any part of the operation? 0000
Discharge originated at:
Structure ❑
Application Field ❑
Other ❑
a. Was conveyance man-made? ❑ ❑ ■ ❑
b. Did discharge reach Waters of the State? (if yes, notify DWQ) ❑ ❑ H ❑
c. Estimated volume reaching surface waters?
d. Does discharge bypass the waste management system? (if yes, notify DWQ)
❑
❑
M
❑
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
Ye,
❑
N�
❑
NA
❑
NE
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 (I.e./large trees, severe erosion,
❑
❑
seepage, etc.)?
6. Are there structures on -site that are not property addressed and/or managed through a waste management or
❑
0
❑
❑
closure plan?
7. Do any of the structures need maintenance or improvement? ❑ M ❑ ❑
8. Do any of the structures lack adequate markers as required by the permit? (Not applicable to roofed pits, dry stacks ❑ N ❑ ❑
and/or wet stacks)
8. Does any part of the waste management system other than the waste structures require maintenance or
0 ❑ ❑ ❑
improvement?
Yes No N6 NE
Waste pplication
10, Are there any required buffers, setbacks, or compliance alternatives that need maintenance or improvement?
❑ moo
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%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
Corn (Silage)
Crop Type 2
Fescue (Hay)
Crop Type 3
Crop Type 4
Crop Type 5
Page: 3

• •
Permit: AWC030005 Owner -Facility: Billy Smith
Inspection Date: 04/28/2005 Inspection Type: Compliance Inspection
,
Facility Number: 030005
Reason for Visit: Routine
Waste 6uliotign
Crop Type 6
Yes
No NA NE
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?
❑
■ ❑ ❑
18. Is there a lack of properly operating waste application equipment?
Records E},Q,G
❑
Yes
■ ❑ ❑
No NA NF
and mt ents
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 afters 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?
■
❑
❑
❑
25. Did the facility fail to conduct a sludge survey as required by the permit?
Cl
❑
■
❑
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?
❑
❑
■
❑
Page: 4

•
•
Permit: AWC030005 Owner -Facility: Billy Smith Facility Number: 030005
Inspection Date: 04/28/2005 Inspection Type: Compliance Inspection Reason for Visit: Routine
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 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 Quality ■ ❑ ❑
representative immediately.
31. Did the facility fail to notify regional DWQ of emergency situations as required by Permit? ■ ❑ ❑ ❑
32. Did Reviewerllnspector fait to discuss reviewlinspection with on -site representative? ❑ ■ ❑ ❑
33. Does facility require a follow-up visit by same agency? ❑ ■ ❑ ❑
Page: 5

DMstonYof Wate r Quahty } : ,
3 ,FC11tty Nunrtber Division of Soil and VVater'Conservahon
J
O'0ther Agency
Type of Visit �Coompliance Inspection 0 Operation Review 0 Structure Evaluation 0 Technical Assistance
Reason for Visit CJQ Routine O Complaint O Follow up O Referral O Emergency 0 Other ❑ Denied Access
.. I - 1%
Date of Visit: �+ lQ Arrival Time: Departure Time: p S Count: f— Region:
Farm Name: w� )I _ _I l A�� )tXLrO �� Owner Email:
Owner Name: 1 1 1 16, ' � Z I,I fr 1 L� -fiPhone: &, 7
Mailing Address: ,J MIA
rCTT Yl_lt. ► _i1 ill
Physical Address: SG, TL U.4- iz— tA I -e
�
C � - C�Q
Facility Contact: I_I� r � O r _ �T(7� n Tit : `� 1 Phone No: �.1 � ~ 3 1', 3 6 1
Onsite Representative: �1 ' �� Integrator:
Certified Operator: &Zvi IOperator Certification dumber:
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
Back-up Certification Number:
Latitude: o ® Longitude: IV
Design Current Design Current
Capacity Population Wet Poultry Capacity Population
❑ Layer
❑Nan -La ei
Dry Poultry
❑ Lavers
❑ Non -Layers
❑ Pullets
❑ Turkeys
❑ Turkey Poults
❑ Other
Discharges & Stream Impacts
1, is any discharge observed from any part of the operation?
Discharge originated at: ❑ Structure ❑ Application Field ❑ Other
a. Was the conveyance man-made?
b. Did the discharge reach waters of the State? (If yes, notify DWQ)
Design Current
Cattle Capacity Population
Dairy Cow
Dairy 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:
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
El Yes
No
❑NA
❑NE
❑ Yes
❑ No
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑Yes
o
❑NA
❑NE
Yes
❑ No
❑ NA
❑ NE
12128104 Continued

Facility Number: Q — C) • Date of Inspection
Waste Collection & Treatment
4. Is storage capacity (structural plus storm storage plus heavy rainfall) less than adequate? ❑ Yes 71�No ❑ NA ❑ NE
a. If yes, is waste level into the structural freeboard? ❑Yes ❑ No ❑ NA ❑ NE
Structure I Structure 2 Structure 3 Structure 4 Structure 5 Structure 6
Identifier: Was l Q)'1
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 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
E, No El NA ❑ NE
(((((L�����,No
8. Do any of the stuctures lack adequate markers as required by the permit.' El Yes
El NA ❑ NE
(Not applicable to roofed pits, dry stacks and/or wet stacks)
r
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
)krNo ❑ NA ❑ NE
maintenance/improvement?
11. Is there evidence of incorrect application? If yes, check the appropriate box below. ❑ Yes
No ElNA ❑ NE
ElExcessive Ponding ElHydraulic Overload ElFrozen Ground ❑ Heavy Metals (Cu, Zn, etc.)
❑ PAN ❑ PAN > 10% or 10 lbs ❑ Total Phosphorus ❑ Failure to Incorporate Manure/Sludge into Bare Soil
❑ Outside of Acceptable Crop Window ❑ Evidence of Wind Drift ❑ Application Outside of Area
12. Crop type(s)
13. Soil type(s)
14. Do the receiving crops differ from those designated in the CAWMP?
❑ Yes ICJ No
El NA
El NE
15. Does the receiving crop and/or land application site need improvement?
Elit N` Yes o
❑ 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 No
❑ NA
❑ NE
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):'
m 4
U
Reviewer/Inspector f%me (vie cDPhone: (�
iewer/Inspector Signature:14 L. Date:
I2128104 Continued

.1 1
Facility Number: — [�of Inspection
Required Records & Documents
19. Did the facility fail to have Certificate of Coverage & Permit readily available? ❑ Yes ❑ NA ❑ NE
20. Does the facility fail to have all components of the CAWMP readily available? If yes, check ❑ Yes No ❑ NA ❑ NE
the appropirate box. ❑ WUP ❑ Checklists ❑ Design El maps El Other
21. DoezasteAA
rd keeping nee�Zpreekl
ement? If yes, the k the appropriate �?S`oil
elow. ❑ Yes ❑ No ❑ NA ❑ NE
plicati n eeboard Waste Analysis Analysis rs
Rainfall to -king Crop Yield I mu ❑ Monthly and Rain Inspectio Bather Cv
22. Did the faci ty 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? ,b j0 Yes No >(NA ElNE
24. Did the facility fail to calibrate waste application equipment as required by the permit? � • ❑ Yes No ❑ NA ❑ NE
25. Did the facility fail to conduct a sludge survey as required by the permit? `0 ❑ Yes ❑ No A NA El NE
26. Did the facility fail to have an actively certified operator in charge? El Yes �_No ///❑ NA ❑ NE
27. Did the facility fail to secure a phosphorus loss assessment (PLAT) certification'? ElYes No )(NA ❑ NE
Other Issues
28. Were any additional problems noted which cause non-compliance of the permit or CAWMP? ❑ Yes *o ❑ NA ❑ NE
29. Did the facility fail to properly dispose of dead animals within 24 hours and/or document ❑ Yes No ❑ NA ❑ NE
and report the mortality rates that were higher than normal'?
30. At the time of the inspection did the facility pose an odor or air quality concern? ❑ Yes L]f No ❑ NA ❑ NE
If yes, contact a regional Air Quality representative immediately �_,{ T`
31. Did the facility fail to notify the regional office of emergency situations as required by p�,Yes ❑ No ❑ NA ❑ NE
General Permit? (ie/ discharge, freeboard problems, over application) [ "
32. Did Reviewer/Inspector fail to discuss review/inspection with an on -site representative? ❑ Yes No ❑ NA ❑ NE
33. Does facility require a follow-up visit by same agency? ❑ Yes /]` No ❑ NA ❑ NE
Additional
dw
I
l 0 ! J ;-
IV
(a-�� �0`�' WA-� P =7•� �hS-N//000yr
a

Tpchnical Assistance Site Visit Report
• DiWbn of Soil and Water Conservatior*
O Natural Resources Conservation Service
O Soil and Water Conservation District
O Other...
Facility Number 03 - Date: Time: L 11:00 1 Time On Farm: 150 WSRO
Farm Name Billy Smith Farms Inc County Alleghany Phone: [phone]
Mailing Address c/o Carl Smith ENNICE NC 28623
Onsite
Representative Mrs_ Carl Smith Integrator
Type Of Visit Purpose Of Visit
® Operation Review
❑ Compliance Inspection (pilot only)
❑ Technical Assistance
❑ Confirmation for Removal
❑ No Animals -Date Last Operated:
❑ 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
Op Routine
O Response to DWQ/DENR referral
O Response to DSWC/SWCD referral
O Response to complaint/local referral
Q Requested by producer/integrator
O Follow-up
O Emergency
O Other...
Design Current
Capacity Population
❑ Layer
❑ Non -Layer
® Dairy 200 155
❑ Non -Dairy
❑ Other
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?
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 WSP
Level (Inches) 15
CROP TYPES lCorn, Silage Fescue -graze
SPRAYFIELD
SOIL TYPES Ad CeE CmC Cx TsD
7. What type of technical assistance does the onsite representative feel is needed? (list in comment section)
03/10/03
Op Routine
O Response to DWQ/DENR referral
O Response to DSWC/SWCD referral
O Response to complaint/local referral
Q Requested by producer/integrator
O Follow-up
O Emergency
O Other...
Design Current
Capacity Population
❑ Layer
❑ Non -Layer
® Dairy 200 155
❑ Non -Dairy
❑ Other
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?
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 WSP
Level (Inches) 15
CROP TYPES lCorn, Silage Fescue -graze
SPRAYFIELD
SOIL TYPES Ad CeE CmC Cx TsD
7. What type of technical assistance does the onsite representative feel is needed? (list in comment section)
03/10/03
® Dairy 200 155
❑ Non -Dairy
❑ Other
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?
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 WSP
Level (Inches) 15
CROP TYPES lCorn, Silage Fescue -graze
SPRAYFIELD
SOIL TYPES Ad CeE CmC Cx TsD
7. What type of technical assistance does the onsite representative feel is needed? (list in comment section)
03/10/03

Facility Number 03 - 5 Date:
11/2/04
PARAMETER
Q No assistance provided/requested
❑ 8. Waste spill leaving site
TECHNICAL ASSISTANCE Needed
Provided
❑ 9. Waste spill contained on site
❑ 10. Level in structural freeboard
25. Waste Plan Revision or Amendment
®
❑
❑ 11. Level in storm storage
26. Waste Plan Conditional Amendment
❑
❑
27. Review or Evaluate Waste Plan wlproducer
❑
❑
❑ 12. Waste structure integrity compromised
El 13. Waste structure needs maintenance
28. Forms Need (list in comment section)
El
29. Missing Components (list in comments)
❑
❑
❑ 14. Over application >= 10% & 10 lbs.
❑
❑
❑ 15. Over application < 10% or a 10 lbs.
30. 2H.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. Organize/computerization of records
❑
❑
❑ 19. Late/missing lagoon level records
34. Sludge Evaluation
❑
❑
❑ 20. 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
❑ 24. 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
Referred to 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 evaluation/recommendations
❑
❑
2.
49. Drainage work/evaluation
❑
❑
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)
El
❑
5'
56. Operation & maintenance education
❑
❑
57. Record keeping education
❑
❑
6.
58. Croplforage management education
❑
❑
59. Soil and/or waste sampling education
❑
❑
03/10/03

•
Facility Number 03 - 0 Date: 1 11/2104
COMMENTS:
Waste analysis: 3/17/04 5.5 Ibs.N11000 gals. B
Soil samples dated 7/20/04 look good.
Mr. Smith was not available for the review today. Mrs. Smith came for the review.
* Need to get a waste sample in now to cover the September 2004 applications.
# 37. The waste storage pond needs to be pumped out as soon as possible since it is at the maximum
iquid level.
# 25. The waste plan revisions mentioned in the DWQ inspection still need to be corrected. I was not
able to locate the fields in the latest WUP on site.
could not locate the latest Certificate of Coverage and new general waste permit. Mrs. Smith said she
hought it was at their house.
# 28. 1 left some of the new record keeping forms with Mrs. Smith that are required by the new permit.
TECHNICAL SPECIALIST Rocky Durham
SIGNATURE
Date Entered: 1115104 Entered By: [R7ocky Durham
3 03/10/03

