030008_INSPECTIONS_20171231

A c �-
Division of Water Resource,
SI.V� I ro
Facility Number - Q Division of Soil and Watery�I servation s� D� Z
Q Other Agency
Type of Visit: Compliance Inspection 0 Operation Review Q Structure Evaluation Q Technical Assistance
Reason for Visit: Routine Q Complaint Q Follow-up Q Referral Q Emergency Q Other Q Denied Access
Z.o
Date of Visit: Arrival Time: Departure Time:[ VA,4-ro County: AIIWVxn Region: W5 I-C
Farm Name: ! OI C�P<S Bi D5, bat V Owner Email:
Owner Name: t A \;j i Vl q-11.T1 CVO rN y -TOl yle5- Phone:
Mailing Address: 059 Hwy 2-2-1 So of� C.,$ 754
Physical Address: 1 7-2-1�S, O't�_ C o7 �� 7J��
Facility Contact: W iV1 _T6 ft1P S Title: Phone 33 �)36 3 — I qq !
Onsite Representative:-lntegraate� _ pl7�r��j r j tl
Certified Operator: Certification Numbl' : I ` Z p f
Back-up Operator: Certification Number:
Location of Farm: Latitude: 3(v 0 3U f 31 r Longitude: q ` f 31. 3 3$ +
U s Y -7 t1: --17 j N C, 19 7VII N 6 1'f S, N 0, ZI Nj l._ j� v.; j Lz 1s
Farm or\ 6 ht J
Design Current
Swine Capacity Pop.
Wean to Finish
Wean to Feeder
Feeder to Finish
Farrow to Wean
Farrow to Feeder
Farrow to Finish
Gifts
Boars
Other
Other
Design Current
Wet Poultry Capacity Pop.
Layer
Non -La er
Dry You
Layers
Non -Lay
Pullets
Puults
Design Current
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 past discharge from any part of the operation?
3. Were there any observable adverse impacts or potential adverse impacts to the waters
th ate other than from a discharge? e2p r ` n
I { �j 1
of 3 F0,- l l c� b Ito LS rV� Ou G r 0_1
Design Current
Cattle Capacity Pop.
Dairy Cow
Dairy Calf
Dairy Heifer
Dry Cow
Non -Dairy
Beef Stocker
Beef Feeder
Beef Brood Cow
go
[:]Yes [�No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes ❑ No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑Yes ❑No ❑NA ❑NE
❑ Yes ❑ No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes] No ❑ NA ❑ NE
21412015 Continued
JJ 1une t7-,

Facilit Number: - Date of Inspection. *� 1
Waste Collection & Treatment
4. Is storage capacity (structural plus storm storage plus heavy rainfall) less than adequate? ❑ Yes [I 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
�2 `J Identifier:];
` Spillway?:
Designed Freeboard (in):
Observed Freeboard (in): 3162
5. Are there any immediate threats to the integrity of any of the structures observed?
❑ Yes
M 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
[)KNo
❑ NA
❑ NE
waste management or closure plan?
If any of questions 4-6 were answered yes, and the situation poses an immediate public health or environmental
threat,
notify DWR
7. Do any of the structures need maintenance or improvement?
Yes
[—]No
❑ NA
❑ NE
8. Do any of the structures lack adequate markers as required by the permit?
❑ Yes
� No
❑ NA
❑ NE
(not applicable to roofed pits.. dry stacks, and/or wet stacks)
9. Does any part of the waste management system other than the waste structures require
❑ Yes
MNo
❑ NA
❑ NE
maintenance or improvement?
Waste Application
10. Are there any required buffers, setbacks, or compliance alternatives that need
❑ Yes
P No
❑ NA
❑ NE
maintenance or improvement?
11. Is there evidence of incorrect land application? If yes, check the appropriate box below.
❑ Yes
❑ No
❑ NA
IR 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): I A_Dke t--k 1' , 0� Y-\ , Ji !_'5r,I )eO(k QL 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 P<NA ❑ NE
acres determination?
17. Does the facility lack adequate acreage for land application?
❑ Yes ,E�'No
❑ NA
❑ NE
18. Is there a lack of properly operating waste application equipment'?
❑ Yes
9fNo
❑ 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
D�No
❑ NA
❑ NE
the appropriate box.
❑WUP ❑Checklists ❑Design ❑ Maps ❑ Lease Agreements
❑Other:
21. Does record keeping need i 1provement? If yes, check the a box below.
❑
Yes
❑ No
❑
°Weather
❑ Nil
Waste Application Weekly Freeboard ❑Waste!ropriaie
nalysi oil Analysis
Code
Rainfall [ Stocking ❑ Crop Yield ❑ 120 Minute Inspections [Monthly and I" Rainfall Inspections
IBI
ss
6drt�T-
22. Did the facility fail to install and maintain a rain gauge?
❑ Yes
CZ`No
❑ NA
❑ NE
23. If selected, did the facility fail to install and maintain rainbreakers on irrigation equipment?
❑ Yes
❑ No
ES�IVA
❑ NE
Page 2 of 3
21412015 Continued

Facili Number: Q - Date of Inspection: _ 3
24, Did the facility fail to calibrate waste application equipment as required by the permit? Yes
25. Is the facility out of compliance with permit conditions related to sludge? If yes, check ❑ Yes
the appropriate box(es) below,
❑ Failure to complete annual sludge survey ❑ Failure to develop a POA for sludge levels
❑ Non -compliant sludge levels in any lagoon
List structure(s) and date of first survey indicating non-compliance:
26. Did the facility fail provide documentation of an actively certified operator in charge?
27, Did the facility fail to secure a phosphorus loss assessments (PLAT) certification?
Other Issues
28. Did the facility fail to properly dispose of dead animals with 24 hours and/or document
and report mortality rates that were higher than normal?
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)
❑No ❑NA ❑NE
❑ No [ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes No
❑ Yes No
❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes PNo ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes Zr No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes [P-No
31. Do subsurface tile drains exist at the facility? If yes, check the appropriate box below. N Yes [:]No
❑ Application Field ❑ Lagoon/Storage Pond Other. .<,A-Ute
32. Were any additional problems noted which cause non-compliance of the permit o CAWMP? Yes ❑ No
33. Did the Reviewer/Inspector fail to discuss review/inspection with an on -site representative'? ❑ Yes Qj l�o
34. Does the facility require a follow-up visit by the same agency? ❑ Yes �No
❑ 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 better explain situations (use additional pages as necessary).
i. DI55er 4-ef-5 ? aaC7i d ew -� o�a4
TroLiL spy -dear e_4t✓l'lbrAior\ due_ ye-5
;n S
y��LLgopre- bx,[,t oCCL+4 i n a8 C [ 3150 --� twa� ? c'_ 5 Cc1" one- 4,o� 41
0 PAP Pt i cc� on tin u rrk)S e.6 r�`.te�j i n �; P "? V� a.�1 ed
e, �) e CV— d_o C ! e<c cans C �s can . — r ; Rico rde.d b vk n b
coon � �9p
n
4el P O Lth'1 T-ezckti f-eE� ? N o lease, r� ° r �I�' 14041`� n c e ,
1 Q n e u Y ta55� 5 rMa1�
v �`���1C�O►� �-��d5 �D�� V��a-�� ylp� d.V�-I �d�-�') Ee 1 �� �wl nj
wsn
d tO a s+ e 5 0-w-0 le
O �,�i-� � � ��►;� o Ail :..�„� �GskL�,,_ ��r�� o rL .
r7�igjr6 � �.ei ir5+� �.�iS55�/S��lj7� LSD = 3,;2-1
Reviewer/Inspector Name:
Reviewer/Inspector
Page 3 of 3
Phone, aj
Date:
2/4/2015

oD_zo 6- PC- Qjf '
Division of Water Resource
Facility Number - ; u Division of Soil and �Vate�`servation9� ..(�
0 Other Agency
Type of Visit: Compliance Inspection 0 Operation Review 0 Structure Evaluation 0 Technical Assistance
Reason for Visit: Routine 0 Complaint 0 Follow-up 0 Referral 0 Emergency 0 Other 0 Denied Access
Date of Visit: I JZ
- Zb Arrival Time: Departure Time: County: URegion: WS i�Q
Farm Name: IJ0 Y1 -eS BC05. .U&i V`V Owner Email: J
Owner Name: 1��� .�- T j nus j nQ S Phone:
Mailing Address: _�(15-9�-t�uu zZr 50014NI Sam,
Physical Address: 14 T s� y Z Z� 5o 6,
Facility Contact: EAW lh 71)`, Title:
Onsite Representative:
Certified Operator:
Back-up Operator:
Location of Farm:
4 21 N'f
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
Phone: 6i(336)363 — qqq!
Integrator:
Certification Number:
Certification Number:
Latitude: 3�p �O! 3� t Longitude: $ 10 3 13 J 3 r r
Z S� Foy- o n
Design Current
Wet Poultry Capacity Pop.
Layer
Non -La er
Design Current
Dry Poultry CauaCity 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 DWR)
c. What is the estimated volume that reached waters of the State (gallons)?
Design Current
Cattle Capacity Pop.
Dairy Cow
Z
Dairy Calf
Dat
_iry Heifer
Dry Cow
Non -Dairy
Beef Stocker
Beef Feeder
Beef Brood Cow
❑ Yes gNo ❑ NA ❑ NE
[] Yes [] No
❑ Yes ❑ No
d. Does the discharge bypass the waste management system? (If yes, notify DWR) ❑ Yes ❑ No
2. Is there evidence of a past discharge from any part of the operation'? ❑ Yes �No
3. Were there any observable adverse impacts or potential adverse impacts to the waters ❑ Yes D, No
t oft e oth than from a disc rge?
p �
e D R _ i Jd�e.�
Page I of 3 n Tear-�sa pp, v i �e h ; /V C.
lv�D� a 7�1 q - I 6 i 7
❑NA ❑NE
❑NA ❑NE
❑NA ❑NE
❑NA ❑NE
❑NA ❑NE
Q
21412015 Coati e
a

[Facility Number: - • Date of Ins ection:`r
Waste Collection &Treatment
4. Is storage capacity (structural plus storm storage plus heavy rainfall) less than adequate?
a. If yes, is waste level into the structural freeboard?
�2 Structure 1 Structure 2 Structure 3 Structure 4
Identifier:
Spillway?:
Designed Freeboard (in):
Observed Freeboard (in):
5. Are there any immediate threats to the integrity of any of the structures observed?
(i.e., large trees, severe erosion, seepage, etc.)
6. Are there structures on -site which are not properly addressed and/or managed through a
waste management or closure plan'?
❑ Yes WNo ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes ❑ No ❑ NA ❑ NE
Structure 5 Structure 6
❑ Yes VNo
❑ Yes rN(No
❑NA ❑NE
❑ NA ❑ NE
If any of questions 4-6 were answered yes, and the situation poses an immediate public health or environmental threat, notify DWR
7. Do any of the structures need maintenance or improvement? 9Yes VNo ❑ NA ❑ NE
8. Do any of the structures lack adequate markers as required by the permit? ❑ Yes XNo ❑ 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
maintenance or improvement?
Waste App ication
10. Are there any required buffers, setbacks, or compliance alternatives that need
maintenance or improvement'?
❑ Yes KNNo
❑ Yes [X No
❑NA ❑NE
❑NA ❑NE
11. Is there evidence of incorrect land application? If yes, check the appropriate box below. Kyes ❑ No ❑ NA
❑ xcessive Ponding ❑ Hydraulic Overload ❑ Frozen Ground ❑ Heavy Metals (Cu, Zn, etc.)
AN ❑ PAN > 10% or 10 lbs. ❑ Total Phosphorus ❑ Failure to Incorporate Manure/Sludge into Bare Soil
Outside of Acceptable Crop Window ❑ Evidence of Wind Drift ❑ Application Outside of Approved Area
12. Crop Type(s):
13. Soil Type(s):
❑ NE
14. Do the receiving crops differ from those designated in the CAWMP? ❑ Yes ANo ❑ 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 ES?NA ❑ NE
acres determination?
17. Does the facility lack adequate acreage for land application? ❑ Yes *o ❑ NA ❑ NE
18. Is there a lack of properly operating waste application equipment? ❑ Yes XNo ❑ NA ❑ NE
Required Records & Documents
19. Did the facility fail to have the Certificate of Coverage & Permit readily available? ❑ Yes >rNo ❑ 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 ing need i provement? I ['Yes ❑ No ❑ NA ❑ NE
Waste AppIicad need
Freeboard Waste Analys sYM
Soil Anal si ra rs Weather Code
Rainfall Stocking Crop Yield �0 Minute Inspectionsonthly and 1" Rainfall Inspections
22. Did the facility fail to install and maintain a rain gauge? Xt A A ' (9►_ "� ❑ Yes 1 No ❑ NA ❑ NE
23. If selected, did the facility fail to install and maintain rainbreakers on irrigation equipment? [:]Yes ❑ No D; NA ❑ NE
Page 2 of 3 21412015 Continued