I
:, Ovision of Water Quality-
�. t = vision of Soil and. Water Conservation-
0 OtherAgency .
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 05 Date of Visit: 51i1/2004 Time: 1125
0 Not Operational O Below Threshold
® Permitted ® Certified © Conditionally Certified © Registered Date Last Operated or Above Threshold: .........................
Farm Name: >> i�iy..Srtaitl>.far-�atxan............................................................................ Countv: A11991KHAY ........................................ WSRO........
Owner Name:B;jix.&.Siaia•jCy................... Smith ........................................................... Phone No:
MailingAddress:'.
• �lo.Ga�A.Smith.2.L�2.�alr�:Ott.fist.................................................. i"N,�IIGi"....NS��:�kt.�A.RQ�.��[A................ Z86 U..............
Facility Contact: Carl.S.q1Ah.......................................................Title:................................................................ Phone No: 65.7.39.813illy .....................
Onsite Representative: GjAyjoq.Sjmitkt................. . Integrator:.,........,.
Certified Operator:R.,.G&jr]................................... $"lib ...................... .... ....................... Operator Certification Number:IIA41......
Location of Farm:
Farm location: NC HWY 21 north. Right onto Foxridge Rd. (1422). Right onto #1453. Right onto #1439. Left onto Early A.
Road (# 1440). �
❑ Swine ❑ Poultry ® Cattle ❑ Horse Latitude 36 'F 32 4 51 " Longitude 81 • 00 G 24 t4
Design Current Design Current Design Current
Swine Capacity Population Poultry Capacitv Population Cattle Capacity Population
❑ Wean to Feeder
❑ Feeder to Finish
❑ Farrow to Wean
❑ Farrow to Feeder
❑ Farrow to Finish
❑ Gilts
❑ Boars
Number of Lagoons
❑ Layer ® Dairy 1 200 1 150
❑ Non -Layer JE1 Non -Dairy
❑ Other
Total Design Capacity. 200
Total SSLW 280,000
Discharges & 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? (Ifyes, 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 1 Structure 2 Structure 3 Structure 4 Structure 5
Identifier: ......Waste.P.ond.................................................................................................................................................. .......
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes []No
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes
❑ No
❑ Yes
® No
❑ Yes
® No
❑ Yes
® No
Structure 6
Freeboard (inches): 84
12112103
Continued

r
Facility Number: 03-05 Date of Inspection 5/11/2004 • - ----�"
5. Are there any immediate threats to the integrity of any of the structures observed? (iel trees, severe erosion, [] Yes ® No
seepage, etc.)
6. Are there structures on -site which are not properly addressed and/or managed through a waste management or ❑ 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 maintenance/improvement? ❑ 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 OR 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 Corn (Silage & Grain) 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
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.
Comments (refer to question #): Explain any YES answers and/or: any recommendations or any o.tlier comments �....
Use drawings of facility to better explain,situations. (use additional pages as necessary): ® Field Copy ❑ Final Notes'
3. Per operator's records, 97 loads went to Virginia in 2004 (so far). Freeboard records look good this time. 2004 soil samples have
been sent. Have not received results yet.
23. Per onsite records, the following fields and crops recieved animal waste. These tracts/fields do not correspond to the tracts
and fields listed in the WUP. The WUP and/or your records must be revised immediately so that the animal waste application
records and WUP match. You should contact your technical specialist for assistance with any waste plan updates and/or recordkeeping
procedures. These fields are listed in the WUP as T-1 143 F-1,2,3 totalling 55 acres:
-1143 F-1C1 (BTI) - Rye and corn (15 acres)
-1143 F-1Cl (BT4) - Rye and corn (10 acres)
-1143 F1Cl (BT5) - Rye and corn (25 acres)
-1143 F-20 (BT2 and 3) - Rye and corn (5 acres)
DWQ to send Carl Smith the most recent version of their C4 WMP.
Reviewer/Inspector Name i Meli sa Rosebrock
Reviewer/Inspector Signature: I , Date: JZ�
12112103 1 1
Continued

aiiuLy Vurber: ' 03-05 Iof Inspection 5/11/2004 •
Rc
uired 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.
❑ Yes
® No
❑ Waste Application ❑ Freeboard ❑ Waste Analysis ❑ Soil Sampling
24.
Is facility not in compliance with any applicable setback criteria in effect at the time of design?
❑ Yes
® No
25.
Did the facility fail to have a actively certified operator in charge?
❑ Yes
® No
26.
Fail to notify regional DWQ of emergency situations as required by General Permit?
(ie/ discharge, freeboard problems, over application)
❑ Yes
® No
27.
Did Reviewer/Inspector fail to discuss 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 1" Rain
❑ 120 Minute Inspections ❑ Annual Certification Form
No violations or deficiencies were noted during this visit. You will receive no further correspondence about this visit.
Additional Comments and/or Drawings:
**29. T-1066 F-IOCI received waste on corn this Spring. Pasture is the crop listed in the WUP.The WUP needs to be updated as soon+
as possible. This violation of a failure to abide by the CAWMP was previously mentioned during the 2001, 2002, and 2003
Operational Reviews and DWQ Compliance Inspections. Operator stated that he had already contacted a technical specialist
for the update. Check previous inspections and reviews for those fields that need to be updated.
Iw
12112103

;;*vision of Water Quality
vision of Soil aitd Water Conservation.
.. : 0 Other Agency PM
Type of Visit ;O Compliance Inspection O Operation Review O Lagoon Evaluation
Reason for Visit 0 Routine Q Complaint O Follow up O Emergency Notification O Other ❑ Denied Access I
Facility Number lo—O=l
Date of Visit -
El Permitted M Certified 0 Conditionally Certified ❑ Registered
Farm Name: Bill u ,MM ITY1 �Q r1n�
I... ........•............... .......................................
Owner Name: 1:i I t -4 1l h! r VI.Q <; M 17V1
Mailing Address:
a
Facility Contact:
Onsite Representative: d V ALUA 1trW l / Fill aI A--4 '�
/..�...,..,.. �.. I............_G...................._..._................ ...............................
.
Certified Operator: u�1 I )rn k
................................................................................................................
Location of Farm: _
5�i1 lriy Time: 1 as
0 Not Operational 0 Below Threshold
r
Date Last Operated or Above Threshold- .........................
County: ^A I - ................./ ...........
Phone No: ........................... 4.5.7.:...0 S� � I'.,.�'-o
..
t:K rre........; ............. T.. L :.. a..x a�
Phone No: 33(.. • G._S �%• .3 9y� �i
Integrator:........................................................................................
Operator Certification Number R_y-..q.q,-,.I,,,,,,.....
❑ Swine ❑ Poultry 0 Cattle ❑ Horse Lantuae )J_!)Z_ 11Imo• Longimne I A I I- [L ) V I• ! ry .r
Design Current Design Current Design ,.Current
_
=Svifie-Capacity Population PoaarY _Cpacity-.PopolattonCatfle Capacity,'�uon
❑ Wean to Feeder
❑ Feeder to Finish
❑ Farrow to Wean
❑ Farrow to Feeder
❑ Farrow to Finish
❑ Gilts
❑ Boars
Number of Lagoons
Disebaraes & Stream Impacts
1. Is an discharge observed from an art of the operation? `
Y g Y P Pe El 0 No
Discharge originated at: I-] 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) 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 '0 No
3. Were there any adverse impacts or potential adverse impacts to the Waters of the State other than from a discharge? ❑ Yes 0 No
Waste Collection & Treatment
4. Is storage capacity (freeboard plus storm storage) less than adequate? �� Spillway ❑ Yes 'R] No
iIN
Structture 15wcture 2 Structure Structure 4 Structure 5 Structure 6/
Identifier: .......... �tP
Freeboard (inches):
12112103 ' Continued
OF
N.V6

+�.�_ •vw+v-y,..,�..,,i�. .,s .. T^.-wwrrr-•w..n�wr�^�t..i-•-�-ro-...�.-..-.r--..wn••-,.-.. �.-,,,...r.,�vrui".�v'�7�5"�Y�'..,,...sy�i .r�•s,r . ,
Fab/ilitv.Nninber: Date of Inspection S/ 1 1 JAL
5. Are there any immediate threats to the inR.rity 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 maintenancelimprovement?
9. Do any stuctures lack adequate, gauged markers with required maximum and minimum liquid level
elevation markings?
Waste Application
10. Are there any buffers that need maintenance/improvement?
11. Is there evidence of over application? If yes, check the appropriate box below.
❑ Excessive Ponding ❑ PAN ❑ Hydraulic Overload ❑ Frozen Ground ❑ Copper and/or Zinc
12. Crop type
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?
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?
19. Is there any evidence of wind drift during land application? (i.e. residue on neighboring vegetation, asphalt,
roads, building structure, and/or public property)
20. At the time of the inspection did the facility pose an odor or air quality concern? If yes, contact a regional
Air Quality representative immediately.
❑ Yes No
❑ Yes D�No
/
❑ Yes S(No
❑ Yes N o
-4 f
❑ Yes ® No
1
❑ Yes ENo
El Yes D�lo
❑ Yes 'ENo
❑ Yes l N 'No
✓`
❑ Yes ►. No
n
❑ Yes 42 No
❑ Yes No
[I Yes SNo
—❑ Yes—❑•No—
� f
❑ Yes R] No
Se
❑ Yes `MNo
l
❑ Yes �Q No
°e
•Cdaihments (fifer=to question #} Explain airy YES answers and/or any °-.recommendations-or:any other c6mments
- a
Uie'drawings of facilityao better,explain situations.,(use.additional pages-as.necesmry): I x❑ Field Copy ❑ Final Notes °
3). Virg l n0j4- record ? q 7 U . , a to M. l
F-le165 *n No - Nov
311-11o'{ S.S lbs.NI loco c, .
Reviewer/Inspector Name
ReviewerAnspector Signor
Date:

^� ����.I�`A� •'"�����i 'z����•��,�}+►.Ya�+n��,��? yr .-s a �' i1 yF. ,��'�vr�ri:w,s. r+•� �a t15 i5f"
1 1
C�� y-':'tumher: Uj— O _ of Inspection
Required Records & Document.~
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 Xi " o
23. Does record keeping need improvement? If yes, check the appropriate box below. ❑ Yes `© No
Waste Application ❑✓Freeboard ]Waste Analysis ❑moil Sampling
24. Is facility not in compliance with any applicable setback criteria in effect at the time of design? ❑ Yes EkNo
25. Did the facility fail to have a actively certified operator in charge?
26. Fail to notify regional DWQ of emergency situations as required by General Permit?
(ie/ discharge, freeboard problems, over application)
27. Did Reviewer/Inspector fail to discuss review/inspection with on -site representative?
28. Does facility require a follow-up visit by same agency?
29. Were any additional problems noted which cause noncompliance of the Certified AWMP?
NPDES Permitted Facilities
30. Is the facility covered under a NPDES Permit? (If no, skip questions 31-35)
31. If selected, did the facility fail to install and maintain rainbreakers on irrigation equipment?
32. Did the facility fail to install and maintain a rain gauge?
33. Did the facility fail to conduct an annual sludge survey?
34. Did the facility fail to calibrate waste application equipment?
35. Does record keeping for NPDES required forms need improvement? If yes, check the appropriate box below
•❑ Stocking Form [:]Crop Yield Form ❑ Rainfall ❑ Inspection After 1" Rain
❑ Yes �0.No
❑ Yes No
❑ Yes ,Rlo
❑ Yes lg-No
�'Ves ❑ No
❑ Yes No
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ 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.
dditional Conim6hts andlor Drawings': _
b o
0
hoc► .,ti. urn cam,
aco� � d� �P � ,.P�� u.-J W U �
114 -3 —1 CA_ C'O-f� �/ L) L)
ri�3-icy ()bA)
0Ty
Oy3- i cL t,2&
h�t4-3 � S a G l.. 6,
Af
no
12112103

t
�ftvision'4 Water Quality
�_. wision,of Soil and Water,Conservation
" D 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
FFacility Number 03 OS Date of Visit: 5/11/2004 Time: 1125
0 Not Operational Q Below Threshold
N Permitted ® Certified (] Conditionally Certified 0 Registered Date Last Operated or Above Threshold:
Farm Name: Hillx.Sm illi:airmtsJar.............................. .. County: Mcghaly............................ ... W..SJRQ ........
................................................ ......... .
Owner Name: leillx.&Shiraey.................... Smith ........................................................... Phone No: ���-hSI-SS�X.farl................................. ...............
Mailing Address:lo.axa.Slztit!>.2.15�..uxx.Alt.R ..................................................
.................... E...NI.C.E....lY..RTHLA.kiAtlNA................. 18.613 ..............
Facility Contact:CArI.Smii[th.......................................................Title:................................................................ Phone No: fS7.,3QS3341y......................
Onsite Representative: Clayjom.SAtlltb............................................................................ Integrator:......................................................................................
Certified Operator:JB.,.Ga1rA................................... Sl itll................................................. Operator Certification Number: Z1.441 .............................
Location of Farm:
Farm location: NC HWY 21 north. Right onto Foxridge Rd. (1422). Right onto #1453. Right onto #1439. Left onto Early A
toad (# 1440). V
❑ Swine ❑ Poultry N Cattle ❑ Horse Latitude 36 OF 32 51 Longitude F S •F 00 24
Design Current'
Swine Canacity Punulation
❑ Wean to Feeder
❑ Feeder to Finish
❑ Farrow to Wean
❑ Farrow to Feeder
❑ Farrow to Finish
❑ Gilts
❑ Boars
Number of Lagoons 0
.. ., -_— .- 1
Discharges & Stream Impacts
Design Current - Design Current
Poultry Capacity Population Cattle Capacity Population.
❑ Layer ®Dairy 200 I50
❑ Non -Layer ❑ Non -Dairy
❑ Other
Total Design Capacity 200
Total SSLW 280,000
1. Is any discharge observed from any part of the operation? ❑ Yes N 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 ❑ No
2. Is there evidence of past discharge from any part of the operation? ❑ Yes N No
3. Were there any adverse impacts or potential adverse impacts to the Waters of the State other than from a discharge? ❑ Yes N No
Waste Collection & Treatment
4. Is storage capacity (freeboard plus storm storage) less than adequate? N Spillway ❑ Yes N No
Structure I Structure 2 Structure 3 Structure 4 Structure 5 Structure 6
Identifier: ......Waac.Roud ............................................................................................................... .........
...................................
Freeboard (inches): 84
12112103 � � � Gl �` . L 1conlinued

Facility Number: 03-05 Date of Inspection 1 5/11/2004 • ' _
5. Are there any immediate threats to the integrity of any of the structures observed? (ie/ trees, severe erosion, ❑ Yes N 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 N 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 ❑ Yes N No
elevation markings?
Waste Application
10. Are there any buffers that need maintenance/improvement? ❑ Yes N No
11. Is there evidence of over application? If yes, check the appropriate box below. ❑ Yes N No
❑ Excessive Ponding ❑ PAN ❑ Hydraulic Overload ❑ Frozen Ground ❑ Copper and/or Zinc
12. Crop type Corn (Silage & Grain) Hay
13. Do the receiving crops differ with those designated in the Certified Animal Waste Management Plan (CAWMP)? ❑ Yes N No
14. a) Does the facility lack adequate acreage for land application? ❑ Yes N No
b) Does the facility need a wettable acre determination? ❑ Yes N No
c) This facility is pended for a wettable acre determination? ❑ Yes N No
15. Does the receiving crop need improvement? ❑ Yes ® No
16. Is there a lack of adequate waste application equipment? ❑ Yes N 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 N No
19. Is there any evidence of wind drift during land application? (i.e. residue on neighboring vegetation, asphalt, ❑ Yes N 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.
question # Explain an YES answers and/or an recommendatioiisor an other comments
:Comments refer to q' ).� p y Y .W y
(
Use drawings of facility to better explain situations. (use additional pages as necessary):" , ® Field Copy ❑ Final Notes t
23. Per operator's records, 97 loads went to Virginia in 2004 (so far). Freeboard records look good this time. 2004 soil samples have
been sent. Have not received results yet.
3. Per onsite records, the following fields and crops recieved animal waste. These tracts/fields do not correspond to the tracts
nd fields listed in the WUP. The WUP and/or your records must be revised immediately so that the animal waste application
ecords and WUP match. You should contact your technical specialist for assistance with any waste plan updates and/or recordkeeping
rocedures. These fields are listed in the WUP as T-I 143 F-1,2,3 totalling 55 acres:
4143 F-1C1 (BT1) - Rye and corn (15 acres)
-1143 F-1Cl (BT4) - Rye and corn (10 acres)
-1143 F1C1 (BT5) - Rye and corn (25 acres)
-1143 F-2Cl (BT2 and 3) - Rye and corn (5 acres)
WQ to send Carl Smith the most recent version of their CAWMP.
Reviewer/Inspector Name
t iE
Reviewer/Inspector Signatu
Date:
12112103 1 1 Continued

Facility Number: 03-05 D&f inspection 5/11/2004 .
Rc
uired 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?
(iel 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
N No
25.
Did the facility fail to have a actively certified operator in charge?
❑ Yes
N No
26,
Fail to notify regional DWQ of emergency situations as required by General Permit?
(iel discharge, freeboard problems, over application)
❑ Yes
N No
27.
Did Reviewer/Inspector fail to discuss review/inspection with on -site representative?
❑ Yes
N No
28.
Does facility require a follow-up visit by same agency?
❑ Yes
N No
29.
Were any additional problems noted which cause noncompliance of the Certified AWMP?
N 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
10 No violations or deficiencies were noted during this visit. You will receive no further correspondence about this visit. I
Additional Comments and/or Drawings.
**29. T-1066 F-1 OCI received waste on corn this Spring. Pasture is the crop listed in the WUP.The WUP needs to be updated as soo
as possible. This violation of a failure to abide by the CAWMP was previously mentioned during the 2001, 2002, and 2003
Operational Reviews and DWQ Compliance Inspections. Operator stated that he had already contacted a technical specialist
for the update. Check previous inspections and reviews for those fields that need to be updated.
12112103

vision of Water aL
• Qu h'
lion of Soil and Water- Conservation
0 Other Agency'
�.
Type of Visit IP 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 J'ateorvisit:
® Permitted © Certified © Conditionally Certified [ _Registered
Farm Name: .��.... I f Q r J�—t ►C�
Owner Name: T� 11 U_N-
Mailing Address:
s
Facility Contact:
Onsite Representative:
W
Certified Operator: ...... 01.0.4.... !- m.t
Location of Farm:
❑ Swine ❑ Poultry Ij Cattle ❑ Horse
� Designn Current
Swine Cariacity Pninulatinn
❑ Wean to Feeder
❑ Feeder to Finish
❑ Farrow to Wean
❑ Farrow to Feeder
❑ Farrow to Finish
❑ Gilts
❑ Boars
r�
bil Time: �
Not Operational O Below Threshold
Date Last Operated or Above Threshold: .........................
County:..P.1.1..........k -------------- -----
Phone No:....:...,.1 ?'.........� �'�r�
............................
.................................. Phone No:33fv�.+'a:.3.4F %'il
Integrator: ... -.................................................................................
Operator Certification Number:........ _..,
I,:2W I' 1 3 1— ` 1 5 1 I" Longitude 1`5 J I- I V V I`
Design Current Design Current
Poetltry -_- .
_ Ca act Po elation. Cattle ' •Ca O aci O.'-Po ulation ..
❑ Layer Dairy v� O
❑ Non -Layer I I JE1 Non -Dairy
❑ Other - —
Total Design Capacity _e O
Total -SSLW-.`` �O O
Discharges & Stream Impacts
1. Is any discharge observed from any part of the operation?
❑ Yes XNo
Discharge originated at: ❑ Lagoon ❑ Spray Field ❑ Other
a. If discharge is observed, was the conveyance man-made? ❑ Yes ❑ No
b. If discharge is observed, did it reach Water of the State? (If yes, notify DWQ)
c. If discharge is observed, what is the estimated flow in gaYrnin?
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:�.[+��4✓...................................................................................................................................... ......
1�
Freeboard (inches):l''
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes No
❑ Yes I
❑ Yes No
Structure 6
............. I..............
/yam}
12112103 Continued

Facility Number: Date of Inspection
W.
5. Are there any immediate threats to the —ty of any of the structures observed? (ie/ trelpsevere erosion,
❑ Yes
XNO
seepage, etc.)
6. Are there structures on -site which are not properly addressed and/or managed through a waste management or
❑yesVo
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?
ElYes
No
V
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
❑ Yes
No
elevation markings?
Waste Application
10. Are there any buffers that need maintenance/improvement?
❑ Yes
o
11. Is there evidence of over application? If yes, check the appropriate box below.
❑ Yes
o
❑ Excessive Ponding ❑ PAN ❑ Hydraulic Overload ❑ Frozen Ground ❑ Copper and/or Zinc
12. Crop type "44
1
13. Do the receiving crops differ with those designaba 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?
El Yes
No
15. Does the receiving crop need improvement?
El Yes
No
16. Is there a lack of adequate waste application equipment?
❑ Yes )6,No
Odor Issues
17. 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?
18. Are there any dead animals not disposed of properly within 24 hours? ❑ Yes k
o
19. Is there any evidence of wind drift during land application? (i.e. residue on neighboring vegetation, asphalt, ❑ Yes o
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 XN 0
Air Quality representative immediately.
ents:
w v a
Field Copy ElFinal Notes
_ a
a
�irq i ni4 r� co rG�s q 7 U Gw
ADt
Roo #+- �
F" e 16 S 1 n W L) t\!o✓
3)1-11N SSIb5.N/
Reviewer/Inspector Name
Reviewer/Inspector Signal
12112103
Date:
54a140
M1rE

. Facility Number: — D of Inspection
Required
Records& Docum_ent4
21.
Fail to have Certificate of Coverage & General Permit or other Permit readily available?
❑ Yes
XNo
22.
Does the facility fail to have all components of the Certified Animal Waste Management Plan readily available?
(ie/ WUP, checklists, design, maps, etc.)
❑ Yes
(No
23.
Does record keeping need improvement? If yes, check the appropriate box below.
❑ Yes
RNo
❑Waste Application ❑Freeboard ❑ J►'Vaste Analysis ❑sail Sampling
�
24.
Is facility not in compliance with any applicable setback criteria in effect at the time of design?
❑ Yes
k<10
25.
Did the facility fail to have a actively certified operator in charge?
❑ Yes
No
26.
Fail to notify regional DWQ of emergency situations as required by General Permit?
(ie/ discharge, freeboard problems, over application)
❑ Yes
No
27.
Did Reviewer/Inspector fail to discuss review/inspection with on -site representative?
ElYes
o
28.
Does facility require a follow-up visit by same agency?
❑ Yes
k-Kr
29.
Were any additional problems noted which cause noncompliance of the Certified AWMP?
);rfes
❑ No
NPDES Permitted Facilities
30.
Is the facility covered under a NPDES Permit? (If no, skip questions 31-35)
❑ Yes
KNO
31.
If selected,did the facility fail to install and maintain rainbreakers on irrigation equipment?_❑Yes__❑
No
32.
Did the facility fail to install and maintain a rain gauge?
❑ Yes
❑ No
33.
Did the facility fail to conduct an annual sludge survey?
❑ Yes
❑ No
34.
Did the facility fail to calibrate waste application equipment?
❑ Yes
❑ No
35.
Does record keeping for NPDES required forms need improvement? If yes, check the appropriate box below.
❑ Yes
❑ No
❑ Stocking Form ❑ Crop Yield Form ❑ Rainfall ❑ Inspection After 1" Rain
❑ 120 Minute Inspections ❑ Annual Certification Form
E] No violations or deficiencies were noted during this visit You will receive no further correspondence about this visit -
Additional Comments and/or Drawings:
T 1 o 6 6 F- I oU AUA­� u� oz✓
CCU✓ vim- 8A*
1 I 4 3 -� G� /�,,�� w- Cm-ru-� �5� G,.J lv u
pry
1143— 1 c-� Lis
b7 s �
a G c. Is
-- nm- w
' PJ-V 4- r Jn A,---_ - n n°# M , l�
12112103

7 4 -P

hnical Assistance Site Visit Re
❑ Wean to Feeder
El Feeder to Finish
❑ Farrow to Wean
❑ Farrow to Feeder
❑ Farrow to Finish
❑ Gilts
❑ Boars
DirMbn of Soil and Water Conservatiorq
Natural Resources Conservation Service
Soil and Water Conservation District
Other...
Facility Number 03 -
DirMbn of Soil and Water Conservatiorq
Natural Resources Conservation Service
Soil and Water Conservation District
Other...
Facility Number 03 -
Date: 10/27/03
Time: I 10:40
Time On Farm: 80 WSRO
Farm Name Billy Smith Farms Inc
County Alle han
Phone: [phone]
Mailing Address c/o Carl Smith
ENNICE, NORTH CAROLINA 28623
Onsite
Representative Clayton Smith Integrator
Type Of Visit
® Operation Review
❑ Compliance Inspection (pilot only)
❑ Technical Assistance
❑ Confirmation for Removal
❑ No Animals -Date Last Operated:
❑ Operating below threshold
❑ Swine ❑ Poultry ® Cattle ❑ Horse
Purpose Of Visit
O Routine
O Response to DWQ/DENR referral
O Response to DSWC/SWCD referral
O Response to complaint/local referral
O Requested by producer/integrator
O Follow-up
O Emergency
O Other...
Design Current Design Current
Capacity Population Capacity Population
❑ Layer
El Non -Layer
® Dairy
❑ Non -Dairy
1 Zoo
�zo
❑ Other
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 WSP IF
Level (Inches) 32
CROP TYPES lCom, Silage I IFescue-graze
SPRAYFIELD
SOIL TYPES Ad CeE CmC Cx
TID
7. What type of technical assistance does the onsite representative feel is needed? (list in comment section)
03/10/03

Facility Number 03 - 5 Date:
10/27/03
PARAMETER
Q No assistance provided/requested
❑ 8. Waste spill leaving site
TECHNICAL ASSISTANCE Needed
Provided
❑ 9. Waste spill contained on site
❑ 10. Level in structural freeboard
25. Waste Plan Revision or Amendment
®
❑
❑ 11. Level in storm storage
26. Waste Plan Conditional Amendment
❑
❑
27. Review or Evaluate Waste Plan w/producer
❑
❑
❑ 12. Waste structure integrity compromised
El 13. Waste structure needs maintenance
28. Forms Need (list in comment section)
❑
❑
29. Missing Components (list in comments)
❑
❑
❑ 14. Over application >= 10% & 10 lbs.
❑
❑
❑ 15. Over application < 10% or < 10 lbs.
30. 21-11.0200 re -certification
❑ 16. Hydraulic overloading
31. Five & Thirty day Plans of Action (PoA)
❑
❑
32. irrigation record keeping assistance
❑
❑
❑ 17. Deficient irrigation records
[118. Late/missing waste analysis
33.Organize/computerization of records
❑
❑
❑ 19. Late/missing lagoon level records
34. Sludge Evaluation
❑
❑
[120. Late/missing soils analysis
[121, Crop needs improvement
35. Sludge or Closure Plan
❑
❑
❑ 22. Crop inconsistent with waste plan
36. Sludge removallclosure procedures
❑
❑
37. Waste Structure Evaluation
❑
❑
❑ 23. Irrigation maintenance deficiency
❑ 24. Deficient sprayfield conditions
38. Structure Needs Improvement
❑
❑
39.Operation & Maintenance Improvements
❑
❑
40. Marker checklcalibration
❑
❑
Regulatory Referrals
41. Site evaluation
❑
❑
❑ Referred to DWQ Date:
42. Irrigation Calibration
El
El
❑ Referred to NCDA Date:
43. Irrigation designlinstallation
❑
❑
❑ Other...
system
Date:
44. Secure irrigation information (maps, etc.)
❑
❑
LIST IMPROVEMENTS
45. Operating improvements (pull signs, etc.)
❑
❑
MADE BY OPERATION
46. Wettable Acre Determination
❑
❑
Facility has installed 4 water boxes and a spring
47. Evaluate WAD certification/rechecks
❑
❑
development.
48. Crop evaluationlrecommendations
❑
❑
2. The creek below the WSP has been fenced out
49. Drainage work/evaluation
❑
❑
and some stream crossings installed.
50. Land shaping, subsoiling, aeration, etc.
51. Runoff control, stormwater diversion, etc.
❑
❑
❑
❑
13.
52. Buffer improvements
❑
❑
53. Field measurements(GPS, surveying, etc.)
❑
❑
4.
54. Mortality BRAPs
❑
❑
55. Waste operator education (NPDES)
❑
[Ell
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