Facility Number: - Q Date of Inspection: —7
24. Did the facility fail to calibrate waste application equipment as required by the permit?
Yes
❑ No
❑ NA ❑ NE
25. Is the facility out of compliance with permit conditions related to sludge? if yes, check
❑ Yes
❑ No
�A ❑ 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
lWo
❑ NA ❑ NE
27. Did the facility fail to secure a phosphorus loss assessments (PLAT) certification?
❑ Yes
Flo
❑ NA ❑ NE
Other Issues
28. Did the facility fail to properly dispose of dead animals with 24 hours and/or document ❑ Yes No ❑ NA ❑ NE
and report mortality rates that were higher than normal?
29. At the time of the inspection did the facility pose an odor or air quality concern? ❑ Yes No ❑ 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
909
❑ Yes
X No
❑ NA
❑ NE
permit? (i.e., discharge, freeboard problems, over -application) 336 ,E-111 +
31. Do subsurface tile drains exist at the facility? If yes, check the appropriate box below.
19 Yes
❑ No
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Application Field ❑ Lagoon/Storage Pond [� Other:
32. Were any additional problems noted which cause non-compliance of the permit or CAWMP?
6dyes
❑ No
D NA
❑ NE
33. Did the Reviewer/Inspector fail to discuss review/inspection with an on -site representative?
❑ Yes
Nr5o
❑ NA
❑ NE
34. Does the facility require a follow-up visit by the same agency?
❑ Yes
%J No
❑ NA
❑ NE
omments (refer to question #): Explain any YES answers and/or any additional recommendations or any other comments. I
se
rawings of facility to better explain situations (use additional pages as necessary).
Z ab CS So sa�.w�-�1e.5 due, r z-13 i', s, -o toe, savu.&A by e r)GL o V Sew
z• 4rij Z ol.5- vj 0.5*e_ alp1 i e.oklor\ rr? e r-6_5 e ot,%le+,A ? Y 42S
True v-- s P re o-J i-r- a,0li bra. Wj d U-P- & 0-k. .7016
5 1r� Oil 5 P rP -P� C'Ct- t br-a4 o+r\ (� �i'�d ? �Isa C�,��.
Ca. te5 nbn 620 a o 6 IVo ✓ PCr no
P
Mow L) P. 1.p . �25eu� 3 1i - I ISM 5 ll' ��-e r, 311t / J
0.(brR 5 t�0.- �e ,3'1 t� �+ d CoU� Cme 40 '5
9 J�M-11 l%eA S.1Ince. PW
IL �!D w��- �o�rves�ed 1Qs� c.crr
o Loa:5 rn�r� `Nnc - �� (x-o ��f a-LIowej � 3 o t 1� s. P�}rN
! An h t;�oh5 mA-Ap 1 n
a n aA \1 S% S 470 VA To I
Q.t-Cu rate +� ') "P
(V A C-1 -1 (0 1Y V_ ad�'o yu
Reviewer/Inspector Name:
Reviewer/Inspector Signature:
Page 3 of 3
do 1 S mAjp l e f rob" 1 y
d.Q Y)D+ ho"Ve PA
Phone: (33t) -7 -76 - j 6R 9
Date: -7 � / 2 01 �0
R�+S A& P o-� z-- `
12.1'NeeJ iM refa1ro

0 Division of Water Resources
El Division of Soil and Water Conservation
11 Other Agency
Facility Number: 030008 Facility Status: Active permit. WC030008h� Denied Access
Inpsection Type: Structure Evaluation Inactive Or Closed Date:
Reason for Visit: Emergency County: Alleghany Region: Winston-Salem
Date of Visit: 10/05/2015 Entry Time: 10:25 am Exit Time: 10:35 am Incident #
Farm Name: Joines Brothers Dairy Owner Email:
Owner: 'O dwm J.pinesITr Phone: .336-372A579
Hailing Address: BsN_v�Y-221 Snpa�fG28675
Physical Address: 4088 Hwy 221 S Sparta NC 28675
Facility Status: ❑ Compliant Not Compliant Integrator:
Location of Farm:
Take Hwy 21 north from Sparta and make left onto Hwy 221 South.
Question Areas:
Waste Col, Stor, & Treat
Certified Operator: Clay E Joines
Secondary OIC(s):
On -Site Representative(s):
Name
24 hour contact name
Edwin Joines
On -site representative
Edwin Joines
Primary Inspector:
Inspector Signature:
Secondary Inspector(s):
Latitude: 36* 30' 31" Longitude: 81' 13' 33"
Operator Certification Number- 21445
Title Phone
Phone:
Phone
1 Phone:
f Date:
7wj
to15
Inspection Summary: ,
OIC has transferred at least 14 loads of waste to Greg Gambill's waste structure and was transferring when we arrived. Waste
level in Mr. Joines' structure is 14 inches above maximum liquid mark. Was 14 inches below mark before rain on October 1, 2015.
Some overtopping of fresh water is occurring from the top of the dam. Recent equipment traffic on top of the dam due to this storm
has caused channels and ruts to convey fresh water into waste pond. Operator to repair dam when weather conditions allow him
to work on the top of the dam.
page: 1

Permit: AWC030008 Owner - Facility : Edwin Joines Facility Number: 030008
Inspection Date: 10/05/15 1npsection Type: Structure Evaluation Reason for Visit: Emergency
Waste Structures
Disignated Observed
Type Identifier Closed Date Start Date Freeboard Freeboard
_T
Waste Pond WASTE POND 4M
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 (Le] large
❑
M ❑
❑
trees, severe erosion, seepage, etc.)?
B. 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?
❑ ❑
❑
B. Do any of the structures lack adequate markers as required by the permit? (Not applicable
❑
0 ❑
❑
to roofed pits, dry stacks and/or wet stacks)
9. Does any part of the waste management system other than the waste structures require
❑
0 ❑
❑
maintenance or improvement?
page: 2

Division of Water Quality
Facility Number 0 Division of Soil and Water Conservation
0 Other Agency
Type of Visit: C o pliance Inspection CJ 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: I
-7h1, I r�Arrival Time: : p Departure Time: County:
Farm Name:s Owner Email:
Owner Name:•, V" —S ?^"'� o . Phone:
Mailing Address: � f 4, , SPAr4, t V r_ 2W 6 7S
Physical Address:
Facility Contact: Title:
Onsite Representative:
Certified Operator:
Back-up Operator:
Location of Farm:
I"l
Region: Ws & o
Phone: tc J 36 3— 7yz/1
Integrator:^
Certification Number:
Certification Number: 4
Latitude: 3 L �3a I� Longitude:
21 !J, I L H"`7 '2, f S, , Fltm DA r)h-�
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 CanaeitV Pon.
La ers
Non -Layers
Pullets
Turkeys
Turkey Poults
Other
Dischar es and Stream Impacts
1. Is any discharge observed from any part of the operation?
Discharge originated at: ❑ Structure ❑ Application Field ❑ Other:
a. Was the conveyance man-made?
b. Did the discharge reach waters of the State? (If yes, notify DWQ)
c. What is the estimated volume that reached waters of the State (gallons)?
d. Does the discharge bypass the waste management system? (If yes, notify DWQ)
2. Is there evidence of a past discharge from any part of the operation?
3. Were there any observable adverse impacts or potential adverse impacts to the waters
of the State other than from a discharge?
Design Current
Cattle Capacity Pop.
Dairy Cow
-L7
190
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
❑ Yes No
❑ Yes No
❑ Yes No
❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ NA ❑ NE
Page I of 3 21412011 Continued

FacilityNumber: 0. - DP • Date of Inspection:
Waste Collection & Treatment
4. Is storage capacity (structural plus storm storage plus heavy rainfall) less than adequate? ❑ Yes No 0 NA ❑ NE
a. If yes, is waste level into the structural freeboard? ❑ Yes ❑ No ❑ NA 0 NE
Structure 1 Structure 2 Structure 3 Structure 4 Structure 5 Structure 6
Identifier:
Spillway?:
Designed Freeboard (in):
Observed Freeboard (in): 72
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
❑ Yes No
❑NA ❑NE
❑ NA ❑ NE
If any of questions 4-6 were answered yes, and the situation poses an immediate public health or environmental threat, notify DWQ
7. Do any of the structures need maintenance or improvement? ❑ Yes 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 [DNA ❑ 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 j No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Excessive Ponding ❑ Hydraulic Overload ❑ Frozen Ground ❑ Heavy Metals (Cu, Zn, etc.7)'�
❑ PAN ❑ PAN > 10% or 10 lbs. ❑ Total Phosphorus ❑ Failure to Incorporate Manure/Sludge into Bare Soil
❑ Outside of Acceptable Crop Window ❑ Evidence of Wind Drift ❑ Application Outside of Approved Area
12. Crop Type(s): C—OrFeSLAAe.
13. Soil Type(s):
14. Do the receiving crops differ from those designated in the CAWMP? ❑Yes fxo
o ❑ NA❑ NE
15. Does the receiving crop and/or land application site need improvement? ❑ Yes ❑ NA ❑ NE
16. Did the facility fail to secure and/or operate per the irrigation design or wettable ❑ Yes ❑ No �KNA
❑ 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
[l No
❑ NA
❑ NE
the appropriate box.
❑WUP ❑Checklists _]Design ❑ Maps ❑ Lease Agreements
Other:
2el oesrecord keeping need improvement? If yes, checck,/the appropriate box below.
aste Application ❑ Weekly Freeboard vQ Waste Analysis ❑Soil Analysis
Yes ❑ No
Waste Transfers
❑ NA
❑Weather
❑ NE
Code
❑ 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
❑ NA
❑ NE
23. If selected, did the facility fail to install and maintain rainbreakers on irrigation equipment?
❑ Yes
KNO
XNA
❑ NE
Page 2 of 3
21412011 Continued

j Facility Number: - D� • Date of inspection: rl j -.!r—
24. Did the facility fail to calibrate waste application equipment as required by the permit? ❑ Yes No ❑ NA ❑ NE
25. Is the facility out of compliance with permit conditions related to sludge? If yes, check ❑ Yes ✓✓✓���❑ No JIVNA ❑ 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
o ❑ NA ❑ NE
27. Did the facility fail to secure a phosphorus loss assessments (PLAT) certification? ❑ Yes ❑ NA ❑ NE
Other Issues
28. Did the facility fail to properly dispose of dead animals with 24 hours and/or document ❑ Yes 1 No ❑ NA ❑ NE
and report mortality rates that were higher than norrrtal? �[
29. At the time of the inspection did the facility pose an odor or air quality concern? ❑ Yes y� No ❑ NA ❑ NE
If yes, contact a regional Air Quality representative immediately. 7�
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 ❑ No
❑ NA
❑ NE
L
❑ Application Field ❑ Lagoon/Storage Pond Other: orb 6CVj
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 J No
❑ NA
❑ NE
Comments (refer to question #): Explain any YES answers and/or any additional recommendations or any dther comments.
Use drawings of facility to better explain situations (use additional pages as necessary).
��.�Zhq CL�1a n�k� 1JL ►�^� �urr -�r Lf�G.
W'4 Mtl Spfr_-C6 % OJv zdt
ctre 4ckt �� ept j a # em G�4¢it 1U�Xr
lei
cisl-_ a (e-cordf 4 F � rtl �� A r c-0
IT
2 : s�,.r e- -Ft c,f1t.� KKJt-e s°�^'r'lpL.�-' i �604
rq .
z - FAA 4 � w u P �,l�ae I�� C tti sr� >4 -�, /�
3, �, �•�
F,Qcolds IA" �► O��ri"�G,
PtA
Reviewer/Inspector Name
Reviewer/Inspector Signature
Page 3 of 3
Phone: C�
Date: 7Z/4 ZO/3'
21412011