IFacility Number 43 - L�_J Date: I 10/2776T—1 I
COMMENTS:
Waste analysis: 9-15-03 LSD 7.9 Ibs.N11000 gals. B
Soil samples dated 4-23-03 had some fields calling for a ton or more of lime on the pasture fields.
Fields noted in the DWQ inspection report still need to be added to the waste plan.
" Remember to record your waste pond freeboard levels once a week.
+
TECHNICAL SPECIALIST lRocky Durham
SIGNATURE
Date Entered: 1115103
Entered By: lRocky Durham
03/10/03

FZ "
sionpof Water Quality
Q tsion of Soil,,and Water Conservation
Q Other. Agency
Type of Visit O Compliance Inspection O Operation Review Q Lagoon Evaluation
Reason for Visit O Routine O Complaint O Follow up O Emergency Notification O Other ❑ Denied Access
Facility Number 03 05 Date of Visit: f17/09/2003 I'inu; 1220
O Not Operational Q Below Threshold
® Permitted ® Certified 0 Conditionally Certified 0 Registered Date Last Operated or Above Threshold:
Farm Name: Oillx.Sm"katSus.ltac ......................................................... Countti: c#heghanX..............----•--•----..._. }?YW�.Q -
Owner Name: BiUxt&_ShirJex_._._._._ 8,utith----------------------------- Phone No: 3 �:�51:8,21.LGsu1�----------------------
Mailing Address: s1.+7... arJ..S1[tith....................................................................................... EN. NIM..i`IKR.T.R.CA,ii,MINA................ 218623 ..............
Facility Contact: GarLSAdth......................................... Title: ............................................... Phone No: 336.657.,390�.(Mly.).......
Onsite Representative: C,zrthh ----- ----- - -------------------- --- Integrator: --- ------------------ --------------._.,
Certified Operator: H -Cad ................................... .SIOAbl................................................. Operator Certification Number: 2144L................
Location of Farm:
Farm -location: NC HWY21 north.— Right onto Fox —ridge Rd. (1422). Right onto #1453. Right onto #1439. Left onto Early
Road (# 1440). T
❑ Swine ❑ Poultry ® Cattle ❑ Horse Latitude 36 ' Longitude 81 • ®24
Design Current
Swine Canacitv Pannlatinn
❑ Wean to Feeder
❑ Feeder to Finish
❑ Farrow to Wean
❑ Farrow to Feeder
❑ Farrow to Finish
❑ Gilts
❑ Boars
F1
Design Current Design Current
Poultry Capacity Population Cattle Capacity Population
❑ Layer ®:Dairy 200 135
❑ Non -Layer ❑ Non -Dairy
❑ Other
Total Design Capacity 200
Total SSLW 280,000
Number of Lagoons 0 ❑ Subsurface Drains Present ❑ Lagoon Area 10 Spray Field Arcs
Holding Ponds / Solid Traps; I ❑ No Liquid Waste Management System
Discharges & Stream Impacts
1. Is any discharge observed from any part of the operation?
Dischart,e 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 DVI'Q)
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: 1 asteP .._.----•--------------_-------------------------•-------------------------------- .--------------------------
Freeboard (inches): 5 _
05103101
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes
❑ No
® Yes
❑ No
❑ Yes
® No
❑ Yes
® No
Structure 6
Continued

1/
Facility Number: 03-05 Date (01' Inspection 07/09/2003
5. Are there any immediate threats to the integrity of any of the structures observed'? (ie/ tree , vere 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 Fescue (Hay) Fescue (Graze) Corn (Silage & Grain) Rye cover
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?
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?
(iel 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
113 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
2. Waste pond had more than 4 feet of freeboard in Jan. 2003 but still filled up again. Operator dug a vegetated ditch to contain the
_
expected overflow. Waste did not reach waters of the state.
7. Burrow holes look ok now.
19, All Fall applications went to Virginia. Operator needs to account for the amount of waste and that it went to Virginia (date would be
good also). Per Sue Homewood, Virginia fields do not have to be in WUP.
T
ReviewerAnspector Name Melisga Rosebrock
Reviewer/inspector Signature: ph, iml JA/ Date:
05103101
Y V
Continued

Facility Number: 03-05 17�f Inspection 07/09/2003
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
Additional Comments aFidlor Drawmgs:
19. Soil test results were obtained for the Virginia fields. Suggest that waste analysis be obtained also.
19. Don't forget to take waste sample by 8/24/03.
19.2002 and 2003 soi1.test results.look good. _
19. Need to use the allowable PAN listed in the WUP, not from the recommendations from the soil test results.
22. DWQ notified 6/16103.
** 19. and 25. The following fields need to be added to the WUP as soon as possible since waste has already been applied here:
T-1061 F-7cl
-1064 F-7cl
-1372 F-Icl
05103101

Type of Visit
Reason for Visit
Division of Water Quality
Division of Soll1and Water Conservation
0 Other Agency .
mpliance Inspection 0 Operation Review 0 Lagoon Evaluation
Routine 0 Complaint 0 Follow up 0 Emergency Notification 0 Other
(late of isit: mime:
Facilitv Number
I PM
❑ Denied Access
Permitted ❑ Certified [3 Conditionally Certified ❑ Registered Date Last Operate or bove Threshold:
Farm Name: �� Count:
10 f-
Owner Name: ��m Phone No: W • 5�7, Xia�/�
Mailing Address: ��� �m r_ S� P rr7e.4 �. t nl'liC�,tiL. o�g��
Facility Contact- M-C I —"-"�±h Title: Phone No: "" �57. 3 %U
6 II c�
Onsite Representative: Integrator: U
Certified Operator:._ i3� s� m Operator Certification Number: 214411
Location of Farm:
�j�--Pr]��i-'Krl l� /� ctZ 1' L�I°n 7�a / S_3
y4c. on+� 14:3H,
❑ Swine ❑ Poultry � Gattle ❑ Horse Latitude ' VEST] u Longitude
Design
Swine Capacit
❑ Wean to Feeder
❑ Feeder to Finish
❑ Farrow to Wean
❑ Farrow to Feeder
❑ Farrow to Finish
❑ Gilts
❑ Boars
Number of Lagoons
Holding.Ponds / Solid'Traps
Current Design Current Design Current
o Motion Poultry Capacity Population C ttie Capacity Po ulati n
❑ Laver I Ii Dairyf
❑ Non -Laver I I PNon-DaiEL___
❑ Other
Total Design Capacity
Total SSLW �g CJCG
U No Liuuid Waste Management
Discharges & 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?
«'aste Collection & Treatment
4. Is storage capacity (freeboard plus storm storage) less than adequate? , spillway
tu taucre Structure 2 Structure 3 Structure 4 Structure 6
ldentifier; prrA
Freeboard (inches):
❑ Yes KNO
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes ❑ No
El Yes El No
Ayes ❑ No
❑ Yes XN,
❑ Yes X
No
Structure 6
05103101 Continued

Facility Number: Date of Inspection I /
5. Are there any immediate threats to the integrity of any of the structures observed? (ie/ trees, severe erosion, ❑Yes10
seepage, etc.)
6. Are there structures on -site which are not properly addressed and/or managed through a waste management or
closure plan? ❑ Yes XNo
(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 Wo
9. Do any stuctures lack adequate, gauged markers with required maximum and minimum liquid level
elevation markings? ❑ Yes >lo
«'ante Application
10. Are there any buffers that need maintenance/improvement?
11. Is there evidence of over application? ❑ Excessive Ponding
12. Crop type
13. Do the receiv
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?
❑ PAN ❑ Hydraulic_ Overload
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 or other Permit readily available?
18. Does the facility fail to have all components of the Certified Ani al Waste Management Plan readily available?
(ie/ WUP, checklists, design, maps, etc.) J
19. Does record keeping need improvement? (ie/ irrigation, free oard, 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
LJ Yes 0 No
❑ Yes No
❑ YesJNo
No
❑ YesNo
❑ Yes
❑ Yes' XNo
❑ Yes �(No
❑ Yes *1,o
Yes El No
❑ Yes No
❑ Yes o
❑ Yes No
El Yes o
❑ Yes No
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 €I): 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 Conv
�❑ Final Notes
Z. W a�-�� �or1c > 4 " mod I n SQn . Z OQ3
4 t Cl- Ho 6,3V
1A
92Z.
It
Reviewer/Inspector NamefVj _ rt�
Reviewer/Inspector Signature: Date:
05103101 - f t` antinued

0
Facility number: 03 — o�i Date of Inspection
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? ❑Yes XNO
28. is there any evidence of wind drift during land application? (i.e. residue on neighboring vegetation, asphalt. ❑ Yes o
roads, building structure. and/or public property)
29. Is the land application spray system intake not located near the liquid surface of the lagoon? E9 -r= s m,
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? E3 Yes
32. Do the flush tanks lack a submerged fill pipe or a permanent/temporary cover? �a •
I Additional Comments and/or Drawings.
Tr S 11�3�'77DO F 7a1 q- T-.37,2 F 1 CL
T - 8�� �- l ice,
7, Bu rron L des C-P fitpo .
aoo3 Sv, I peso (+s I m-) (L goad ,
U
o —�O-1 T-)OW F-7e-A, T-1644 bra be. i h L,6 u P R5 _.
l.UOQ fq N wv p— n a
t,oas+e "a f y s �5
bon,
1
'S Id 03
,FT--13-7Z F I
4-es re-I5.
}o� Uirhi�t4�e)d5 J
IV
05103101

visidii of Water Quality
vrsion of Soil and Water Conservation
O'Other Agency
Type of Visit O Compliance Inspection Q. Operation Review O Lagoon Evaluation
Reason for Visit 0 Routine O Complaint O Follow up O Emergency Notification O Other ❑ Denied Access
Facility Number 03 5 Date ui• Visit: 10/9/Z002 Time: 11:00
O Not Operational O Below Threshold
® Permitted ® Certified ❑ Conditionally Certified ❑ Registered Date Last Operated or Above Threshold:
Farm Name: Riltx.Smi:thFarm. lex........................................................ }' ... County: Afthany------•-----•--._..._._..--•--• 5R.Q.....
Owner Name: jDiUy-&_ShirJey--------.- .S.oiith-- - --- - - - --- - --- - - Phone No: 3.3F _657_.$52j ----- ---------- ----- --
Mailing Address:.r,/o..Cat,1.,SWtb .............................. ....... ENNIC.E.-NOB:A:�1..G,P�ti,K2UNA................ Z81OU ............
..................................................
FacilityContact: ........................................................... Title. ............................................... Phone No: .............................
Onsite Representative: C�st,1Zt4D_StiUtkk----------. .-------_-----.---------- lntegrator:-------------------------------------------•
Certified Operator:l3...CA[:1...................................SIBith ................................................. Operator Certification Number: 2J,4'kl.............................
Location of Farm:
+arm location. NC'HWY-21 north. Right onto Foxridge Rd. (1422). Right onto #1453. Right onto #1439. Left onto Early A
load (# 1440).
❑ Swine ❑ Poultry ® Cattle ❑ Horse Latitude ®• 32 4 Sl �4 Longitude S1 • ®1 246.
Design Current
Swine CaDacity 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 200 130
❑ Non -Layer ❑ Non -Dairy
❑ Other
Total Design Capacity 200
Total SSLW 250,000
Number of Lagoons ❑ Subsurface Drains Present ❑ Lagoon Area 10 Spray Field Area 1.
Holding Ponds / Solid Traps 1 ❑ No Liquid Waste Management Svstem
Discharges & 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?
h. If discharge is observed, did it reach Water of the State' (If yes, notify DWQ)
c. If discharge is observed. what is the estimated flow in gal/min?
d. Does discharge bypass a lagoon system? (If yes. notify DWQ)
2. Is there evidence of past discharge from any part of the operation?
3. Were there any adverse impacts or potential adverse impacts to the Waters of the State other than from a discharge?
Waste Collection & Treatment
4. Is storage capacity (freeboard plus storm storage) less than adequate? ❑ Spillway
Structure I Structure 2 Structure 3 Structure 4 Structure 5
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes ® No
Structure 6
Identifier: --•--•--•--•-----•-----•--• --------------------------- ......................
Freeboard (inches): 30
05103101
Continued

Facility Number: 03-5 Dale 44, Inspection I0/9/2002
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 maintenancelimprove men t?
❑ 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
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.
Ilse drawings of facility to better explain situations. (use additional pages as necessaryR ❑ Field Copy ❑ Final Notes
19. Tract 1143(Tompkins) needs to be added to the waste plan. Tract 1061 field 7cl and Tract 1372 field Icl and Tract 1066 field SO
_
and field Icl needs to be added to the waste plan. The waste analysis was slightly over the 60 day requirement on some of the Spring
applications.
7. Saw one groundhog hole on the waste pond embankment.
The certified operator was unable to attend the review due to Migraine headaches.
Reviewer/Inspector Name Rocky Durham
Reviewer/Inspector Signature: Date:
05103101 Continued

Facility Number: 43-5 Def lnspertirm 10/9/2002 0
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
' rt�ona " omments an o�z rawtn;�s . _ - ,.,.�_-, ..-•-- -.. - - __ _ _. _ ._._.. . _. r. ,. _ ..._ n�
Waste analysis: 4-29-02 LSD 8.2 lbs.N/1000 gals. $
Soil analysis dated 4-27-02
05103101