Division of Water Quality
Facility Number - 0 Division of Soil and Wateta nervation f
x#
0 Other Agency.
Type of Visit: ompliance 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: 2,; ZQ County:
Farm Name: a; gte f#-{1 pt Ar Owner Email:
Owner Name: ����►� 4- .!i5M/41 Phone:
Mailing Address: j S��h 'L� J 5vw�[� _ S r,�g G
Region:
Physical Address:
Facility Contact: E-d VJ."% ,1nGf Title: Phone: C1 J 36 3 - `-7l
Onsite Representative: Integrator:
Certified Operator: Certification Number:
Back-up Operator:
Location of Farm:
Certification Number:
Latitude: 30 31 It Longitude: F 3
,4-wy 21 0,/ t_ 01 22.I -5, /-FLr,t,, o-A +2y1V_1__
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
Discharges and Stream Impacts
Design Current
Wet Poultry Capacity Pop.
Layer
Non -La er
Design Current
Dry Poultry CaDaCity PAD.
Layers
Non -Layers
Pullets
Turkeys
Turkey Poults
Other
Design Current
Cattle Capacity Pop,12�
Dairy Cow
-ZZL
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
No
x
❑ NA
❑ NE
Discharge originated at: ❑ Structure ❑ Application Field ❑ Other:
a. Was the conveyance man-made?
❑ Yes
❑ No
❑ NA
❑ NE
b. Did the discharge reach waters of the State? (If yes, notify DWQ)
❑ Yes
[] No
❑ NA
❑ NE
c. What is the estimated volume that reached waters of the State (gallons)?
d. Does the discharge bypass the waste management system? (If yes, notify DWQ)
❑ Yes
[:]No
❑ NA
❑ NE
2. Is there evidence of a past discharge from any part of the operation?
❑ Yes
No
��`ANo
❑ NA
❑ NE
3. Were there any observable adverse impacts or potential adverse impacts to the waters
❑ Yes
❑ NA
❑ NE
of the State other than from a discharge?
,,aj
Page I of 3 21412011 Continued

Facili Number: Q 3 - • Date of inspection:
Waste Collection & Treatment
4. Is -storage capacity (structural plus storm storage plus heavy rainfall) less than adequate? ❑ Yes 19No ❑ NA ❑ NE
a. If yes, is waste level into the structural freeboard? ❑ Yes iiii`❑�No ❑ NA ❑ NE
Structure 1 Structure 2 Structure 3 Structure 4 Structure 5 Structure 6
Identifier: ljou'�' POh d Dr y S k
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.) 7�,_�,,(
6. Are there structures on -site which are not properly addressed and/or managed through a ❑Yes IXI No ❑ NA ❑ NE
waste management or closure plan? ;�"C
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? 7❑� 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
XNo
❑ NA
❑ NE
maintenance or improvement?
11. is there evidence of incorrect land application? If yes, check the appropriate box below.
❑ Yes
No
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Excessive Ponding ❑ Hydraulic Overload ❑ Frozen Ground ❑ Heavy Metals (Cu, Zn, e
.}
❑ 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):/O/'I1
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
NA
❑ NE
acres determination?
17. Does the facility lack adequate acreage for land application?
❑ Yes
0 No
❑ NA
❑ NE
18. Is there a lack of properly operating waste application equipment?
❑ Yes
A 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. Yes [:]No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Waste Application ❑ Weekly Freeboard Waste Analysis ❑ Soil Analysis ❑ Weather Code
❑ 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 k No ❑ NA ❑ NE
23, if selected, did the facility fail to install and maintain rainbreakers on irrigation equipment? [:]Yes [:]No X NA ❑ NE
Page 2 of 3 21412011 Continued

Facili Number: 3 - Q0
Date of Inspection: '7
24. Did the facility fail to calibrate waste application equipment as required by the permit? ❑ Yes X
No ❑ NA ❑ NE
25. Is the facility out of compliance with permit conditions related to sludge? If yes, check ❑ Yes 0No [ NA ❑ NE
the appropriate box(es) below. 7�
❑ 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? T[
29. At the time of the inspection did the facility pose an odor or air quality concern? ❑ Yes XNo ❑ 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) Ik
31. Do subsurface tile drains exist at the facility? If yes, check the appropriate box below. [Yes ❑ No ❑ NA ❑ NE
1i N TT
❑ D Application Field ❑ Lagoon/Storage Pond Other: Golf JV4-
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 facility to better explain situations (use additional pages as necessary).
2�. 7rrf�r� Ian� 1��� 'n �s D�T�� �41—
'`' (10 Eel p�.1 `� t• <Jk 4,Aat. ilJ, A.Me
-� G � k c WIR.",
ai j�z war ,na[�tr3
2,011/
IJa ��
vim►,2�1 —S, t�
IYJ" I +�G1�� ✓ b� IJ�TxI+XJ
P
j �ar1k�'1 �d. �'r-�+�l�s� �rass
IiJ� e��w����- leas ,�,� wMP
3 1
rr-4c-
rlW1 lc vel'+ c1� Ezk N r
1f1� 13 3.98'lAP+J/7,73iUA4
/z�, 3 = S3 G 14 PA'q
Reviewer/Inspector Name: 74 4 Phone: r 334)
Reviewer/Inspector Signature: ��� Date: Zj.% L2.D I +
Page 3 of 3 21412011

h
1
Facility Number
.Division of Water Quality
- n 0 Division of Soil and'Water
O'Other Agency'"
of Visit: A Vmpliance Inspection 0 Operation Review Q Structure fEval
in for Visit:Routine 0 Complaint 0 Follow-up 0 Referral 0 Emei
- r.r� „KEY .•.
o rvation
in Q Technical Assistance
ry 0 Other 0 Denied Access
Date of Visit: Arrival Time: Departure Time: Q; SD County: eqt,
Farm Name: Lor j�lb ��IY Owner Email:
Owner Name: w r1 -'fr"VA Jo"d&j Phone:
Mailing Address:
Physical Address: S7 - t t I t t r I
Facility Contact: !:i dW l� �,y��A&3 Title: Phone: Le) '�f 3 �7 �
Onsite Representative: Integrator: -'
Certified 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
Region: WSR 0
Certification Number:
o ii n I 1/
Latitude: 30 3 1 _ Longitude: g ! Lj
Design Current Design Current
Capacity Pop. Wet Poultry Capacity Pop.
Layer
Non -La er
Non-L
Pullets
Turku
Poults
Design Current
Design Current
Cattle Capacity Pop.
Dairy Cow
Z75
Dairy Calf
Dairy Heifer
DryCow
3to
Non -Dairy
Beef Stocker
Beef Feeder
Beef Brood Cow
Dischar es and Stream Impacts
1. Is any discharge observed from any part of the operation? ❑ Yes No ❑ NA ❑ NE
Discharge originated at: ❑ Structure ❑ Application Field ❑ Other:
a. Was the conveyance man-made? ❑ Yes ❑ No ❑ NA ❑ NE
b. Did the discharge reach waters of the State? (If yes, notify DWQ)
❑ Yes
❑ No
❑ NA
❑ NE
c. What is the estimated volume that reached waters of the State (gallons)?
d. Does the discharge bypass the waste management system? (If yes, notify DWQ)
❑ 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 1 of 3 21412011 Continued

Facility Number: 3- pg lie
Date of Inspection: I
Waste Collection & Treatment
4. Is storage capacity (structural plus storm storage plus heavy rainfall) less than adequate? ❑ Yes No ❑ NA ❑ NE
a. If yes, is waste level into the structural freeboard? ❑ Yes ❑ No ❑ NA ❑ NE
Structure 1 Structure 2 Structure 3 Structure 4 Structure 5 Structure 6
Identifier:
Spillway?:
Designed Freeboard (in):
Observed Freeboard (in): 7
5. Are there any immediate threats to the integrity of any of the structures observed? ❑ Yes PNo ❑ 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 j No ❑ NA ❑ NE
maintenance or improvement? A
11. Is there evidence of incorrect land application? If yes, check the appropriate box below. [] Yes V 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. Soil Type(s):
74
14. Do the receiving crops differ from those designated in the CAWMP?
15. Does the receiving crop and/or land application site need improvement?
16. Did the facility fail to secure and/or operate per the irrigation design or wettable
acres determination?
17. Does the facility lack adequate acreage for land application'?
18. Is there a lack of properly operating waste application equipment?
Required Records & Documents
19. Did the facility fail to have the Certificate of Coverage & Permit readily available?
20. Does the facility fail to have all components of the CAWMP readily available? If yes, check
the appropriate box.
El Yes No
❑ Yes j No
❑ Yes j❑T No
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ NA
❑ NE
XNA❑
NE
❑ Yes
j No
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Yes
No
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Yes No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ WUP ❑Checklists ❑ Design ❑ Maps ❑ Lease Agreements ❑Other:
21. Does record keeping need improvement? If yes, check the appropriate box below. Yes [] No ❑ NA ❑ NE
XWaste Application ❑ Weekly Freeboard ❑ Waste Analysis ❑ Soil Analysis �T ram- ❑ Weather Code
❑ Rainfall ❑ Stocking � Crop Yield ❑ 120 Minute Inspections ❑ Monthly and I " Rainfall Inspections
22. Did the facility fail to install and maintain a rain gauge? ❑ Yes No ❑ NA ❑ NE
23. If selected, did the facility fail to install and maintain rainbreakers on irrigation equipment? ❑ Yes ❑ No _T�,NA ❑ NE
Page 2 of 3 21412011 Continued

Facili Number: - . Date of Inspection:Age I
24. Did the facility fail to calibrate waste application equipment as required by the permit? ❑Yes Xf 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. JJ��
❑ 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 J�
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? TTTCCC"'
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)
3 I. Do subsurface tile drains exist at the facility? If yes, check the appropriate box below.
Yes ❑ No
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Application Field ❑ Lagoon/Storage Pond Other: CDW
1
32. Were any additional problems noted which cause non-compliance of the p rmit 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. I
Use drawings of facility to better explain situations (use additional pages as necessary).
Z duA&I,2-0
� 1�.�� S�Or�dr-.- G���sra•r�d ��" ?��"Z s
�r, lG;l R[ jrJ �c�h led�C I rJt^^•',e
'_ SG.'vl�.--�r��dJ f�.�i ";'ot 1 •�`yw.� ��n.g,�„�G,n,'�'� �CLGMML..�lO �a � � ! �.'�L '�1 ,p'1°fc:-.�c� k7y >�S�a•'1�'"� r/'1p
� d Ca�r+�:z�-�� �•�I-t�z.-r 0�. ��� �r'^'.�.cl �"�^'� /if �lc%..� N�1 ��
!l z6l2= %7�15 PAJ
(3=,�'-a1'1.4
Reviewer/Inspector Name: PA k M) d WIG( Phone: (336) /
Reviewer/Inspector Signature: Date: �/ 261,3
Page 3 of 3 2/4/2011

� C
Facility Number
Type of Visit:
Reason for Visit:
114 Division of Water Quality
A 0 p� - Q Division of Soil and Water Co► rvation
0 Other Agency
mpliance Inspection V Operation Review U Structure Evaluation O Technical Assistance
Routine 0 Complaint 0 Follow-up 0 Referral 0 Emergency 0 Other 0 Denied Access
Date of Visit: 7 j y Arrival Time: ! 2 : O Departure Time: s- County:A1
Farm Name:; e.f r 04%.L`rf-4
-0irk Owner Email:
Owner Name: Phone:
Mailing Address:
Physical Address:
5-9 N"4 22-1 SoK
--�� i
Facility Contact: Min �JiPn 5 Title:
Onsite Representative:
Certified Operator:
Back-up Operator:
l' r1 r.
Region: WSP-a
Phone: ��� 3e;_5— JY4/1
Integrator: —
'e& 1"
Certification Number: /2-/31/L of 2—
Certification Number:
Location of Farm: Latitude: 3L 3�� 3 i Longitude:
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 Pnnitry canacity Pon.
Layers
Non -Layers
Pullets
Turkeys
Turkey Poults
Other
Design Current
Cattle Capacity Pop.
Dairy Cow
-,27-5—
Dairy Calf
Daig Heifer
Dry Cow
Non -Dairy
Beef Stocker
Beef Feeder
Beef Brood Cow
Discharges and Stream Impacts
1. is any discharge observed from any part of the operation?
❑ Yes
XNo
❑ NA
❑ NE
Discharge originated at: ❑ Structure ❑ Application Field ❑ Other:
a. Was the conveyance man-made?
❑ Yes
❑ No
❑ NA
❑ NE
b. Did the discharge reach waters of the State? (If yes, notify DWQ)
❑ Yes
❑ No
❑ NA
❑ NE
c. What is the estimated volume that reached waters of the State (gallons)?
d. Does the discharge bypass the waste management system? (If yes, notify DWQ)
❑ Yes
❑ No
❑ NA
❑ NE
2. Is there evidence of a past discharge from any part of the operation?
❑ YeszNo
[:3 NA
❑ NE
3. Were there any observable adverse impacts or potential adverse impacts to the waters
❑ Yes r� No
❑ NA
❑ NE
of the State other than from a discharge?
�\
Page I of 3 21412011 Continued