IpJiJozf of Water Qijiifity
on of Soil andWaterConservation
0 Other Agency�
Type of Visit O Compliance Inspection O Operation Review O Lagoon Evaluation
Reason for Visit O Routine Q Complaint O Follow up O Emergency Notification O Other ❑ Denied Access
Facility Number 03 0g Date of Visit: 4/tQ12002 Time: 115Q
rO Not Operational O Below Threshold
® Permitted ® Certified 0 Conditionally Certified 0 Registered Date Last Operated or Above Threshold : .........................
Farm Name: Billy, Snag.tl)..k:uma.lar........................... County: A119911AMY ........................................ !!'.SRO........
Owner Name: 131l1y.&.,SliirJpy................... 'Smi'th ........................................................... Phone No: 33.6r.6.57-................................................
Mailing Address: lsfo.OaxA.Srltzi.th►.z.ISM.Rt1 SIC. iQAA.................................. ENN.C.E....N.011TH-CAROLINA ............... Z$O23..............
Facility Contact: Cart.S.m k...................................................... Title:................................................................ Phone No: 33...tt 7.. 9.. 3.. illy:............
Onsite Representative: Gaxl.Sm th.................................................................................. Integrator:......................................................................................
Certified Operator:R...G.arl................................... Shcxllrh................................................. Operator Certification Number:11441 .............................
Location of Farm:
Farm location: NC HWY 21 north, Right onto Fosridge Rd. (1422). Right onto #1453. Right onto #1439. Left onto Early
oad (# 1440).
❑ Swine ❑ Poultry ® Cattle ❑ Horse Latitude 36 • 32 51 �� Longitude 81 • 00 24 .
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
F
Layer ® Dairy 200 13Non-Layer JCI Non -Dairy
❑ Other
Total Design Capacity 200
Total SSLW 280,000
Number of Lagoons 1 0 ❑ Subsurface Drains Present ❑ Lagoon Area JE1 Spray Field Area
Holding Ponds 1 Solid Traps I 1 JE1 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? El 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? Cl Spillway ❑ Yes ® No
Structure 1 Structure 2 Structure 3 Structure 4 Structure 5 Stricture 6
Identifier: :.....ACV. as te. Pond...... ...................................
Freeboard (inches): 54
05103101 Continued

Facility Number: 03-05 Date of Inspection 4/10/2002
5. Are there any immediate threats to the4egrity of any of the structures observed? (ie/ t 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
S. 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) Small Grain Overseed
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
L,
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
7. Trees still need to be cut on the dam. operator to complete this by June 1, 2002.
19. Need to keep freeboard records. No waste analysis for 9/15/01 waste applications. Operator only has Fall 2001 records on notebook
paper. Operator to send SLUR-2 forms for Fall 2001 to DWQ by May 1, 2002 using 5/14/01 waste analysis. Updated records were
received the next day and were reviewed. Need to keep each crop on a seperate SLUR-2 form.
19. Waste applications made 1/31/02, 2/l/02, 2/21-23/02, and 3/25/02 need to have a waste sample taken ASAP. Operator is to catch up
Spring application records (SLUR-2 forms) once applications have been completed. To be checked during operational review.
19. Per operator, some waste applications continue to be made on fields that are not in CAWMP. Per operator, Sparta field office is
1working to add these to the plan now.
Reviewer/Inspector Name Melissa Rosebrock
Reviewer/Inspector Signature. Date: C)Z
05103101 Continued

Facility Number: 03-05 Dat4nspection 4/10/2002 •
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
Additional omments and/or Drawings:
05103101

4
ion of water Y."ia"►J
Vision of Soil and WaWi, ' oni&I at1Qn
Q Other Agency,
!Type of Visit XCompliance Inspection O Operation Review O Lagoon Evaluation I
Reason for Visit fioutine O Complaint O Fonow up O Emergency Notification O Other ❑ Denied Access
Facility Number Dale of Visit• ime: So
Q Not O erational Q Below Threshold
APermittedoCertified 0 Conditionally Certified [3Registered Date Last Operated or Above Threshold:
NFarm Name: t .... I /I. ...�. n C� County:... .� ... �^.... ........... ry...................
Owner Name: L 1 r- 1 Phone No:
...�. ....�........! ... -� ............................... ... .. ................. ......1......�.�►�
Facility Contact: ..........r.!-......m.I..... Title:............................................................... Phone No: �`�.3..1v7'i r!
ailing Add s 3-7.....F. .........................E��... }.1v ..............a..'9 .......................
�c�Is� r.. .. � n l
Onsite Representative:.... QX .l .. �!... ....... integrator: �}( � �'...............................................
...... n.............
C
Certified Operator:..,•• •,;..,.,. •�•,••„•,.,,,, J. SQ �. Operator Certification Number: dM&21K '
`...... ...... ... .............................•.....................
-- Location of Farm:- — — - -- - ,I 54gLi4
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.Noulati6i� i..
❑ Layer Dairy o2QQ �3
❑ Non -Layer ❑ Non -Dairy
❑ Other 1 -
Total Design Capacity -W O
Total SSLW I a g
Number of Lagoons Subsurface Drains Present JI0 Lagoon Area I❑ Spray Field Area
Holding Ponds / Solid Traps ❑ No Liquid Waste Management System
Discharges & Stream Impacts
1. Is any discharge observed from any part of the operation?
❑ Yes WNo
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 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 *0
Waste Collection & 'Treatment
4. Is storage capacity (freeboard plus storm storage) less than adequate? Vspillway ❑ Yes KN 0
,A IStruc ure Structure 2 Structure 3 Structure 4 Structure 5 Structure 6
Identifier.iv_
1freeboard (inches):
i
,i 55/00 Continued on back

1'
Facility Number: — Date of Inspection I/
5. Are there any immediate threats to the int Ry of any of the structures observed? (ie/ trees, severe erosion,
0 Yes
0No
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?
j 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
KNO
Waste Application
10. Are there any buffers that need maintenance/improvement?
❑ Yes
J<Vo
11. Is there evidence of over application? ❑ Excessive Ponding ❑ PAN ❑ Hydraulic Overload
❑ Yes
ANO
12. Crop type
13. Do the receiving crops differ with those designated in the Certified Animal Waste Management Plan (CAWMP)?
❑ Yes
ANo
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?.
-0Yes_
No. —
15. Does the receiving crop need improvement?
❑ Yes
No
16. Is there a lack of adequate waste application equipment?
❑ Yes
WNo
Reauired Records & Documents
17. Fail to have Certificate of Coverage & General Permit readily available? ❑ Yes KNo
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 14No
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
21. Did the facility fail to have a actively certified operator in charge? ❑ Yes '❑
22. Fail to notify regional DWQ of emergency situations as required by General Permit?
(ie/ discharge, freeboard problems, over application) ❑ Yes )j 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
Molatri# js;or- deftciencies •ftre pptecl• d(Wh)g fh1s;visitf • ;Y;o will receive 06 ru"her
corresoonden ' ' abotiti this visit: ::::::::::::::.................... .
Comments (refer to question #); Explain any YES answers and/or any recommendations or,any otho
Use'drawings of facility to better explain situations, (use additional pages as necessary):
Ilrf v nr ��, / t _ �I •
6
r
P
Reviewer/Inspector Name
Reviewer/Inspector Signature:
.. Tti 1(l11i{51
Date: I 0 5100

Facility Number: D* Inspection
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 XNo
❑ Yes YNO
7-=.�.MG
a/
aa.
�3�as/oa-A&(
AA�� f15A� a
V'M
IM
/Y�000-4'1006
5100

W�r'-Agency
ion of Water Quality
ion of Soil'and Water Conservation
(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
Date of visit: 8/22120t)1 -Time: 10:00
FFacility Number 03 5
Not O erational Q Below Threshold
M Permitted M Certified ID Conditionally Certified 0 Registered Date Last Operated or Above Threshold: .......••••.....
Farm Name: .................................................... .. ........... . County: AlIgglIgjay ........................................ WS.RQ........
Owner Name: bitly.&ShirleJ'................... SM11hl........................................................... Phone No: 33.6-6,5.i.: S�1...........................................................
Mailing Address: D51.11AMIT—ROM)........
Facility Contact: .............................................................................. Title:
EN.M.C.>: NOR:ski-CIABOUNA................ U.622 ..............
PhoneNo: ........................................
Onsite Representative: GalC1...�laJtOIT.S[pllXh........................................................... Integrator:......................................................................................
Certified Operator:B............................................... S.oAith................................................. Operator Certification Number: Z1.441.............................
-- —Location-of-Farm: -- - - -
Farm location: 9 miles east of Sparta on Rd. # 1440 off Hwy. 18. +
❑ Swine ❑ Poultry M Cattle ❑ Horse Latitude 36 •F 32 51 Longitude F 81 • 00 24
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 Capacity Population Cattle Capacity Population
❑ Layer ::�::]®-Dairy 200 1122
❑ Non -Layer ICI Non -Dairy
❑ Other
Total Design Capacity 200
Total SSLW 280,000
Number of Lagoons ❑ Subsurface Drains Present ❑ Lagoon Area ❑ Spray Field Area
Holding Ponds 1 Solid Traps 1 ❑ No Liquid Waste Management System
DischarLyes & Stream Impacts
1, Is any discharge observed from any part of the operation? ❑ Yes M 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 ❑ No
2. Is there evidence of past discharge from any part of the operation? ❑ Yes M No
3. Were there any adverse impacts or potential adverse impacts to the Waters of the State other than from a discharge? ❑ Yes M No
Waste Collection S 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 G
Identifier: ...................................................................................................................................................................................................................
Freeboard (inches): 24
05103101 Continued

Facility Number: 03-5 Date of Inspection 8/22/2001
5. Are there any immediate threats to the inta.a ity of any of the structures observed? (ie/ tree0ere erosion,
❑ Yes
N 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?
N Yes
❑ No
8. Does any part of the waste management system other than waste structures require maintenance/improvement?
❑ Yes
N No
9. Do any stuctures lack adequate, gauged markers with required maximum and minimum liquid level
elevation markings?
❑ Yes
N No
Waste Application
10. Are there any buffers that need maintenance/improvement?
❑ Yes
N No
11. Is there evidence of over application? ❑ Excessive Ponding []PAN []Hydraulic Overload
❑ Yes
N No
12. Crop type Corn (Silage & Grain) Timothy, Orchard, & Rye Fescue (Graze)
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
N No
b) Does the facility need a wettable acre determination?
❑ Yes
N No
c) This facility is pended for a wettable acre determination?
❑ Yes
N No
15. Does the receiving crop need improvement?
❑ Yes
N No
16.
Is there a lack of adequate waste application equipment?
❑ Yes
N No
Required
Records & Documents
17.
Fail to have Certificate of Coverage & General Permit or other Permit readily available?
❑ Yes
N 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
N No
19.
Does record keeping need improvement? (ie/ irrigation, freeboard, waste analysis & soil sample reports)
N Yes
❑ No
20.
Is facility not in compliance with any applicable setback criteria in effect at the time of design?
❑ Yes
N No
21.
Did the facility fail to have a actively certified operator in charge?
❑ Yes
N No
22.
Fail to notify regional DWQ of emergency situations as required by General Permit?
(ie/ discharge, freeboard problems, over application)
❑ Yes
N No
23.
Did Reviewer/Inspector fail to discuss review/inspection with on -site representative?
❑ Yes
N No
24.
Does facility require a follow-up visit by same agency?
❑ Yes
N No
25.
Were any additional problems noted which cause noncompliance of the Certified AWMP?
❑ Yes
N 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 N Final Notes-,
# 17. Need to have the General Permit with records. I will send a copy to Mr. Smith
+
# 19. Need to be keeping weekly levels on the waste storage pond.
# 13. Need to have Rye ( cover crop added to the WUP and any hay fields in NC that waste is applied to. After this question was
marked we found another WUP that had Rye included in the crop rotation, but we were not sure if this was the latest WUP. No date.
# 7. Still needs to remove some small trees on the waste pond embankment that were noted by the DWQ inspector.
# 4. The waste pond is getting close to the max. liquid level. Mr. Smith will be applying as soon as possible.
Reviewer/inspector Name iRocky Durham
Reviewer/Inspector Signature: Date:
O5103101 Continued

Facility Number: 03-5 DWf Inspection 8/22/2QQ1
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
Ad ithonal omments and/or Drawings:
Waste analysis: 5/11/01 LSD 7.8 lbs.N11000 gals. B +
w
05103101

' ivision of Water Quality
�ivision of Soil and Water Conservation
D Other Agency
rype of Visit Q Compliance Inspection O Operation Review O Lagoon Evaluation
Reason for Visit 0 Routine O Complaint O Follow up O Emergency Notification O Other ❑ Denied Access
Facility Number
1)Ae,df Vkil: 4/1W2401 Time: 0945
03 05
Q Not Operational 0 Below Threshold
® Permitted ® Certified 0 Conditionally Certified C] Registered Date Last Operated or Above Threshold: .........................
Farm Name: Hilly.5mithfA1Clp1S.bc.................................................. ............................. County: Alleglk aM..........................................W.SRO.......
Owner Name: 13Alix. G..Slta�leY................... SWOL .......................................................... Phone No: 6-(tS.I.-$521.C.ax1..........................................---..
Mailing Address: 37..t.Ear Y..RoAd.................................................................................... ENNICL.NORT.H.C,A,RMINA................ M.6.23 ..............
Facility Contact: Caid.Sm th.......................................................Title:............................................................... Phone No: 3,36.b.57.t 9 3.Dalb.'.......
Onsite Representative: Cal;bill),itll................................................................................... Integrator:.......................................................................................
Certified Operator: B.-Carl ................................... ST] Abl................................................. Operator Certification Number: 2a,4.41.............................
Location of Farm:
Farm location: 9 miles east of Sparta on Rd. # 1440 off Hwy. 18. A
r
❑ Swine ❑ Poultry ® Cattle ❑ Horse Latitude 36 • 32 4 514. Longitude 81 ' 00 24
Design Current
Swine CaUacity Population
❑ Wean to Feeder
❑ Feeder to Finish
❑ Farrow to Wean
❑ Farrow to Feeder
❑ Farrow to Finish
❑ Gilts
❑ Soars
Design Current Design Current
Poultry Capacity Population Cattle Capacity Population
❑ Layer 10 Dairy 200 162
❑ Non -Layer ❑ Non -Dairy
❑ Other
Total Design Capacity 200
Total SSLW 280,000
y �,NumbeM
Lagoons -rs ❑ Subsurface Drains Present ❑ Lag(x)n Area ❑ Spray Fi-7HoldingPoSolid Taps 1 ❑ No Liquid Waste Management System
Discharges R Stream Impacts
I. Is any discharge observed from any part of the operation? ❑ Yes ® No
Dischar�,e originated at: ❑ Lagoon ❑ Spray Field ❑ Other
a. ]f discharge is observed, was the conveyance man-made? ❑ Yes ❑ No
b. If disrhsrt*e is observed. did it reach Water of the Suite? (If yes. nolify DWQ) ❑yes ❑ No
c. ]f discharge is observed. what is the estimated Ilmv in gal/min?
d. Does discharge bypass a lagoon system? (]f yes. notif�' 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 T26//�/- Continued