s
Facili Number: 03 - Q,3 . Date of Inspection:_ 1 `
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 1 }
Identifier:
Spillway?:
Designed Freeboard (in):
Observed Freeboard (in):
❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ NA ❑ NE
Structure 2 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?
❑ YesXNo ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes �o ❑ 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 XNo ❑ NA ❑ NE
8. Do any of the structures lack adequate markers as required by the permit? ❑ Yes XNo ❑ 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? X
Waste Application
10. Are there any required buffers, setbacks, or compliance alternatives that need ❑ YesNo ❑ NA ❑ NE
maintenance or improvement?
11. Is there evidence of incorrect land application? If yes, check the appropriate box below. EYe:XNo ❑ NA ❑NE
❑ Excessive Ponding 0 Hydraulic Overload ❑ Frozen Ground ❑ Heavy Metals(Zn,
❑ PAN ❑ PAN > 10% or 10 lbs. ❑ Total Phosphorus 0 Failure to Incorporate Manure/Sludge into Bare Soil
❑ Outside of Acceptable Crop Window ❑ Evidence of Wind Drift ❑ Application Outside of Approved Area
12. Crop Type(s):
13. Soil Type(s):
14. Do the receiving crops differ from those designated in the CAWMP? ❑ Yes 'KNo ❑ NA ❑ NE
15. Does the receiving crop and/or land application site need improvement? ❑ Yesj�'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. 1s there a lack of properly operating waste application equipment?
❑ YesANo
❑ 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. D s record keeping need improvement? Yes ❑ No [DNA ❑ NE
Waste Application [►T Weekly Freeboard Waste Analysis Soil Analysis eather Code
Rainfall [EWockingoCrop Yield 120 Minute Inspections Monthly and I " Rainfall Inspections
22. Did the facility fail to install and maintain a rain gauge? ❑ YesNo ❑ NA ❑ NE
23. If selected, did the facility fail to install and maintain rainbreakers on irrigation equipment? ❑ Yes [:]No A"NA ❑ NE
Page 2 of 3 21412011 Continued

" Facility Number: - Q Date of inspection:
24. Did the facility fail to calibrate waste application equipment as required by the permit? ❑ Yes w No ❑ NA ❑ NE
25. Is the facility out of compliance with permit conditions related to sludge? If yes, check ❑ Yes ❑ No NA ❑ NE
the appropriate box(es) below.
❑ Failure to complete annual sludge survey ❑ Failure to develop a POA for sludge levels
❑ Non -compliant sludge levels in any lagoon
List structure(s) and date of first survey indicating non-compliance:
26. Did the facility fail to provide documentation of an actively certified operator in charge? ❑ Yes No ❑ NA ❑ NE
27. Did the facility fail to secure a phosphorus loss assessments (PLAT) certification? ❑ Yes�9No ❑ NA ❑ NE
Other Issues
28. Did the facility fail to properly dispose of dead animals with 24 hours and/or document ❑ YesNo ❑ NA ❑ NE
and report mortality rates that were higher than normal?
29. At the time of the inspection did the facility pose an odor or air quality concern? ❑ Yes No ❑ NA ❑ NE
If yes, contact a regional Air Quality representative immediately.
30. Did the facility fail to notify the Regional Office of emergency situations as required by the
❑ Yes
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
�J�
No
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Application Field ❑ Lagoon/Storage Pond [Other: ,Dr Co Lo4y
M
32. Were any additional problems noted which cause non-compliance of the permit or CAWMP?
es
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 ft Explain any YES answers and/or any additional recommendations or any other comments.
Use drawings of facility to better explain situations (use additional pages as necessary).
2 t_ 4.J 4 S/�J. ig � ��� p 20 1, - so 1(1 Sri, 4-
1 CA?
Ci f y h id .
3Z, �1964 F .523 F
,A,Tg 7
� 5.$!i
Y11a/2012:
till 12-011: 9.5-19 J l-'rr7
Reviewer/Inspector Name: rq_[}� fL� IL'I•V&W1 Phone: �OJO'Jrf1--_5-21Y,5_
Reviewer/Inspector Signature: �� Date: 711 7 .z D 1 2
If I
Page 3 of 3 21412011

Dai 1 SLC) R- -\/ al 6-7
Division of Water Quality
Facility Number Division of Soil and Water tliservation 16 q M
p Other Agency
Type of Visit: Compliance Inspection 0 Operation Review O Structure Evaluation O Technical Assistance
Reason for Visit: Routine O Complaint O Follow-up O Referral O Emergency O Other O Denied Access
Date of Visit: Arrival Time: Departure Time: County: A(IQQb2hl Region: 105 P_0
Farm Name: h 1 hem " B r-A.p�Q1- l _ Owner Email: `J
�
Ow er Name: Ea Lot n 4- Tim m ,4 es Phone:
Mailing resqQ � L Q
� a- L5. �fi � G s
Physical Address: q pz.) t1 y:_:�DUt�1 5,04
t
Facility Contact: �d w t Yl -To l n P 5 Title:
Onsite Representative: 4:5
rd Ltd 1 n Soi n e�5
Certified Operator: C[-WIn folne-S
L a�la 7.5
hone: /p 3
• ee d 6y
Integrator:
Certification Number:
Back-up Operator: Certification Number:
Location of Farm: Latitude: 7j 3y 3 f Longitude: g 3 33
,a-jN on
Swine
Design Current Design Current
Capacity Pop. Wet Poultry Capacity Pop. Cattle
Wean to Finish
Wean to Feeder
Feeder to Finish
Farrow to Wean
Farrow to Feeder
Farrow to Finish
Gilts
Boars
Other
Other
Layer
Non -La er
Design Current
Dry Poultry Capacity Pop.
Layers
Non -Layers
Pullets
Turkeys
Turkey Poults
Other
Discharp_es 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? ([f 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
Capacity Pop.
Dairy Cow
`]
Dai Calf
DairyHeifer
Dry Cow
Non -Dairy
Beef Stocker
Beef Feeder
Beef Brood Cow
)S_
❑ Yes 0 No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes
❑ No
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑Yes
❑No
❑NA
❑NE
❑ Yes
❑ No
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Yes
[ No
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Yes
No
❑ NA
❑ NE
Page 1 of 3 21412011 Continued

Facili Number: 0. - 0 jDate of Inspection:
Waste Collection & Treatment
4. Is storage capacity (structural plus storm storage plus heavy rainfall) less than adequate? ❑ Yes
a. If yes, is waste level into the structural freeboard?
Structure 1 Structure 2 Structure 3 Structure 4
/ °y�1as-� Pond
Identifier:
Spillway?:
Designed Freeboard (in): _
Observed Freeboard (in):_
5. Are there any immediate threats to the integrity of any of the structures observed?
(i.e., large trees, severe erosion, seepage, etc.)
6. Are there structures on -site which are not properly addressed and/or managed through a
waste management or closure plan?
❑ Yes
No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ No ❑ NA ❑ NE
Structure 5 Structure 6
❑ Yes 0 No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes P 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 10 No ❑ NA ❑ NE
(not applicable to roofed pits, dry stacks, and/or wet stacks) T`
9. Does any part of the waste management system other than the waste structures require [:]Yes 06 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? 0
11. Is there evidence of incorrect land application? If yes, check the appropriate box below. 1� Yes ❑ No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Excessive Pon - g ❑ 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 r,
12. Crop Type(s): [ l�'i� l� (�,1t� .G(_.r "CY) A�1.11
13. Soil Types):
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 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
19. Did the facility fail to have the Certificate of Coverage & Permit readily available? ❑ Yes I 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:
Y
oes record keeping nee improvement? I te•box-below- ❑ Yes ❑ No ❑ NA ❑ NE
aste Appl cation Weekly Freeboar Waste Analysis Soil Analysis BAVV r sfers �eather Code
infall AStocking [�] Crop Yield [120 Mi ute Inspections Monthly and 1" Rainfall Inspections u)-
22. Did the facility fail to install and maintain a rain gauge? ❑ Yes No ❑ NA ❑ NE
23. If selected, did the facility fail to install and maintain rainbreakers on irrigation equipment? ❑ Yes 9 No 3KNA ❑ NE
Page 2 of 3 21412011 Continued

Facili Number: ZU-0 Date of Inspection:
_' i�24. Did the facility fail to calibrate waste appotion equipment as required by the permit? ❑Yes No ❑ NA [_]NE
25. Is the facility out of compliance with permit conditions related to sludge? If yes, check ❑ Yes ❑ No NA ❑ NE
the appropriate box(es) below.
❑ Failure to complete annual sludge survey ❑ Failure to develop a POA for sludge levels
❑ Non -compliant sludge levels in any lagoon
List structure(s) and date of first survey indicating non-compliance:
26. Did the facility fail 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?
29_ At the time of the inspection did the facility pose an odor or air quality concern?
❑ Yes
0 No
❑ NA
❑ NE
If yes, contact a regional Air Quality representative immediately.
T
30. Did the facility fail to notify the Regional Office of emergency situations as required by the
❑ Yes
[�(No
❑ NA
0 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.
IX Yes
� No ❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Application Field ❑ Lagoon/Storage Pond Other: T) r y co tO
32, Were any additional problems noted which cause non-compliance of the permit or CAWMP?
Yes
❑ No
D NA
❑ NE
33. Did the Reviewer/Inspector fail to discuss review/inspection with an on -site representative?
❑ Yes
gNo
❑ NA
❑ NE
34. Does the facility require a follow-up visit by the same agency?
❑ Yes
Q6 No
❑ NA
❑ NE
(Comments (refer to question #): Explain any YES answers and/or any additional recommendations or any other comments. I
Use drawings of facility to better explain situations (use additional pages as necessary).
Ira'A
' r
r
Cb
T- I4 66 F - z a._c.ke,d.�,e�o a- PFFr� �, - vw
No
aA.,d T- 1 sl a F � (U r,k) u) 3afq
a
Reviewedlnspector Name:
Reviewer/Inspector Signature
Page 3 of 3
�� � u P �P� r.��
Phone: I — S a9
Date:
2412011

Division of Water Quality �
[Facility Number ,3 Division of Soil and Water Conservation
i
O Other Agency
Type of Visit Compliance Inspection 0 Operation Review 0 Structure Evaluation 0 Technical Assistance
Reason for Visit (Routine 0 Complaint 0 Follow up 0 Referral 0 Emergency 0 Other ❑ Denied Access
Date of Visit: 11£l� V 1 Arrival Time:
Departure Time: County:
91lewhah Region: �O
Farm Name: /
OS����'��
r k Owner Email:
Owner Name: claw,lylsizI
he -
Mailing Address: � Q�
2
�Phone: �
S FtKMC
a$ 6 7: 7
Physical Address: `�S '�
AJV ���
rr __�,
�d U iA
�. $ 6 7
Facility Contact: —L' r� i h �Tl]
f11 eos
Title:
Phone N C 3 �Y'fil
Onsite Representative: W- I h
Tot a e—S
Integrator:
r�
Certified Operator. TO f n e S Operator Certification Number:
Back-up Operator:
Back-up Certification Number:
Location of Farm: Latitude: l ado ®` ® Longitude: � o ©,
Swine
Wean to Finish
Wean to Feeder
Feeder to Finish
Farrow to Wean
Farrow to Feeder
Farrow to Finish
Gilts
Boars
Design Current Design Current
Capacity Population Wet Poultry Capacity Population
_ ❑ Layer
❑ Nan -La er
Other
❑ Other I^
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
XDairy Cow
of13
Ll 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:
Ul I
d. Does discharge bypass the waste management system? (If yes, notify DWQ)
2. Is there evidence of a past discharge from any part of the operation?
3. Were there any adverse impacts or potential adverse impacts to the Waters of the State
other than from a discharge?
Page 1 of 3
❑ Yes
No
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Yes
❑ No
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Yes
❑ No
[:1 NA
❑ NE
❑ Yes
t] No
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Yes No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes �No ❑ NA ❑ NE
72128104 Continued