Facility Number: 03-05 • Date of Inspection 4/1$/2001 •
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: ..... VYI.)?4Xjd...... ....
Freeboard(inches): 24. ...................... ................................... .................................... .................................... ....................................
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 Corn (Silage & Grain) Rye 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
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
R
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
O1/01/01
Continued

<I Facility Number: 03-05 1
& „f Inspcctirn1 4/18/2U01 •
30. Is there any evidence of wind drift during land application? (i.e. residue on neighboring vegetation, asphalt,
roads, building structure. and/or public_ property)
3 1 - Is the land application spray system intake not located near the liquid surface of the lagoon?
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.)
33. Do the animals feed storage bins fail to have appropriate cover?
34. Do the flush tanks lack a submerged fill pipe or a permanent/temporary cover'?
Printed on: 5/1/2001
❑ 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.
❑ Field Copy ® Final Notes
7. Go ahead and cut small pine/tree seedlings. Other vegetation looks good.
8. Need to put a berm at the heifer barn to keep bedding/waste from washing down the hill.
9. May want to run a I" PVC pipe through "red area" on the marker. Paint is coming off. May want to show spillway, too.
10. Make sure you're maintaining at least 25' buffer from creek when applying waste.
13. Call NRCS @ possibility of adding hay to CAWMP.
19. Take -waste. samples. by-5/30/01. Sample dated-I-I/03/00-was-12:5-Ibs:-N/1000 gal - -Need to take 2001-soilsamples. Need to start
keeping freeboard readings.
25. Need to revise CAWMP to include fields that waste was applied to last year (hay).
Reviewer/Inspector Name Melissa Rosebrock
ReviewertInspector Signatu� :2 i¢. n k At Date:
01/01/01

16AM
Division of Water Quality - 4
Division of Soil and Water Conservation �•�$ Ti°
a _� �Q Other Agency _
Type of Visit Compliance Inspection O Operation Review O Lagoon Evaluation
Reason for Visit �outine O Complaint O Follow up O Emergency Notification O Other ❑ Denied Access
Bate of Visit: I q I ' O b 1 J,rirne:
Facility Number
0 Nat Operational Q Below Threshold
Permitted XCertified [3 Conditionally Certified 0 Registered Date Last Operated or Above Threshold:
Farm Name: ....... a..1ILY.......�5PA................................ county: ... A1.Ley_ ha.h... ...............
Owner Name: S r Phone No: C
......g.�..�.�.�.....................� �.......�,°.�.---.....ern.r.�l:t��,:..........................,.��.�.......�.....1.....---�..ory
Facility Contact: ... `-'`'' •,..... S..l..l.!. f............................. Title:................................................................
3-7
Mailing Address: .......1
........ .....
.... 1.... ....................................... ................................................. .pZ......v..
POJ Onsite Representative:.....a. yi . Integrator: o.N t
.....
14
Certified Operator:.................. Car.).............5.M.AA ............. .................... Operator Certification Number:.......,p.. ..!. .. ......
Location of Farm:
q M es e"o54 0 5 par 6 5�- o /$,
❑ Swine ❑ Poultry Xcattle ❑ Horse Latitude ®• 3 Z ®" Longitude �• a0 �"
Design Current Design Current Design " Current"
Swine Capacity Population Poultry Capacity Population Cattle Ca aci Po iiilaticiw? ,;
❑ Wean to Feeder ❑ Layer ❑ Dairy �60
❑ Feeder to Finish ❑ Non -Layer ❑ Non -Dairy
❑ Farrow to Wean
❑ Farrow to Feeder ❑ Other
❑ Farrow to Finish Total Design Capacity o? O Q
❑ Gilts
❑ Boars Total SSLW oZ $d 600
Number of Lagoons ❑ Subsurface Drains Present ❑ Lagoon Area ❑ Spray Field Area
E
olding Ponds / Solid Traps ❑ No Liquid Waste Management System r
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)
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
ruct1ure Su'LiCture 2 Structure 3 Structure 4 Structure 5
Identifieri�T� hd..................................1......................_..................................................
Freeboard (inches):
5100
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes A No
❑ Yes No
❑ Yes �TNo
Structure 6
Continued on back

Facility Number: — Q Date of inspection Printed on: 1/9/2001
5. Are there any immediate threats to th�frttegrity 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?
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
re.
13. Do the receiving crops differ with those designated in the Certified Animal Waste Management Plan (CA
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?
(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 XNo
❑ Yes C*14o
❑ Yes I0
AYes ❑ No
❑ Yes j(No
❑ Yes 06,40
❑ Yes A No
❑ Yes A No
❑ Yes ONO
❑ Yes WNo
❑ Yes )kNo
Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes Kt No
❑ Yes W.No
❑ Yes P(No
❑ Yes '*�No
❑ Yes A No
,Yes ❑ No
O: �VQ yiol'atigns'of defcieuctes were notes d(ritrig his:visit* ;Y 4 will teetiye iiti #"u>�t tg
curies oridence: abatik this :visit.:. .
Comments (refer to question #): Explain any YES answers and/or any recommendations or'any other comments.4 A
Use drawings of facility to better explain situations. (use additional pages as necessary):
-7. Oo Q w - eut imalI In eHrzz :5,e,ed 1 in sr A- Q_ _4-jLc601,1
[Mal boaot � r V VN � t tt Svc: ,� t ,� � �!-�,ro � t
h r4-b'i 44.
JT)0L,ry4P,C. a ���- �� eOmin� . Ma u 6h0u.) spi I I -r 1460.
5. Need t4+ a e4- �XLrn b4j i n q
Reviewer/Inspector Name 4,9-
Reviewer/Inspector Signature: Date: S/pp

i Facility Number: — to of luspection . 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 )PNO
liquid level of lagoon or storage pond with no agitation?
27. Are there any dead animals not disposed of properly within 24 hours? ❑ Yes A 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 ,eNo
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 ); o
32. Do the flush tanks lack a submerged fill pipe or a permanent/temporary cover?
Fr21d 0 h'1a� c,k -emu P
Gje02-1 C
Q 6vrn4X
U Q.9 NA4 icn ? - /
"9T- s ley . .
! D -r WM-Z 1!f-
4&6� -
I3 . CO, I I N 2C".
c�dd�n) h01+o wuP.
-x ZZ'VJ wy '�e
III �% � �f/ I• I �� ���:
t /
5100

vision of Water Quality
vision of Soil and Water Conservation
0 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
Darr oil' Visi►: 11/8/2000 I'ii►�,,: 13:50 I'rin►rd on: 4/9/2001
Facility Number 03 5
0 Not Operational Q Below Threshold
®Permitted ®Certified [3 Conditionally Certified [3Registered Date Last Operated or Above Threshold: ...•••....•••••.
Farm Name: C...............................................
Owner Name: Billy.. la i.['t gY.................... l a t>.t b t ..................
County: AUgghaay......................................... 1' SRA........
Phone No: 33.C-65.2.: 21..............
FacilityContact:..............................................................................Title:................................................................ Phone No:...................................................
Mailing Address: 2.151BA1 RE.T.T.RAAD.................................................................. ENNICE...IYORTH..CA.IZQ1. NA................ M623..............
OnsiteRepresentative: Clayloin.5with.............................................. .. ........................... Integrator:......................................................................................
Certified Operator:D............................................... smith................................................. Operator Certification Number:2,X.4.41......................
Location of Farm: _
Farm location: 9 miles east of Sparta on Rd. # 1440 +
❑ Swine ❑ Poultry ® Cattle ❑ Horse Latitude 3ti • 32 C 51 �4 Longitude S1 • 00 6 24 .6
Design Current
Swine CanaeltV Population
❑ Wean to Feeder
❑ Feeder to Finish
❑ Farrow to Wean
❑ Farrow to Feeder
❑ Farrow to Finish
❑ Gilts
❑ Boars
Design Current Design Current
Poultry CaiDacitv Po ulation Cattle Capacity Population
❑ Layer I I E ® Dairy 1 200 1 170
❑ Non -Layer I 1 1[:] Non -Dairy
❑ Other
Total Design Capacity E--200
Total SSLW 1 280,000
Number of Lagoons I I ❑ Subsurface Drains Present 110 Lagoon Area ❑ Spray Field Area
Holding Ponds / Solid Traps 1 ❑ No Liquid Waste Management System
Discharges R 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
h. If discharge is observed. did ii reach Water of the State? (If yes. notify 1)N'VQ) ❑Yes ❑ No
c. If discharge is observed. what is the estimated tlo.v in ualhnin'
d. Does discharge bypass a IZ120 in 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 Colicclion & "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:..............................................................................................................................
Freeboard (inches): 84
5/00 Continued on back

Facility Number: 03-5 i D.11V ill, Insperliml 1I/8/21)00 Printer! loll:
5. Are there any immediate threats to the Rl grity of any of the structures observed? (ie/ tr6evere erosion,
seepage, etc.)
6. Are there structures on -site which are not properly addressed and/or managed through a waste management of
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?
4/9/2001 'r' r • +
❑ Yes ® No '
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?
Is there evidence of over application? ❑ Excessive Ponding ❑ PAN ❑ Hydraulic Overload
12. Crop type Corn (Silage & Grain) Fescue (Graze) Rye
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?
R t aired Records fi 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? (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?
21 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?
0. No - Viol lations'eli.:deficiencies-W e:noted:during-this visit. N u4ill r&ieive.no-ftirth'ei--'-
: correspondence 'bouf 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
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes ® No
® Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes ® No
❑ 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 situations. (use additional pages as necessary):
t 9. Recommend installing a gauged marker ( every 6 inches ) that can be read 4-5 feet below the max. liquid mark for weekly
'reeboard readings per general permit requirements.
f 17. Need to call the Winston-Salem DWQ office to request a copy of the certificate of coverage. Facility was permitted 1103/00
according to the database.
t 19, Need to match fields applied to, to the tract and field number in the waste plan. Need annual soil samples on application fields.
Need to keep weekly waste pond levels according to the general permit.
V 22. There was evidence that the waste level had gotten above the max. liquid level. 1 informed Mr. Smith that according to the
,eneral permit he is supposed to notify the DWQ regional office if he gets above his max. liquid level. �
Reviewer/Inspector Name 'Rocky Durham
Reviewer/Inspector Signature: Date: 5100

Fauii2!v Number: 03-5 1) W inspection 11/5/2000 Printed oil,: 4/9/2001
Oder 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
2&
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
[Wdditibfid F oinmenwatfdlor Draivings: j
Waste analysis: 1 1/03/00 LSO 12.5 lbs. N/1000 gals. B •
J
5100

ision of Water Quality
01sion
Q of Soil and Water Conservation
Q Other Agency
Type of Visit O Compliance Inspection O Operation Review O Lagoon Evaluation
Reason for Visit % Routine O Complaint O Follow up O Emergency Notification O Other ❑ Denied Access
Facility Number
Date of Vi%il: 6/6/211U4 "Tillie: 1Q45 Printed low 6/19/2000
03 05
0 Not O perational Q Below Threshold
® Permitted ® Certified 0 Conditionally Certified [3 Registered pate Last Operated or Above Threshold: ....................
Farm Name: ............................................................
Owner Name:
. County: Alivgharty......................................... llrSRO........ —
....... Phone No:f:S%.:13SL(aza)...
Facility Contact: Ut;i.,SJWti1....................................................... Title:................................................................ Phone No: 336,.65.1.3.9.3 f1.111X).........
Mailing Address: 37X.Early..&A.................................................................................... ENNA.C.L..1YQ.RTUCA.R(?1 NA................ MU3.............
Onsite Representative:.lAytom.,S]mAtb............................................................................ Integrator:..........................----...........................
Certified Operator:..arl...................................$'Mith ................................................ Operator Certification Number:ZI.4.41
Location of Farm:
....................................................................................................----..---.---..----..--..----..---..----..........................................................--..--. .----------..----..--.........
a� ant.la�tAa�n;...9..nniltis. ea�t.Qf.S..axt;�.aan.�is�..#..X44.Q............................................................................................................................................................. _
::l
❑ Swine ❑ Poultry ® Cattle ❑ Horse Latitude 36 • 3Z 51 Longitude 81 • UO 2A
Design Current
Swine Caoacity 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 1 200 1 165
❑ Non -Lay IM Non -Dairy
❑ Other
Total Design Capacity 200
Total SSLW 280,000
Number of Lagoons ❑ Subsurface Drains Present JJEI Lagoon Area ❑tipsy Field Area
Holding Ponds/ Solid Traps 1 ❑ 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/tnin?
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 1 Structure 2 Structure 3 Structure 4 Structure 5 Structure 6
Identifier:.Siorage.P.ogd.................. ...................... -----...................................................................................................---.........
Freeboard (inches): 28
Continued on back