Facility Number: Date of Inspection
Waste Collection & Treatment
4. Is storage capacity (structural plus storm storage plus heavy rainfall) less than adequate?
a. If yes, is waste level into the structural freeboard?
Structure Structure 2 Structure 3 Structure 4
�"�Idcntifier:�ly(�,Tt � ��nd
Ifl
Spillway?:
Designed Freeboard (in):
Observed Freeboard (in):
5. Are there any immediate threats to the integrity of any of the structures observed?
(ie/ large trees, severe erosion, seepage, etc.)
6. Are there structures on -site which are not properly addressed and/or managed
through a waste management or closure plan?
❑ Yes XNo
❑ Yes ❑ No
Structure 5
El NA El NE
❑ NA ❑ NE
Structure 6
❑ Yes X
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 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 YNo
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?
11. Is there evidence of incorrect application? If yes, check the appropriate box below. ❑ Yes No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Excessive Ponding ❑ Hydraulic Overload ❑ Frozen Ground ❑ Heavy Metals (Cu, Zn, etc.)
❑ PAN ❑ PAN > 10% or 10 lbs ❑ Total Phosphorus ❑ Failure to Incorporate Manure/Sludge into Bare Soil
❑ Outside of Acceptable Crop Window ❑ Evidence of Wind Drift ❑ Application Outside of Area
12. Crop type(s)
13. Soil type(s)
14. Do the receiving crops differ from those designated in the CAWMP?
15. Does the receiving crop and/or land application site need improvement?
❑ Yes
❑ Yes
16. Did the facility fail to secure and/or operate per the irrigation design or wettable acre determination ? ❑ Yes
17. Does the facility lack adequate acreage for land application? ❑ Yes
18. Is there a lack of properly operating waste application equipment? ❑ Yes
No ❑ NA Cl NE
No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ No �( NA ❑ NE
XNo ❑ NA ❑ NE
KNo ❑ 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):
IReviewer/Inspector Name iC- (' —AJE.-- I Phone:
Reviewer/Inspector Signature: U � J 10-D , " %�-d L Date: d
Page 2 of 3 12128104 Continued

Facility Number: *of Inspection l In 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
VNo
❑ NA
❑ NE
the appropriate box. ❑ WUP ❑ Checklists ❑ DesignMaps Other
El
21.
Dovement?•
Doe ecord keeping nee;�Weekl
Yes
❑ No
❑ NA
❑ NE
Application FreeboaY7%Soil Anal si aste
Transfers
n
IJ Rainfall [K Stocking rop Yieldions Monthly and 1" Rain
Inspections E Weather Code
22.
Did the facility fail to install and maintain a rain gauge?
❑ Yes
A No
❑ NA
❑ NE
23.
If selected, did the facility fail to install and maintain rainbreakers on irrigation equipment?
❑ Yes
[] No
�(NA
❑ NE
24.
Did the facility fail to calibrate waste application equipment as required by the permit?
ElYes
)_ No
[3 NA
❑ NE
25.
Did the facility fail to conduct a sludge survey as required by the permit?
El Yes
(❑ No
�1A
❑ NE
26.
Did the facility fail to have an actively certified operator in charge?
❑ Yes
KNo
❑ NA
❑ NE
27.
Did the facility fail to secure a phosphorus loss assessment (PLAT) certification?
❑ Yes
tKNo
❑ NA
❑ NE
Other Issues
28.
Were any additional problems noted which cause non-compliance of the permit or CAWMP?
❑ Yes
No
❑ NA
❑ NE
29.
Did the facility fail to properly dispose of dead animals within 24 hours and/or document
❑ Yes
No
0
ElNA
❑ 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)
,No
32.
Did Reviewer/Inspector fail to discuss review/inspection with an on -site representative?
❑ Yes
❑ NA
❑ NE
33.
Does facility require a follow-up visit by same agency?
❑ Yes
Ro
❑ NA
❑ NE
Additional Comments and/or Drawings:
p
� • � ` +lei 1 ,
i
i
�'r • � � ` � 1 �r 1 Ida ``�/1
Page 3 of 3 . I

0
Incident Report
o �
Report Number: 201001650
Q v— .� b V PC-- O sg b
Incident Type: Non -Compliance Reporting
On -Site Contact:
Category: APS - Animal
First/Mid/Last Name:
I ncident.Started`. 12/29/2009
Company Name:
County: Alleghany
Phone:
City: Sparta
Pager/Mobile Phone:
!
Farm #: 003-0008
Responsible Party:
Reported By:
Owner:
First/Mid/Last Name:
Permits AWC030008
Company Name:
Facility: Joines Brothers Dairy
Address:
First Name: Edwin
Middle Name:
City/State/Zip:
Last Name: Joines
Phone:
Address 4088 Hwy 221 S
Pager/Mobile Phone:
I
City/State/Zip: Sparta NC 28675
Phone:
Material Category: Estimated City: UOM
Chemical Name
Reportable Qty. lbs. Reportable City. kgs.
DD:MM:SS
Latitude:
Longitude:
Location of Incident:
Address:
City/State/Zip
Decimal
Hwy 221 South
Sparta
Report Created 05/14/10 12:40 PM
Position Method:
Position Accuracy:
Position Datum:
Page 1

P,
•
Cause/Observation: Directions:
Action Taken: Comments:
Incident Questions:
Did the Material reach the Surface Water? Unknown Conveyance: _
Surface Water Name?
Did the Spill result in a Fish Kill? Unknown Estimated Number of fish?
If the Spill was from a storage tank indicate type.
Containment? Unknown
Cleanup Complete? Unknown
(Above Ground or Under Ground)
Water Supply Wells within 1500ft: Unknown Groundwater Impacted : Unknown
Access to Farm
Structure Questions
Animal Population
E Spray Availability
Report Created 05/14/10 12:40 PM Page 2

9
Access to Farm
Farm accessible from the main road?
Animal Population
Confined?
Depop?
Feed Available?
Mortality?
Spray Availability
Pumping equipment?
Available Fields?
Structure Questions
Breached?
Inundated?
Overtopped?
Water on outside wall?
Poor dike conditions?
Waste Structure Type Waste Structure Identi inches
Waste Pond WASTE POND 8.00
Event Type
Incident closed
Requested Additional Information
Report Received
Referred to Regional Office - Primary Contact
Report Entered
Incident Start
Event Date
❑ Yes ❑ No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes ❑ No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes ❑ No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes ❑ No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes ❑ No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes ❑ No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes ❑ No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes
❑ No
❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes
❑ No
❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes
❑ No
❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes
❑ No
❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes
❑ No
❑ NA ❑ NE
Plan Due Date Plan Recieved Date Level
OK Date
2010-05-11 12:26:44
2009-12-29 08:00:00
Due Date Comment
Report Created 05/14/10 12:40 PM Page 3

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 12:26:44 PM
Referred Via:
Did DWQ request an additional written report?
If yes, What additional information is needed?
Report Created 05/14/10 12:40 PM Page 4

Facility NumberDa
Division of Soil and Water- onservatton: O IT Jf
IT-K I
0 Other Agency zT
Type of Visit
Compliance Inspection
O Operation Review O Structure Evaluation
O Technical Assistance
Reason for Visit
{Routine O Complaint
O Follow up O Referral O Emergency
O Other ❑ Denied Access
Date of Visit: Q Arrival Time: � 1 t'))
Departure Time: ; b � County:
e Region: L_S
Farm Name: -Tt7 Ift 26
Owner Email:
Owner Name: F/Au.)+r Y\nr
� �T^;,A-�
5
�l 72 '-• 4S
Mailing Address: `D � D
�jZ_t
t tw d� o�
`-Phone:
e >0V% C -fir Tk
2 S 6 7.S- ^�
Physical Address: "L`r
S�
�� _a a� 4_') 1y! 1 S�afA��
1�-'�- a2Z 67�
Facility Contact: F lA t
T O i n e-S
Title:
Phone No:
Onsite Representative: ' d
Lk--),i Ifs _To�k vies
Integrator:
Certified Operator: E at�1 n Zot,nes
Operator Certification Number:
Back-up Operator:
Back-up Certification Number:
Location of Farm: Latitude: Mo
« � ° i
3 Longitude:
is3
Swine
Wean to Finish
Wean to Feeder
Feeder to Finish
Farrow to Wean
Farrow to Feeder
Farrow to Finish
Gilts
Boars
Other
❑ Other
Design Current Design Current
Capacity Population Wet Poultry Capacity Population
❑ La er
❑Non -La er
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)
Cattle
Btesign Current
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 N?`No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes ❑ No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes ❑ No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes
[]No
[DNA
❑ NE
❑ Yes
No
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Yes
No
❑ NA
❑ NE
12128104 Continued

Facility Number: 01 — C) s • Date of Inspection 0
Waste Collection & Treatment
4. Is storage capacity (structural plus storm storage plus heavy rainfall) less than adequate?
❑ Yes No ❑ NA ❑ NE
a. If yes, is waste level into the structural freeboard?
❑ Yes ❑ No ❑ NA ❑ NE
Structure Structure 2 Structure 3 Structure 4
Pon
Structure 5 Structure 6
IIdentifier:,,J
/ Spillway?:
Designed Freeboard (in):
Observed Freeboard (in):
5. Are there any immediate threats to the integrity of any of the structures observed?
❑ Yes *o ❑ 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 ElNA ElNE
through a waste management or closure plan?
If any of questions 4-6 were answered yes, and the situation poses an immediate public health or environmental threat, notify DWQ
7. Do any of the structures need maintenance or improvement? ❑ Yes �(No ❑ NA ❑ NE
S. Do any of the stuctures lack adequate markers as required by the permit? ❑ Yes XNo ❑ 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 KNo ❑ NA ❑ NE
maintenance or improvement?
Waste Application
10. Are there any required buffers, setbacks, or compliance alternatives that need ❑ Yes )No ❑ NA ❑ NE
maintenance/improvement?
11, Is there evidence of incorrect application? If yes, check the appropriate box below. ❑ Yes RNo ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Excessive Ponding ❑ Hydraulic Overload ❑ Frozen Ground ❑ Heavy Metals (Cu, Zn, etc.)
❑ PAN ❑ PAN > 10% or l0 ibs ❑ Total Phosphorus ❑ Failure to Incorporate Manure/Sludge into Bare Soil
❑ Outside of Acceptable Crop Window ❑ Evidence of Wind Drift ❑ Application Outside of Area
12. Crop type(s)
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
ONo
❑ NA
❑ NE
16. Did the facility fail to secure and/or operate per the irrigation design or wettable acre determination ?
❑ Yes
❑ No
V NA
❑ NE
17. Does the facility lack adequate acreage for land application?
❑ Yes
�<No
❑ NA
❑ NE
18. Is there a lack of properly operating waste application equipment?
❑ Yes
XNo
❑ NA
❑ NE
Comments (refer to question #): Explain any YES answers and/or any recommendations or any other comments.
Use drawings of facility to better explain situations. (use additional pages as necessary):
Reviewer/Inspector Name
Reviewer/Inspector Signature:
Phone: —1 -7 ( — �$q
Date: 6
12128104 Continued

0 9 16 40
�, —
Facility Number: fe of Inspection
Required Records & Documents
19. Did the facility fail to have Certificate of Coverage & Permit readily available? ❑ Yes No ❑ NA ❑ NE
20. Does the facility fail to have all components of the CAWMP readily available? If yes, check ❑ Yes No ❑ NA ❑ NE
the appropriate box. ❑ WUP ❑ Checklists ❑ Design El Maps El Other
21. Doe record keeping need imp ovement?41-Y a e-appmpriate-bmr ❑ Yes 3eNo ❑ NA ❑ NE
Z
steA lica ion 2111C I Freeboard Waste Anal sis S�7c
'al sis -Eef4ifiepp Y Y Ynfall [�ocking Crop Yield 120 Minute Inspections nthly and 1" Rain Inspections �Zeather Code
22. Did the facility fail to install and maintain a rain gauge? ❑ Yes tS(No ❑ NA ❑ NE
23. If selected, did the facility fail to install and maintain rainbreakers on irrigation equipment? ❑ Yes ❑ No 1�(NA ❑ NE
24. Did the facility fail to calibrate waste application equipment as required by the permit? ❑ Yes %No ❑ NA ❑ NE
25. Did the facility fail to conduct a sludge survey as required by the permit? ❑ Yes ❑ No (<NA ❑ NE
26. Did the facility fail to have an actively certified operator in charge? ❑ Yes P(No ❑ NA ❑ NE
27. Did the facility fail to secure a phosphorus loss assessment (PLAT) certification? ❑ Yes P%No ❑ NA ❑ NE
Other Issues
28. Were any additional problems noted which cause non-compliance of the permit or CAWMP? ❑ Yes No ❑ NA ❑ NE
29. Did the facility fail to properly dispose of dead animals within 24 hours and/or document ❑ Yes P�No ❑ NA ❑ NE
and report the mortality rates that were higher than normal?
30. At the time of the inspection did the facility pose an odor or air quality concern? ❑ Yes No [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 R10 ❑ NA ❑ NE
General Permit? (ie/ discharge, freeboard problems, over application) 1
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 XfNo ❑ NA ❑ NE
Additional Comments and/or Drawings:
1
a�. a.doT Tz.aoa9 soil etAal s�5
�ed
C ! i ra c� vwP e tech — _ u2 a 000
PA
12128104