Facility Number: 03-05 Date of Inspection 1 6/6/2000 Printed on: 6/19/2000
5. Are there any immediate threats to the egrity of any of the structures observed? (ie/ tee 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
(►f 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? 19 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?
❑ Yes
® No
15. Does the receiving crop need improvement?
❑ Yes
® No
16.
Is there a lack of adequate waste application equipment?
❑ Yes
® No
Reuuired 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
0; N6M61ati6ris.or deficiencies-weee;noted dijNhg4tk6 v,isit.-:You;will :reeei:ve.no-fu.rther-' -'
co rres�oridence. about this.visit.
B. Need to mow vegetation around waste pond to discourage animals from burrowing and for better inspection of dam.
19. No waste sample for 3/20/00 application.
,_ _ __ __ .. I - .
Reviewer/Inspector Name Meli a Rosebroc
Reviewer/Inspector Signature: Date:

Facility Number: 03-05 D; ' Inspecti4m 6/6/2000 Printed on: 6/19/2000
•
dor 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
IN 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
Ad
J

lo; ao
Division of nd WaterCons+rvatton »;Operatio
. < _ n Revi "
-��,,,�����((/(��D```���,,,tvision_ of So and Water,Conservahon`- Compliance Insp oa
i*isi0I1 of Water Quality-;CoiFnpliance inspe-cbpn t $ ir: u c ✓h `:* y.a ra j ;
, a Other Agency. Operation Review f r `� *c} i f °r
Routine 0 Complaint 0 Follow-up of DWQ inspection 0 Follow-up of DSWC review 0 Other
Facility Number Date of Inspection 0
--CUTS 11
Time of Inspection Q 24 hr. (hh:mm)
0 Permitted #, Certified [3 Conditionally Certified [3 Registered [3 Not O erational Date Last Operated:
Farm Name: ... 8.111 ... ►�:}.i Hj..... Q i�'n'15........ .Ln......................... County: 4.1 haa.............................................
.. .
Owner Name:...i...lj. !? ........r.4.1.r........G�.j'_.1.f..l.............................. Phone No:.... 36..t...�l ..7.`...........
��}} .�j......o �r�
W�
Facility Contact: ............ ,,,,i-d.......?..n1j. ,..............Title:................... one No:......
Mailing Address: r'.,,,,, ,,,•,•
..............................
... �-..........fin rz i . ........................................ � a...
Onsite Representative:.._, AM1+0jn, . Integrator: ...............................................................
Certified Operator:..J.;�,.8......a,�.;.1......�j ,(?'j, j, Operator Certification Number:., a.................................
....................................... I �1
Location of Farm:
m.;......:..................................................
...... ................................................................................................ ...............
Latitude '—K' j• & " Longitude EaD• d ° ®44
Design. Current
Swine Capacity Population
❑ Wean to Feeder
❑ Feeder to Finish
❑ Farrow to Wean
❑ Farrow to Feeder
❑ Farrow to Finish
❑ Gilts
❑ Boars
Design ..,Current rDesign Current
Poultry Capacity Population Cattle Capacity -Po ulation
❑ Layer Dairy
❑ Non -Layer I I Non -Dairy
❑ Other
Total Msign;Capacity.;. �L}
Total -SSLW
Number of Lagoons JE1 Subsurface Drains Present ❑ Lagoon Area ❑ Spray Field Area
Holding Ponds / Solid Traps ❑ No Liquid Waste Management System
Discharges & 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 gallmin'?
d. Does discharge bypass a lagoon system? (Il'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? r I4 Spillway
Structure 1 tructure ? Structure 3 Structure 4 Structure 5
Identifier: s40rPon
--� 1 4
Freeboard{inches}: ..............�............................................................................................. .............. .................................... ....
5. Are there any immediate threats to the integrity of any of the structures observed? (ie/ trees, severe erosion,
seepage, etc.)
312 3/99
❑ Yes Ko
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes No
El Yes o
[]Yes �No
Structure 6
...............................
[]Yes 4NO
Continued on back

• Facility Number: — Q • 1)f 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
13. Do the receiving crops differ with those designated is 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? N ! h
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?
.: .10 yi6lafioris:oi- deficiencies -were n6ted. during 4his:visit; • Yoit Wiil•reeeiye iio: further -
................................
. corresp6rideike: abaut thes visit.
❑ Yes No
❑ Yes No
to Yes [:]No
❑ Yes *o
❑ Yes j No
❑ Yes VNo
❑ Yes V'No
❑ Yes No
❑ Yes No
❑ Yes M-No
❑ Yes No
❑ Yes 9No
❑ Yes XNo
Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes No
❑ Yes No
❑ Yes XNo
❑ Yes No
[-]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 situations. (use additional pages as necessary): _.
jq Ght�e� l�xzs+e� sof rt? cord5. -- fJo U_)dS+2 L-5d�up{e�S , y- 3jgo 0o App)1 ram►
Corn 5 i ie�� e-
P P
. eed 4'b mou,�V kor) Ox-ounJ WQ5te? 4)orj `+o
diSCoutrt�� anima �raM hU rrnu a, ✓
Y1SP Q o a a� a yn
Reviewer/Inspector Name i
i i
Reviewer/Inspector Signature: % ��h� Date: M 66 QQ
3/23/99

• Facility Number: 1) Inspection
Odor Issues
26. Does the discharge pipe from the confinement building to the storage pond or lagoon fail to discharge at/or below o
liquid level of lagoon or storage pond with no agitation? 0 m If I- C; �G
27. Are there any dead animals not disposed of properly within 24 hours? f l sued Yes b No
28. Is there any evidence of wind drift during land application? (i.e. residue on neighboring vege(ation, asphalt, ❑ Yes ko
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 XNQ
30. Were any major maintenance problems with the ventilation fan(s) noted? (i.e. broken fan belts, missing or
or broken fan biade(s), inoperable shutters, etc.) ❑-Yes [ No
31. Do the animals feed storage bins fail to have appropriate cover? ❑ Yes 1KNo
32. Do the flush tanks lack a submerged Ciil pipe or a permanenUtemporary cover? Qm' 77c � ^-+-r—allo
3/23/99

13 Division of §g1jend Water Conservation - Operation RevVlon
0 Division AWmd`Water Conservation Compliance
Division of Water Quality - Compliance Inspection
Other.Agency - Operation Review
19 Routine 0 Complaint 0 Follow-up of DWQ inspection 0 Follow-up of DSWC review 0 Other
Facility Number 03 5 Date of Inspection
Time of Inspection 10:30 24 hr. (hh:mm)
0 Permitted ® Certified [3 Conditionally Certified 17 Registered 113 Not O erational Date Last Operated:
Farm Name: liily..Strail�h.l~ axal.Int�..
...................
County: Mcghany...
Owner Name:)3i.11y.A.Shidey....................$Mith ...............................................
Facility Contact: CAVISlltltlM...................................................... Title:..............
Mailing Address: .1A,iTURAWA.......................................................
Onsite Representative: .0y'1.Smith.......................................................
Certified Operator: ... a�1................................... sxwth......................
Location of Farm:
WSRO.
Phone No: 33.fr 57.7052,i...........................................................
............. I .......... I........ Phone No: 316:457:8521.......................
ENNI.C.E...INS)RTH.CA,1 MINA ............... 2.8.623 ..............
Integrator:
Operator Certification Number: 2144,1.........
Latitude 3ti • 32 6 5446 Longitude $1 ' 00 1$
Design Current
Swine Canacitv 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 0 Dairy 200 135
❑ Non -Layer ❑ Non -Dairy
❑ Other
Total Design Capacity 200
Total SSLW 280,000
Number of Lagoons 1 ❑ Subsurface Drains Present Area ❑ Spray Field Area
Holding Ponds / Solid Traps ❑ 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 ❑ 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 0 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: 1
Freeboard (inches): ............3.)'get
5. Are there any immediate threats to the integrity of any of the structures observed? (ie/ trees, severe erosion, ❑ Yes ® No
seepage, etc.)
3/23199 Continued on back
T�.:l:♦. N�.mhor a-1—r it s —r1 Q1� 1 /

6. Are there structures on -site which are nr perly addressed and/or managed through a v�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 maintenancelimprovemen t?
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
t or�rr7y �
❑ 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?
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?
®:-No•violations:o� ile'ciencies•ivere noted during this visif.:You:vYiII receive no ftirtliet
• ... corresnondence about this -visit.
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes ® No
Facility Number: 03-5 Date of Inspection 8/27/99

Division of iftand Water Conservation - Operation Rev"
0 Division oflWand Water Conservation - Compliance lns ion
0 Division of Water Quality - Compliance Inspection
(]Other Agency - Operation Review
19 Routine 0 Complaint 0 Follow-up of DWQ inspection 0 Follow-up of DSWC review 0 Other
Facility Number 03 g Date of Inspection 6/9/99
Time of Inspection 14:30 24 hr. (hh:mm)
0 Permitted ® Certified [3 Conditionally Certified 0 Registered JE3 Not O erational Date Last Operated:
Farm Name: llilly..S.miltlafairia5i ac................................................................................ County: A lleghany......................................... ! S.R. 0........
Owner Name: Billy.A.Shirley.................... Smith ........................................................... Phone No: 910:457.78.521...........................................................
FacilityContact: .............................................................................. Title:................... ... Phone No:...................................................
MailingAddress: 2152.15,arrg.U.Rd.................................................................................. FA1pitx..N.C............................................................. M.623 .............
Onsite Representative: axl,Snnith.................. .... Integrator:.........
Certified Operator:,.Caxl................................... SaUalk............... ..... .... I ... ... .... I... Operator Certification Number:21441
Location of Farm:
....... .........................
.....................................................................................................................................................................................................................
kaxtnt.l.a�atxa>u;...9.nuil.�st..Qf..axta.Qzt.Rs1Q............................................................................................................................................................ =
............................................................
Latitude 36 • 32 54 Longitude 81 • 00 18
Design Current
Swine Capacity PODulation
❑ 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 200 1155
❑ Non -Layer I I JC] Non -Dairy
❑ Other
Total Design Capacity 200
Total SSLW 280,000
Number of Lagoons I I ❑ Subsurface Drains Present ❑ Lagoon Area ❑ Sprav Field Area
Holding Ponds / Solid Traps I 1 I ❑ No Liquid Waste Management System
Discharges & Stream Impacts
1. Is any discharge observed from any part of the operation? ❑ Yes 0 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 ❑ No
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?
i
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:
Freeboard (inches): ......-O.Q
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes ® No
[:]Yes ® No
Structure 6
5. Are there any immediate threats to the integrity of any of the structures observed? (ie/ trees, severe erosion,
seepage, etc.)
3/23/99
FaAlitw Mimhnr•
❑ Yes ® No
Continued on back
4ni

fit. ,,,� ,...,.. ... t ""LC Vt ina Ncaai%nJ I V17177 I
6. Are there structures on -site which are n*perly addressed and/or managed through a * 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 ADD'licatlon
10. Are there any buffers that need maintenance/improvement?
❑ Yes
® No
11. Is there evidence of over application? ❑ Excessive Ponding ❑ PAN
❑ Yes
IN 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?
❑ Yes
® No
15. Does the receiving crop need improvement?
16. Is there a lack of adequate waste application equipment?
Reauired_Records_R 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 Reviewertinspector 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' N6 violati6ris:or deficienci6-Wr r'e:noted 4uring•this visit.• :You:Will •rece ve•n6•ftirther
correspondence. about this -visit ... ....... :: . :: :: . . :: :: . . . • . :: . :: . :: : :
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes ® No
[:]Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes ® No
® Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes ® No
[:]Yes ® No
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes ® No
7 Need to mow around WSP for easy visual inspection ( 18" or less).
19 No waste analysis or soil samples for `99. Need to have waste analysis within 60 days of application. Need to balance N for
r asked about applying waste on land in Virginia. I told him I needed to check, but I thought he needed to have the land and
included in his plan, if wanted to do that.
Reviewer/inspector Name iRocky Durham
Reviewer/Inspector Signature:
Date:
IV
Facility Number: 03-5 Date of Inspection 6/9/99

p Division of Soil and er Conservation - Operation Review
3 Division of Soil and er Conservation - Compliance ]inspection
F ■ Division of Water Quality - Compliance Inspection
p Other Agency —Operation Review
16 Routine p Complaint O i ow -up oi DWQ inspection p �o ow -tip of I)SNNIC review O Other
Facility Ntintltcr Dale of Inspection
F•irne ol'tuspection 24 hr. (hh:mm)
p Registered 0 Certified p Applied for Permit p Permitted in Nol 0 perationa Dale Last ()lhcrated:
Farm Name: Billy.Smith.Forms.uir............................................................................... County: Alleghany "TCall WSRO
OwnerNamc: Billy.&.5ihir.Ley ................... S.ttxiLh.............................. ............................ . Phone No: ..GS.7.-852.1...........................................................
Facility Contact: .....................................
iMailinc Address: 2152-13axrelt.Rd..
Onsiw Representalive :.........................
Cerlifrcd Operator: ..Carl .................
Location of Form:
Title: ............................................................... I'lioue No:.............. ......................................
................................... Enjuice..NC ............................................................. 2862a ..............
....................................................................... Integralor:..................
....... Smith ................................................. Operator Cerlificotion Number:2.1.44a.............................
:arm. oratlnn:.. .ml easl.a . arla.ant. ................................................................................................................................................................. A
Latiuidc ®�© ® Longitude ®�®
Swine Capacity Population Poultry Capacity Population Cattle Capacity Population
❑ Wean to Feeder
❑ Feeder to mis
[3 Farrow to Wean
❑ Farrow to Feeder
❑ Farrow to Finish
❑ Gilts
❑ Boars
❑ Layer koDairy ❑ on- ayer on -Dairy
p Other
Total Design Capacity 200
Total SSLW 280,0=
Number of Lagoons / Holding Ponds 1
JE3
Subsurrace
Drains
Present
p
agoon Area
❑ Spray re rea
❑
No
Liquid Waste
Management
System
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
Discharge originated at: p Lagoon ❑ Spray Field ❑ Other
a. li'discharge is observed, was the conveyance man-made? ❑ Yes ❑ No
b. [I'dischargc is observed, did it rcacb Stn-tace 1Vaier? (Yves, ilolilw D4WQ) ❑ Yes ❑ No
c. Ifdischarge is observed. what is the estimated flog in gal/min?
d. Dues dischar�-,c bypass a la�,00n sy' tem? (ll-ves. notif%, DW(1) Yes p No
3. Is there evidence of past discharge from any part of the operation? p Yes ® No
4. Were there any adverse impacts to the waters of the State other than from a discharge? p Yes ® No
5. Does any part of the waste management system (other than lagoons/holding ponds) require p Yes ® No
maintenance/improvement?
6. Is facility not in compliance with any applicable setback criteria in effect at the time of design? p Yes ® No
7. Did the facility fail to have a certified operator in responsible charge? ❑ Yes ® No
7/25/97