Division of Water Qualit4p
Facility Number Division of Soil and Water Conservation
- - -- - - 0 Other Agency I PAJ
Type of Visit Compliance Inspection 0 Operation Review 0 Structure Evaluation 0 Technical Assistance
Reason for Visit � Routine 0 Complaint 0 Follow up 0 Referral 0 Emergency 0 Other ❑ Denied Access
Date of Visit: Arrival Time: 1 j Departure Time: - untya Regio 520
Farm Name: �51 new I f-05 • V1 r y Owner Email: ° S7
6 kJ- 3& 3 - q
Owner Name: E3 � c� �-t'T1 M '] O 1 ne 5 JPhone:
Mailing Address: O v D w 0O 5P t i3C R$ 6 7j1_
Physical Address: 44 ,6- 4 r y
Edwin loin S 3(o3 -q q
Facility Contact: � Title: Phone No:
Onsite Representative: E,A wiY, ` & nIntegrator: r---�
Certified Operator: 11-► PTO I nE�5 Operator Certification Number:
Back-up Operator:
Location of Farm:
ai
Swine
Wean to Finish
Wean to Feeder
Feeder to Finish
Farrow to Wean
Farrow to Feeder
Farrow to Finish
Gilts
Boars
Other
❑ Other
0
1 Latitude:
SpL�
Back-up Certification Number:
BJLJ
Longitude:M
O
Design Current Design Current
Capacity Population Wet Poultry Capacity Population
❑ Layer I -
❑ Non -Layer
Dry Poultry
❑ Layers
❑ Non -Layers
❑ Pullets
❑ Turkeys
❑ urkey Pouets
❑ Other
Discharges & Stream Impacts
I. Is any discharge observed from any part of the operation?
Discharge originated at: ❑ Structure ❑ Application Field ❑ Other
a. Was the conveyance man-made?
Design Current
Cattle Capacity Population
Dairy Cow
7
Dairy Calf
❑ Dairy Heifer
go
❑ Dry Cow
❑ Non -Dairy
❑ Beef Stocker
❑ Beef Feeder
❑ Beef Brood Cowl
I
Number of Structures: aD
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?
Page I of 3
❑ Yes [(No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes
❑ No
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Yes
❑ No
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Yes
❑ No
❑ Yes No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes No ❑ NA ❑ NE
12128104 Continued

Facility Number: - Date of Inspection
Waste Collection & Treatment
4. Is storage capacity (structural plus storm storage plus heavy rainfall) less than adequate?
❑ Yes $No ❑ NA ❑ NE
a. If yes, is waste level into the structural freeboard?
❑ Yes ❑ No ❑ NA ❑ NE
Structures I St cture 2 Structure 3 Structure 4
Identifier:
Structure 5 Structure 6
Spillway?: t
Designed Freeboard (in):
Observed Freeboard (in):
5. Are there any immediate threats to the integrity of any of the structures observed?
❑ Yes �No [3NA ❑ NE
(ie/ large trees, severe erosion, seepage, etc.)
6. Are there structures on -site which are not properly addressed and/or managed
❑ Yes 4No ❑ NA ❑ NE
through a waste management or closure plan?
If any of questions 4-6 were answered yes, and the situation poses an immediate public health or environmental threat, notify DWQ
7. Do any of the structures need maintenance or improvement? ❑ Yes No ❑ NA ❑ NE
8. Do any of the stuctures lack adequate markers as required by the permit? ❑ Yes No ❑ NA ❑ NE
(Not applicable to roofed pits, dry stacks and/or wet stacks)
9. Does any part of the waste management system other than the waste structures require ❑ Yes No El NA El NE
maintenance or improvement?
Waste Application
10. Are there any required buffers, setbacks, or compliance alternatives that need ❑ Yes No ❑ NA ❑ NE
maintenance/improvement?
11.
Is there evidence of incorrect application? If yes, check the appropriate box below. ❑ Yes
[KNo ❑ 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) row h
13.
Soil type(s)
14.
Do the receiving crops differ from those designated in the CAWMP? ❑ Yes
No ❑ NA
El NE
15.
Does the receiving crop and/or land application site need improvement? El Yes
iA
�No ❑ NA
❑ NE
16.
Did the facility fail to secure and/or operate per the irrigation design or wettable acre determination ? ❑ Yes
❑ No X NA
❑ NE
17.
Does the facility lack adequate acreage for land application? ❑ Yes
)0No ❑ NA
❑ NE
18.
Is there a lack of properly operating waste application equipment? ❑ Yes
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):
z
S -t, a..A040 I cqt 1 t; r"1
Ll 7 f Y1 O r~t
Woe— M U
tocccf e I
C� � i3rl�i
rr, ' n C�"L
a A rds W-t- W-v�
Reviewer/Inspector Name 1' io
Phone: 7 Sol 1
Reviewer/Inspector Signatur
Date:
R
Page 2 of 3 ' I , %-, v 8104 Continued .

FacilityNumber: — Date of Inspection •
Required Records & Documents
19. Did the facility fail to have Certificate of Coverage & Permit readily available? ❑ Yes No ❑ NA ❑ NE
20. Does the facility fail to have all components of the CAWMP readily available? If yes, check ❑ Yes (! No ❑ NA ❑ NE
the appropriate box. ❑ WUP ❑ Checklists 11!
❑ Design El Maps El Other
21. D�oew/record keeping nee�Zee
ement? If yes, the the appropriate box elow. ❑ Yes KNo ❑ NA ❑ NE a e Applica ' n Freeboard Waste Analysis S;Zont'hl'y
is ers�eatherCode'
n
Z
Stockin Cro Yield s and I" Rain Ins ections
g P - _� P
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
KNo
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Yes
❑ No
X NA
❑ NE
❑ Yes
P6No
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Yes
No
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Yes
No
IjNo
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Yes
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Yes
>(No
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Yes
XNo
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Yes
)6No
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Yes
�No
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Yes
VNo
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Yes
DNo
❑ NA
❑ NE
Ad ' 'onal Comments and/or Drawings:
r rc4,nn d ue Q in i n oC_t9bV-r and or so i sp rn�Ll
honkil ton on p
bza Via-i
r�,) a60 -7
�21 63.4t44Ld_�
at,m," 'esw
qt§73'�Z) �zd ' �I'° lea

Division of Water Quality
Facility Number 3 [� Division of Soil and Water inservation
Other Agency 1
Type of Visit Compliance Inspection O Operation Review O Structure Evaluation Q Technical Assistance
Reason for Visit Routine O Complaint O Follow up 0 Referral 0 Emergency 0 Other ❑ Denied Access
s• , n�
Date of Visit:14 1 Arrival Time: 1 1 1 . d Departure Time: County: Allen 6 j wl. Region: LOS
Farm Name: �o1hetiS ros ,L_ I r V Owner Email:
T
Owner Name: l Y)i m' 11 (� j j��S Phone: -7 s7
oZ S
Mailing Address: !�� 4 3 �� y4
Physical Address:
Facility contact: I.] t "7-Qjr1.&.5'Title: Phone No: 3
Onsite Representative: Integrator:
Certified Operator: �.,d i vie-5 _ 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 �d ®� Longitude: ®° ®t M��
Design Current Design Current
Capacity Population Wet Poultry Capacity Population
❑ Layer
t 1 ❑ Non -La et
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
1,2
ICK.DairyCow
O-Dairy
Calf
❑
Dairy Heifer
❑
Dry Cow
❑
Non -Dairy
❑
Beef Stockee
❑
Beef Feeder
❑
Beef Brood Cow
c. What is the estimated volume that reached waters of the State (gallons)?
Number of Structures: D]
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 M No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes
❑ No ❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Yes
❑ No ❑ NA
❑ NE
ElYes
�o ❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Yes
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Yes
No ❑ NA
❑ NE
12128104 Continued

Facility Number: —04nN Date of Inspection
Waste Collection & Treatment
4. Is storage capacity (structural plus storm storage plus heavy rainfall) less than adequate? ❑ Yes *o ❑ NA ElNE
a. If yes, is waste level into the structural freeboard? ❑ Yes El No ❑ NA ❑ NE
Structure I Structure 2 Structure 3 Structure 4 Structure 5 Structure 6
Identifier:
Spillway?:
Designed Freeboard (in):
Observed Freeboard (in): dam'
5. Are there any immediate threats to the integrity of any of the structures observed? ❑ YesN ❑ NA El
(iel large trees, severe erosion, seepage, etc.)
6. Are there structures on -site which are not properly addressed and/or managed El 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 environmentailNpa
t, notify DWQ
7. Do any of the structures need maintenance or improvement? El YesEl NA El NE
8. Do any of the stuctures lack adequate markers as required by the permit? El Yes;lNja
El NA El NE
(Not applicable to roofed pits, dry stacks and/or wet stacks)
9. Does any part of the waste management system other than the waste structures require ❑ Yes ❑ NA ❑ NE
maintenance or improvement?
Waste Application
10. Are there any required buffers, setbacks, or compliance alternatives that need ❑ Yes �No ❑ NA ❑ NE
maintenance/improvement? ,_
11. Is there evidence of incorrect application? If yes, check the appropriate box below. El Yes M<O ❑ 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 Drifl ❑ 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
EKNA❑
NA
❑ NE
15. Does the receiving crop and/or land application site need improvement?
❑ Yes
� No
❑ NA
❑ NE
16. Did the facility fail to secure and/or operate per the irrigation design or wettable acre determination?❑ Yes
❑ No
)(NA
❑ NE
17. Does the facility lack adequate acreage for land application?
❑ Yes
XNo
❑ NA
❑ NE
18. Is there a lack of properly operating waste application equipment?
❑ Yes
19No
❑ 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 e Phone: —7 T— sa8$
ReviewerlInspector Signatur jig, A Date:
L , V `'` — . 12128104 Continued

Facility Number: — Date of Inspection
9 1
•
Re wired Records & DocumenM--��TTT -1�
19. Did the facilityfail to have ertific f Covera & Permit readily available?
Y ❑Yes Zo
❑ NA ❑ NE
20. Does the facility fail to have all components of the CAWMP readily available? If yes, check El Yes❑ NA ❑ NE
the appropirate box. ❑ WUP ❑ Checklists ❑ Design El Maps ❑Other
21. Doe record keeping need im rovemen Im Yes ❑ No ❑ NA ❑ NE
P
Taste Applic on Wee y Freeboard ❑ Waste Anal ❑ Soil A ysis ��iZ.64C Tra efPrr
0 Rainfall Stocking Crop Yield Monthly and 1" 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?
Additional Comments and/or Drawings:
ibrc+-on Ave a 0.in n oC+. '�60$ .
❑ Yes
&No
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Yes
❑ No
NA
❑ NE
❑ Yes
M No
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Yes
o
KNA
❑ NE
El Yeso
VN
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Yes
0 No
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Yes I]� N ❑ NA ❑ NE
El Yes No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes VNo ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes tjNo ❑ NA ❑ NE
R pf-64oAa
12128104

Division of Water Quality
n Division of Soil and Water Conservation
❑ Other Agency
Facility Number : 030008 Facility Status: Active Permit: AWC030 08 ❑ Denied Access
Inspection Type: Compliance Insoection _ Inactive or Closed Date:
Reason for Visit: Routine _ _ County: Alleahany Region:Winston-Salem
Date of Visit: 12/13/2006 Entry Time:01:00 PM Exit Time: 02:25 PM - Incident #:
Farm Name: Joines Brothers Dairy _ Owner Email:
Owner: Edwin Joines
Mailing Address: 4088 Hwy 221 5 Sparta NC 26675
Physical Address:
Facility Status: ❑ Compliant ❑ Not Compliant Integrator:
Location of Farm:
Take Hwy 21 north from Sparta and make left onto Hwy 221 South.
Question Areas:
Discharges & Stream Impacts
Records and Documents
Certified Operator: Clay E Joines
Secondary OIC(s):
Phone: [phone]
Latitude: 36°30'31" Longitude: 81°1 '33"
N Waste Collection & Treatment IN Waste Application
JJ Other Issues
Operator Certification Number: 21445
On -Site Representative(s): Name Title Phone
On -site representative Edwin Joines Phone:
24 hour contact name Edwin Joines Phone:
Primary Inspector: M I' sa Rosebroc
Inspector Signature:
IC - r . , f — - — kxL)
Secondary Inspector(s).
Phone: Hate: a b:5 to !a
Inspection Summary:
3. and 9. There is water standing in a corner of the dry cow lot and waste and sediment are washing into stream from this corner.
Operator is aware and will repair broken water pipe ASAP.
11. Cannot determine until waste analysis is returned. Check next visit.
19. Need to add Certificate of Coverage (COC) letter to records.
21. 2006 soil resits ok.
21. Waste analysis for Aug./Sept. 2006 applications was outside of 60-day window.
21. Operator has application records, just needs to transfer to forms and calculate N balance. Check next visit.
21. Records of solid waste applications not available. NOV next time.
21. Need to transfer to forms from field notes.
24. Not completed this date but Alleghany SWCD/NRCS is to assist Mr. Joines to complete by the end of the year.
Page: 1

0 0
Permit. AWC030008 Owner - Facility: Edwin Joines Facility Number : 030008
Inspection Data: 12/13/2006 Inspection Type: Compliance Inspection Reason for Visit: Routine
Regulated Operations Design Capacity Current Population
Cattle
Cattle -Milk Cow 275 190
Total Design Capacity: 275
Total SSLW: 385,000
Type Identifier Closed Date Start Data Designed Freeboard Observed Freeboard
taste Pond WASTE POND 54.0(
Page: 2

n
•
Permit: AWC030008 Owner - Facility: Edwin Joines Facility Number: 030008
Inspection Date: 1211312006 Inspection Type: Compliance Inspection Reason for Via It: Routine
Discharges & Stream Impacts Yes No NA NE
1. Is any discharge observed from any part of the operation? ❑ ■ ❑ ❑
Discharge originated at
Structure ❑
Application Field ❑
Other ❑
a. Was conveyance man-made? ❑ ■ ❑ ❑
b. Did discharge reach Waters of the State? (if yes, notify DWQ) ❑ ■ ❑ ❑
c. Estimated volume reaching surface waters?
d. Does discharge bypass the waste management system? (if yes, notify DWQ)
❑
■
❑
❑
Z 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?
Waste Collection, Storage & Treatment
Yes
No
NA
NE
4. Is storage capacity less than adequate?
❑
■
❑
❑
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 properly addressed and/or managed through a waste management
❑ ■
❑
❑
or closure plan?
7. Do any of the structures need maintenance or improvement?
❑ ■
❑
❑
8. Do any of the structures lack adequate markers as required by the permit? (Not applicable to roofed pits,
❑ ■
❑
[1
dry stacks and/or wet stacks)
9. Does any part of the waste management system other than the waste structures require maintenance or
■ Cl
❑
n
improvement?
Waste Application Yes No
NA
NE
10. Are there any required buffers, setbacks, or compliance alternatives that need maintenance or
❑ ■
❑
❑
improvement?
11. Is there evidence of incorrect application? ❑ ■ ❑ ❑
If yes, check the appropriate box below.
Excessive Ponding? ❑
Hydraulic Overload? ❑
Frozen Ground? ❑
Heavy metals (Cu, Zn, etc)? ❑
Page: 3

U
•
Permit: AWC030008 Owner -Facility: Edwin Joines
Inspection Date: 12/13/2006 Inspection Type: Compliance Inspection
Facility Number: 030008
Reason for Visit: Routine
Waste Application
Yes No NA NE
PAN?
n
Is PAN > 10%/10 lbs.?
n
Total P205?
❑
Failure to incorporate manurelsludge into bare soil?
Outside of acceptable crop window?
Cl
Evidence of wind drift?
D
Application outside of application area?
❑
Crop Type 1
Fescue (Hay)
Crop Type 2
Small Grain (Wheat,
Barley, Oats)
Crop Type 3
Small Grain Cover
Crop Type 4
Crap 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
D ■ ❑ ❑
Plan(CAWMP)?
15. Does the receiving crop and/or land application site need improvement?
❑ ■ ❑ n
16. Did the facility fail to secure and/or operate per the irrigation design or wettable acre determination? D ■ D D
17. Does the facility lack adequate acreage for land application?
D ■ D D
18. Is there a lack of properly operating waste application equipment?
❑ ■ D D
Records and Documents
Yes No NA NE
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?
❑ ■ D D
If yes, check the appropriate box below.
WU P?
❑
Page: 4

0
•
Permit: AWC030008 Owner - Facility: Edwin Joines
Facility Number: 030008
Inspection Date: 12/13/2006 Inspection Type: Compliance Inspection
Reason for Visit: Routine
Records and Documents
Yes No NA NE
Checklists?
Q
Design?
❑
Maps?
❑
Other?
❑
21. Does record keeping need improvement?
■ ❑ ❑ ❑
If yes, check the appropriate box below.
Waste Application?
■
120 Minute inspections?
❑
Weather code?
❑
Weekly Freeboard?
❑
Transfers?
❑
Rainfall?
❑
Inspections after n 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?
■
❑
❑
Q
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?
❑
■
Cl
❑
27. Did the facility fail to secure a phosphorous loss assessment (PLAT) certification?
ri
■
❑
❑
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.
Page: 5

L.J
0
Permit: AWC030008 Owner -Facility: Edwin Joines Facility Number : 030008
Inspection Date: 12/13/2006 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? ❑ M ❑ ❑
32. Did Reviewer/Inspector fail to discuss review/inspection with on -site representative? ❑ ■ n ❑
33. Does facility require a follow-up visit by same agency?
❑ ■ ❑ ❑
Page: 6

I;ca-ion. �PB , Vic ° � =Cali b r- cA on f UWd
Division of Water Quality -
Facility Number 103HQ Division of Soil and Water Conservation J PM
- - 0 Other Agency 1
(Type of Visit mpliance Inspection 0 Operation Review 0 Structure Evaluation 0 Technical Assistance
C
Reason for Visit Routine 0 Complaint 0 Follow up 0 Referral 0 Emergency 0 Other ❑ Denied Access
Date of Visit: Arrival Time: Di�iC`� Departure Time: County: ( Region:
Farm Name: C J I h eS r'o5 • _))a) rr q Owner Email: q
Owner Name: _L(��' b i'� ��� 1 !'Y1 tiJ O 1 r?e Phone: 6Jw,l h - 3 -1a . t4s 7
Mailing Address: ',T�CC_''_ R (�)u_ X f_':�b L '50Q_2iC a i 75
Physical Address: �t [ ��] T ,J_S, aa-i Sa�
Facility Contact: L n `To i h L Jr' Title: Phone No: 4V
_ 4.3
Onsite Representative: w i ✓� ��OL ne S Integrator:
Certified Operator: Ed t,-)I n ��� ne5 Operator Certification Number:
Back-up Operator:
Location of Farm:
L_
Back-up Certification Number:
Latitude: ®o M ®,i Longitude: ®o
ea)jr � Des gn Current Design Current Design Current
Swine Capacity Population Wet Poultry Capacity Population Cattle Capacity Population
10 Wean to Finish
❑ Wean to Feeder
❑ Feeder to Finish
❑ Farrow to Wean
❑ Farrow to Feeder
❑ Farrow to Finish
❑ Gilts
❑ Boars
Other
❑ Other
❑ Layer
❑ Non -Layer
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)
Dairy Cow
o--7 S
❑ 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:ail
d. Does discharge bypass the waste management system? (If yes, notify DWQ)
2. Is there evidence of a past discharge from any part of the operation?
3. Were there any adverse impacts or potential adverse impacts to the Waters of the State
other than from a discharge?
Page I of 3
❑ Yes
o
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Yes
❑ No
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Yes
❑ No
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Yes
❑ o
❑ NA
❑ NE
ElYes
o
❑ NA
❑ NE
ElNo
❑ NA
❑ NE
12128104
Continued

Facility Number: —00 Date of Inspection iiT/ VIrJ•
001
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 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 XNo ❑ NA ❑ NE
(ie/ large trees, severe erosion, seepage, etc.)
6. Are there structures on -site which are not properly addressed and/or managed El 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 Xo ❑ NA ❑ NE
8. Do any of the stuctures lack adequate markers as required by the permit? ElYes <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 ElNE
maintenance or improvement?
Waste Application
10. Are there any required buffers, setbacks, or compliance alternatives that need ❑ Yes o ❑ NA ❑ NE
maintenance/improvement? P6
11, Is there evidence of incorrect application? If yes, check the appropriate box below. ❑ Yes ❑ No ❑ NA KNE
❑ Excessive Ponding El Hydraulic Overload El Frozen Ground El 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
Xj 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 ?
ElYes
❑ No
11
P( NA
❑ NE
17. Does the facility lack adequate acreage for land application?
❑ Yes
�(No
❑ NA
❑ NE
18. is there a lack of properly operating waste application equipment?
❑ Yes
P<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):
` 1-�r3au n -�o Y L
` 0C)�d� h t.t� �-� S`-�1C�1 �-t'1
AL
0 C�.1li v �� o L* L
1i UA�Wx-
Reviewer/Inspector Name _
15� Phone: T?
Reviewer/Inspector Signature:
Date: (p
IF
Page 2 P 3,
12128104 - Continued

Facility Number: — te of Inspection
Required Records & Documents
19. Did the facility fail to have Certificate of Coverage & Permit readily available? ❑ Yes No ElNA ❑ NE
20. Does the facility fail to have all components of the CAWMP readily available? If yes, check [] YesX
No ❑ NA ❑ NE
the appropriate box. ❑ WUP ❑ Checklists ❑ Design El ❑Other
21 s record keeps nee�a4teeFreeboard
vement? Yes ❑ No ❑ NA ❑ NE
aste Ap ication Waste Analysis Soil An ysis ❑.Ulact�Txans€ors❑sRainfall Stockingield Y onthly and 1" Rain Inspections Bather Code
22. Did the facility fail to install and maintain a rain gauge? ❑ Yes No ❑ NA ❑ NE
23. If selected, did the facility fail to install and maintain rainbreakers on irrigation equipment?
24. Did the facility fail to calibrate waste application equipment as required by the permit?
25. Did the facility fail to conduct a sludge survey as required by the permit?
26. Did the facility fail to have an actively certified operator in charge?
27. Did the facility fail to secure a phosphorus loss assessment (PLAT) certification?
Other Issues
28. Were any additional problems noted which cause non-compliance of the permit or CAWMP?
29. Did the facility fail to properly dispose of dead animals within 24 hours and/or document
and report the mortality rates that were higher than normal?
30. At the time of the inspection did the facility pose an odor or air quality concern?
If yes, contact a regional Air Quality representative immediately
31, Did the facility fail to notify the regional office of emergency situations as required by
General Permit? (ie/ discharge, freeboard problems, over application)
32. Did Reviewer/Inspector fail to discuss review/inspection with an on -site representative?
33. Does facility require a follow-up visit by same agency?
❑ Yes
❑ No
�(NA
❑ NE
XYes
❑ No
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Yes
❑ No
*A
❑ NE
❑ Yes
$No
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Yes
❑ No
0 NA
❑ NE
❑ Yes
XNo
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Yes
X No
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Yes
�Po
❑ NA
❑ NE
' ❑ Yes
o
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Yes
No
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Yes
&No
❑ NA
❑ NE
Additional Comments and/or Drawings:
(f, Ja oa is ? o2Q950-k-, o-?UD Ip
al5olij ux.oto a ff jic(zoor)S ? Solid waste 5, ? No
N0�'f Ftne- A + ft ke�
y
3 oj3 12/28/04