Facility Number: 03_5 I1I,ttt1 yltrctitrn ® .
;.• 8.�Ai'e there lagoons or storage ponds on site which need to be properly closed?
Structures (Lmmons.l-lolding Ponds, blush fits, etc.)
9. Is storage capacity (freeboard plus storm storage) less than adequate?
StRICU11-C I Structure 2 Structure 3 Sn-ucture 4
Identifier: I
Freeboard (11): ..............Aft.............. .....
10. Is seepage observed from any of the structures?
11. Is erosion, or any other threats to the integrity of any of the structures observed?
12. Do any of the structures need maintenance/improvement?
(If any of questions 9-12 was answered yes, and the situation poses an
immediate public health or environmental threat, notify DWQ)
13. Do any of the structures lack adequate minimum or maximum liquid level markers?
Waste Application
14. Is there physical evidence of over application?
(If in excess of WMP, or runoff entering waters of the State, notify DWQ)
Structure 5
15. Crop type.......C.cim..(Sitage.&.Gxain.).................................................................................................................... .....
16. Do the receiving crops differ with those designated in the Animal Waste Management Plan (AWMP)?
17. Does the facility have a lack of adequate acreage for land application?
18. Does the receiving crop need improvement?
19. Is there a lack of available waste application equipment?
20. Does facility require a follow-up visit by same agency?
21. Did Reviewer/Inspector fail to discuss review/inspection with on -site representative?
22. Does record keeping need improvement?
For Certified Or Permitted Facilities Only
23. Does the facility fail to have a copy of the Animal Waste Management Plan readily available?
24. Were any additional problems noted which cause noncompliance of the Certified AWMP?
25. Were any additional problems noted which cause noncompliance of the Permit?
t ..:o.vio tions. or icreneies-were.note uring t rs visit:. on. wi.receive no further .: .
orr606.n0i*e a4aut tills visa::::::-.: :::::::::::::::: ::::::: :
p Yes ® No
p Yes ® No
Strnctur-e 6
[]Yes M No
p Yes N No
p Yes ® No
p Yes M No
p Yes ® No
[]Yes ® No
p Yes ® No
El Yes M No
p Yes ®No
Yes ® No
p Yes ® No
p Yes ®No
p Yes ® No
p Yes ® No
p 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 -situations. (use additionalpages as necessary):
J
7
Reviewer/Inspector Name Jenny Rankin
Reviewer/Inspector Signature: Date: qIctlC��

19 tcoutme p C;omplaint p ronow-up of uwy inspection p rc
Facilitv Number
p Registered ® Certified p Applied for Permit p Permitted
Farm Name: Billy.,Smith.F2:rms.1nr.................................................................
Owner Name: B.illy..&.Shirley................... Smith...................................
up of t»wL review p vtner
Date of Inspection
Time of inspection 24 hr. (hh:mm)
In Not 0perationa Date Last Operated:
........ County: Alleghany WSRO
Phone No: 91R-65.7.n852J...........................................................
Facility Contact: CarLSatith.......................................................Title:............................................................... Phone No: 91d:bS7.:8�21.......................
Mailing Address: 21n.RarretUW................................................................................... F-mice-NC ............................................................. 2862a ..............
Onsite Representative: Claytnm.Smilh........................................................................... Integrator:.......................................................................................
Certified Operator.B.-Carr.5mith ................................................................................... Operator Certification Number:2.1.4.41.............................
Location of Farm:
Latitude ®• © Longitude ®• ®° ®i
Swine Capacity Population
p Wean to Feeder
p Feeder to Finish
p Farrow to Wean
Farrow to Feeder
p Farrow to Finis
❑ Gilts
p Boars
Poultry Capacity Population Cattle Capacity Population
p Layer
p Non -Layer
p Other
Total Design Capacity 200
Total SSLW280,0=
Number of Lagoons /Holding Ponds ❑ u sur ace rams resent p agoon rea p pray ie rea
[3 No Liquid Waste Mmiagement System
General
I. Are there any buffers that need maintenance/improvement? © Yes ® No
2. Is any discharge observed from any part of the operation? p Yes ®No
Discharge originated at: p Lagoon ❑ Spray Field p Other
a. If'discharge is observed, was the conveyance man-made? []Yes p No
b. li'discharge is observed, did it reach Surface Water? (If yes. notify DWQ) []Yes []No
c. II'd ischarge is observed. what is the estimated flotiv in gal/min?
d. Does discharge bypass a lagoon system'? (il'yes. notify DWQ) 0 Yes p No
3. Is there evidence of past discharge from any part of the operation? p Yes ® No
4. Were there any adverse impacts to the waters of the State other than from a discharge? p Yes ® No
5. Does any part of the waste management system (other than lagoons/holding ponds) require []Yes ® No
maintenance/improvement?
G. Is facility not in compliance with any applicable setback criteria in effect at the time of design? p Yes ® No
7. Did the facility fail to have a certified operator in responsible charge? p Yes ® No
7/25/97

'IFac:►iry Number: 03_5 � •
8. Are there lagoons or storage ponds on site which need to be properly closed?
Structures (LaEoons,14olding Ponds Flush Pits etc.
9. Is storage capacity (freeboard plus storm storage) less than adequate?
Structure I Structure 2 Structure 3 Structure 4
Identifier:
Freeboard(ft):.............. 5..£t.............. ................................................... ....................
10. Is seepage observed from any of the structures?
11. Is erosion, or any other threats to the integrity of any of the structures observed?
12. Do any of the structures need maintenance/improvement?
(if any of questions 9-12 was answered yes, and the situation poses an
immediate public health or environmental threat, notify DWQ)
13. Do any of the structures lack adequate minimum or maximum liquid level markers?
Waste Application
14. Is there physical evidence of over application?
(If in excess of WMP, or runoff entering waters of the State, notify DWQ)
Structure 5
15. Crop type .......Carn.kSilage..&.C.rain.).............................Fescue.............................................................................................
16. Do the receiving crops differ with those designated in the Animal Waste Management Plan (AWMP)?
17. Does the facility have a lack of adequate acreage for land application?
18. Does the receiving crop need improvement?
19. Is there a lack of available waste application equipment?
20. Does facility require a follow-up visit by same agency?
21. Did Reviewer/Inspector fail to discuss review/inspection with on -site representative?
22. Does record keeping need improvement?
For Certified or Permitted Facilities Only
23. Does the facility fail to have a copy of the Animal Waste Management Plan readily available?
24. Were any additional problems noted which cause noncompliance of the Certified AWMP?
25. Were any additional problems noted which cause noncompliance of the Permit?
Q .oicrttos. or�rencses-were.noted
unng this visit:. nn. i" .rer.eive nofurther .: .
. :: .:.,QorKe0ndi!O4N10 .:- • -: -. •.• - -
p Yes ® No
p Yes Cl No
Structure 6
El Yes ® No
p Yes N No
p Yes ® No
® Yes p No
p Yes ® No
p Yes ® No
El Yes ® No
0 Yes ® No
p Yes ® No
p Yes ® No
p Yes ® No
p Yes ® No
p Yes ® No
p Yes ® No
p Yes ® No
Comments (refer to question #): Explain.any,Y.ES:answers and/or any, recommendations,or any other conin ents. _
Eire drawings of facility to better.explain situations. (use additi6iiaUpages as necessary):w
B) Mr. Smith plans to -install a pump out marker.
7/25/97 I _I
Reviewer/inspector Name tJenny Rankin
ReviewerAnspector Signature: Date:

9-16-1997 10:O5AM FRCPj6ARTA FIELD OFFICE 1 910 372 d5
P. 4
&
DSWC Animal Feedlot Operation Review . . ....
DWQ Animal Feedlot Operation Site Inspection
10 Routine 0 Complaint 0 FoLlow-up of DWQ inspection 0 Follow-up of DS%VC review 0 Other I
Facility Number
Farm Status-. Registered [j Applied for Permit
Certified 13 Permitted
Mite of inspection 14- W-1z]
Time of blspcTtion I 11'00ekev, 124 hr. (hh:mm)
Total Time (in fraction of boors
(ex;1.25 for:1 hr 15 min)) Spent on Revicnv
or lnspiDction (includes travel inn proressiltgi
1[3 Not Operational 1 Date Lost Operated: ............................................................................................................................... ................
Farin Name: ............ County: ..... .........
jaa-ily ................. . ......
Owner Name: .... F6. i ... ........ ------- .......................... Phone ... 5-7.Z..5.5."A
Fatili!)' Contacta. Title. A sK Phone No:-
....................cr...
Mailing ..... .. ............... a 5.(� -0-A-a .................... ........ I .
Address ..............
Onsite-------------------------------------- .......... . .............. . ........ Integrator ........ ............. -1- ...........
Certified Optratorp CL r- 5. Kn . " 4.- k
....... — . ...................... ............ — ............................................ Operator Certification Nurnber......4 ... i ... 4.q-.L ..........
Location of Farm:
------------ ....... I ......................................... I .............. ............ ................ �: ...... ...... —.... ...... I ....... - ....................................................
I--, Li . ; .. , ­t
. ......................
Latitude Longitude
Type of Operation. Design Current
Swine Capacity`Population.
0 We -an to Feeder
El Feeder to Finish
0 Farrow to Wean
0 Farrow to Feed,,-r
0 Farrow to Finish
0 Other
Design Current
Poultry: Capacity Population
❑ Laver
Q.N.on-Laycr
:-Total ,Design Capacity
Total SSLW
Design .- 'Cuften;`, >"
Cattle Caoacity, Npulatioo
Dairy 7�4,4-) 1
10 Nori-Dairyl
lie
L
-1
­
" ; Number of Lagoons 7 Holding Subs�urface Drains Present CI La�onn Area jriSpray k�LieldAr�ea
Generat
1. Are there any buffers that need maintenance/improvement?
2. L, any discharge observed fromany part of the operation?
Dkchareeoriginated at: ElLagoon CjSpray' Field E10thcr
is ubs4:vvcd,was the cusivcvalic=,
b. If dkchar.oc is ob-erved, did it cca,:h Surface NN"Lacr? (Ifye.�, notify DAVQ)
d. Doe:: discharge by ass a laszoon;yszeni'? (If yes. notify DNVQ)
i. IS there ttvidcnuc VI past discharge frorn any part of the op=tiori?
4. 'Were Client arty adverse ill1pilCts to the waters of the Srate other than from a dischargu?
5. DQcs any part of the waste mtna.gctnent syswrn (other than Iagcons/boldi n- ponds) require
[J Yes
Ef No
El Yca
NNO
)'es;
❑ No
0 'Ve.,-
El No
El Yes
F1 No
D Yes
ig No

+' 9-16-1997 10:06AM FRO*4RT4 FIELD OFFICE 1 910 3724E
P- 5
Faeslity Number: 63 — S
G. is facility not in conipliattce with anv applicable setback criteria in effect at the time of design'?
7. Did the facility fail to have a certified operator in responsible. charge?
S. Are there lagoons or storage ponds on site which need to be properly closed?
Structures (LalLoons and/or_I.-Jo!.dinv Ponds)
9. is storage capacity (freeboard plus storm storage) less than adequate?
Frcc:hoard (ft): Structure I Structure 2 stnicturc 3 Structure 4
.��._.......................................................................................................
.❑ Yes a No
❑ Yes No
0 Yes jB( No
❑ Yes D4 No
Structure j Structure G
IQ- Is seepage observed from any of the structures? ❑ Yes No
1 I- 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 or maximum liquid level markers? Yes 0 No
%V.1ste M licatioix
.14. Is there physical evidence of over application? 0 Yes 0 No
(If in excess of W.W, , or runoff entering waters of the State, notify DWQ)
17 Crop Cope
16. Do the receiving crops differ with those designated in the Anima Waste Management Plan (AW`MP)? ❑ Yes M \'o
17,
Does the facility have a lack of adequate acreage fur land application?
❑ Yes
CQ N'0
18.
Does the receiving crop need improvement"
Cl Yes
IS No
19.
Is there a lack of available waste application equipment?
0 Yes
No
20.
Does facility require a follow-up visit by same agency?
❑ Yes
No
21,
Did Reviewer/Inspector fail to discuss revi6w/inspection with bn-`itc representative?
❑ Yes
No
FPC-Cr.rtLAdd F'zAk i 5_gnly
22.
Does the facility fail to have a copy of the Animal Waste Management. Plata readily available?
© Yes
IS No
23,
Were any additional problems noted which cause; noncompliance of the Certified AWMP?
❑ Yes
0 No
24.
Does record keeping need improvement?
❑ Yes
Z No
:br. .. �4is&RaN,shgL:.�N: n&��bX. �. 91ec+]45.'i:+a w•gro+ Pfi:pyy..0000-y,..,,....�..,..eN•::^'^'•'�k-'....:-.+...:..-^.-.-�;M.+�x�wmMi.,ti6R'Pk<:�:Yb.<vi.a,pA,P.',�N.,•.Y':.":�:I Y�e»wi.•�..xa••/°"'"wvv.-- --.:- �r: .. ..^.-..:..a
ReviewtOnspeetor Name « ,:•:. °,
..
+y
...• ,. yR m.a;<
ins.
Reviewer/Jnspector Signature
Date:
-