Division of Water Quality
[] Division of Soil and Water Conservation
❑ Other Agency
Facility Number : 030008 Facility Status: Active Permit: 6WC030008 ❑ Denied Access
Inspection Type: Compliance Inspection Inactive or Closed Date:
Reason for Visit. Routine County: AIleahany — Region: Winston-Salem
Date of Visit: 04/26/2005 Entry Time: 10,,Q¢ AM Exit Time: 11:45 AM Incident #:
Farm Name: Joines Brothers Daily_ Owner Email:
Owner: Edwin Joines
Phone: [phone]
Mailing Address: 4088 HIM221 S Sparta NC 28675
Physical Address:
Facility Status: ❑ Compliant ❑ Not Compliant
Location of Farm:
Take Hwy 21 north from Sparta and make left onto Hwy 221 South.
Integrator:
Latitude: 36°30'31" Longitude: 81°13'33"_
Question Areas:
Q Discharges & Stream Impacts 0 Waste Collection & Treatment 0 Waste Application
0 Records and Documents 0 Other Issues
Certified Operator: Clay E Joines Operator Certification Number: 21445
Secondary OIC(s):
On -Site Representative(s): Name Title Phone
On -site representative Edwin Joines Phone.
24 hour contact name Edwin Joines Phone:
Primary Inspector: *Mi, M Rosebrock Phone: [phone]
Ext.383Inspector SignatureAJ Date:
Secondary Inspector(s):
Phone:
Phone:
Inspection Summary:
3. Operator has seeded denuded lot next to creek with fescue and wheal which has started to germinate. Need to fence comer off
before cattle are returned to lot (June/July). Still to seed area across creek (crossing).
21. 2005 soil samples have been sent and operator is awaiting results.
21. Operator is keeping crop yields for insurance by fields. Tract 1491 was not harvested for corn last Fall since it was blown down.
Operator has insurance records to document.
21. Went over new permit requirements.
21. Must start recording solid waste applications.
Page: 1

Permit: AWC030008 Owner- Facility: Edwin Joines Facility Number : 030006
Inspection Date: 04/26/2005 Inspection Type: Compliance inspection Reason for Visit: Routine
Regulated Operations Design Capacity Current Population
Cattle
© Cattle - Milk Cow 275 175
Total Design Capacity: 275
Total SSLW: 385,000
Waste Structures
Type Identifier Closed Date Start Date Designed Freeboard observed Freeboard
Waste Pond WASTE POND 72,00
Page: 2

a
• •
Permit: AWC030008 Owner -Facility: Edwin Joines Facility Number : 030008
Inspection Date: 04/26/2005 Inspection Type: Compliance Inspection Reason for Visit: Routine
Disc, haraes & Strearnlmpacts Yps No NA NF
1. Is any discharge observed from any part of the operation? ❑ 0 ❑ ❑
Discharge originated at:
Structure ❑
Application Field ❑
Other ❑
a. Was conveyance man-made? ❑ 0 ❑ ❑
b. Did discharge reach Waters of the State? (if yes, notify DWQ) ❑ 0 ❑ ❑
c. Estimated volume reaching surface waters?
d. Does discharge bypass the waste management system? (if yes, notify DWQ)
❑
■ ❑ ❑
2. Is there evidence of a past discharge from any part of the operation?
❑
M ❑ ❑
3. Were there any adverse impacts or potential adverse impacts to Waters of the State other than from a discharge?
❑
Ygs
M ❑ ❑
No NA N1
;te CQllection. Storage & Treatment
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, ❑ 0 ❑ ❑
seepage, etc.)?
6. Are there structures on -site that are not property addressed and/or managed through a waste management or
❑
M
❑ ❑
closure plan?
7. Do any of the structures need maintenance or improvement?
0000
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
0000
improvement?
Waste Apphration
10. Are there any required buffers, setbacks, or compliance altematives that need maintenance or improvement?
yes No NA NE
❑ 0 ❑ ❑
11. Is there evidence of incorrect application?
❑ M ❑ ❑
If yes, check the appropriate box below.
Excessive Ponding?
❑
Hydraulic Overload?
❑
Frozen Ground?
❑
Heavy metals (Cu, Zn, etc)?
❑
PAN?
❑
Is PAN > 10%/10 lbs.?
❑
Total 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
Small Grain (Wheat,
Barley, Oats)
Crop Type 3
Fescue (Hay)
Crop Type 4
Crop Type 5
Page: 3

Permit: AWC030008 Owner- Facllity: Edwin Joines
Facility Number: 030008
Inspection Date: 04/26/2005 Inspection Type: Compliance Inspection
Reason for Visit: Routine
Waste Application
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?
❑
■ ❑
Cl
17. Does the facility lack adequate acreage for land application?
❑
■ ❑
❑
18. Is there a lack of properly operating waste application equipment?
❑
YPR
■ ❑
Nn NA
❑
NE
Records and DDcun eats
19. Did the facility fail to have Certificate of Coverage and Permit readily available?
❑
■ ❑
❑
20. Does the facility fail to have all components of the CAWMP readily available?
❑
■ ❑
❑
If yes, check the appropriate box below
WUP?
❑
Checklists?
❑
Design?
❑
Maps?
❑
Other?
❑
21. Does record keeping need improvement?
■
❑
❑
❑
If yes, check the appropriate box below.
Waste Application?
■
120 Minute inspections?
❑
Weather code?
■
Weekly Freeboard?
❑
Transfers?
❑
Rainfall?
❑
Inspections after > 1 inch rainfall & monthly?
❑
Waste Analysis?
❑
Annual soil analysis?
❑
Crop yields?
■
Stocking?
■
Annual Certification Form (NPDES only)?
❑
22. Did the facility fail to install and maintain a rain gauge?
❑
■
❑
❑
23. If selected, did the facility fail to install and maintain a rainbreaker on irrigation equipment (NPDES only)?
❑
❑
■
❑
24. Did the facility fail to calibrate waste application equipment as required by the permit?
❑
■
❑
❑
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?
❑
❑
■
❑
Page: 4

•
•
Permit: AWC030008 Owner - Facility: Edwin Joines Facility Number: 030008
Inspection Date: 04/26/2005 Inspection Type: Compliance Inspection Reason for Visit: Routine
OthgrIssues
28. Were any additional problems noted which cause non-compliance of the Permit or CAWMP?
❑
■ ❑
❑
29. Did the facility fail to property dispose of dead animals within 24 hours andlor document and report those mortality
❑
■ ❑
❑
rates that exceed normal rates?
30. At the time of the inspection did the facility pose an air quality 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 Reviewer/inspector fail to discuss reviewlinspection with on -site representative?
❑
■ ❑
❑
33. Does facility require a follow-up visit by same agency?
❑
■ ❑
❑
Page: 5

�7'"'."
rF�aW1 Number _J Division of Soii and Wafer Co ervahota
O`Other. Agency ..
Type of Visit lI C mpliance Inspection 0 Operation Review 0 Structure Evaluation 0 Technical Assistance
Reason for Visit Routine Q Complaint 0 Follow up 0 Referral 0 Emergency 0 Other ❑ Denied Access
Date of Visit: Arrival Time: 110 LV I Departure Time: �„ County: u CWP—
Region: JV
Farm Name:h�5 io5�� Q.1 : U%Owner Email: if
Owner Name: ��� L � t � �5 Phone: q5L
Mailing Address: 4 11S, V
Physical Address: I� l �} a-a�^__
Facility Contact: �� Title:
Onsite Representative: LA_ I V1
Cc r 'lied Operator: Vr 'To 1 �, a `s
Sac1c-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
Integrator:
Phone No:6 �)
J 3r� 3 `f `l y �J
Operator Certification Number:
Back-up Certification Number:
Latitude: i''1[/�° ®i s� Longitude: ° ® ���
Design Current Design Current
Capacity Population Wet Poultry Capacity Population
❑ Layer
I I' 10Non-Laver
Dry Poultry
❑ Layers
❑ Non -Layers
❑ Pullets
❑ Turke s
❑ Turkey Poults
❑ Other
Discharges & Stream Impacts
1. Is any discharge observed from any part of the operation?
Discharge originated at: ❑ Structure ❑ Application Field ❑ Other
a. Was the conveyance man-made'?
b. Did the discharge reach waters of the State? (If yes, notify DWQ)
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: E4
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 A No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes ❑ No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes ❑ No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes] No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes No ❑ NA ❑ NE
12128104 Continued

Facility dumber: Date of Inspection
Waste Collection & Treatment
4. Is storage capacity (structural plus storm storage plus heavy rainfall) less than adequate?
❑ Yes *o
❑ NA
❑ NE
a. If yes. is waste level into the structural freeboard?
❑ Yes No
❑ NA
❑ NE
Structure Structure 2 Structure 3 Structure 4
Structure 5
Structure 6
Identifier:
Spillway?: �izS
Designed Freeboard (in):
Observed Freeboard (in): -17
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
El NA
El 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 *40
X
❑ NA ❑ NE
8. Do any of the stuctures lack adequate markers as required by the permit? ❑ Yes o El NA El NE
(Not applicable to roofed pits, dry stacks and/or wet stacks)
4. Does any part of the waste management system other than the waste structures require ❑ Yes P(No ElNA ElNE
maintenance or improvement?
Waste Application
M 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 t No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Excessive Ponding ❑ Hydraulic Overload ❑ Frozen Ground ❑ Heavy Metals (Cu, Zn, etc.)
❑ PAN ❑ PAN > 10% or ] 0 lbs ❑ Total Phosphorus ❑ Failure to Incorporate Manure/Sludge into Bare Soil
❑ Outside of Acceptable Crop Window El Evidence
��ofWind Drifl El Application Outside of Area
12. Crop type(s) f� :. UAPJ! MAL - J ��, ,��fir
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
gNA
❑ NE
17. Does the facility lack adequate acreage for land application?
❑ Yes
XNo
❑ 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): a
O
Reviewer/inspector Name !
Phone: ���
Reviewer/Inspector Sign
Date:
0
v'T` — - , V"" r" - — 12128104 Continued

Facility Number: D& Inspection
Required. Records & Documents ��,,
19. Did the facility fail to have Certificate of Coverage & Permit readily available? ❑ Yes l 6o ❑ NA El NE
20. Does the facility fail to have all components of the CAWMP readily available? If yes, check El Yes
!!!!llVNo ❑ NA ❑ NE
the appropriate box. ❑ WUP ❑ Checklists ❑ Design ❑Maps El Other
21. Doe ' record k6iingnee� ovement?Ifyes,chec the appropriate box Clow. Yes ❑ No ❑ NA ❑ NE
Waste ApWeekly Freeboard [ Waste Analysis L fXonthly
nalysisRainfall Crop Yield _ and 1 " Rain Inspections ea. her Cod
22. Did the facility fail to install and maintain a rain gauge? ❑ Yes KNo ❑ NA ❑ NE
23.
If selected, did the facility fail to install and maintain rainbreakers on irrigation equipment?
❑ Yes
❑ No
J�(NA
❑ NE
24.
Did the facility fail to calibrate waste application equipment as required by the permit?
❑ Yes
A No
❑ NA
❑ NE
25.
Did the facility fail to conduct a sludge survey as required by the permit?
❑ Yes
❑ No
WA
❑ NE
26.
Did the facility fail to have an actively certified operator in charge?
❑ Yes
❑ No
�KNA
❑ NE
27.
Did the facility fail to secure a phosphorus loss assessment (PLAT) certification?
❑ Yes
❑ No
ONA
❑ NE
Other Issues
28.
Were any additional problems noted which cause non-compliance of the permit or CAWMP?
❑ Yes
No
❑ NA
❑ NE
29.
Did the facility fail to properly dispose of dead animals within 24 hours and/or document
❑ Yes
No
ElNA
ElNE
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 proble , over application)
32.
Did Reviewer/Inspector fail to discuss review/inspection with an on -site representative?
ElYes
o
❑ NA
❑ NE
33,
Does facility require a follow-up visit by same agency?
❑ Yes
X No
❑ NA
❑ NE
Additional Comments and/or Drawings:
e ��e,�t-
f --CL I I 'IJL_� ;) _f
t
I
it
MAEM• s
3 0"2 l �s ssJ
12128104

nical Assistance Site Visit
40 QWion of Soil and Water Conservation'
O Natural Resources Conservation Service
O Soil and Water Conservation District
O Other...
Facility Number d3 - ® Date: 10/26/04 Time: 1 13:00 Time On Farm: 90 WSRO
Farm Name Joines Brothers Dairy County Alleghany Phone
336-372-4579
Mailing Address 4088 Hwy 221 South Sparta NC 28675
Onsite
Representative Edwin Joines 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
Q Routine
Q Response to DWQ/DENR referral
O Response to DSWC/SWCD referral
Q Response to complaint/local referral
O Requested by producer/integrator
O Follow-up
0 Emergency
O Other...
Design Current Design Current
Capacity Population Capacity Population
[I Layer
❑
❑ Wean to Feeder
El Feeder to Finish
Non -Layer
❑ Farrow to Wean
❑ Farrow to Feeder
❑ Farrow to Finish
❑ Gilts
❑ Boars
® Dairy 275 180
❑ 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?
5• Is there evidence of improper dead animal disposal that poses a threat to the environment ❑ yes Ono
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) 40
CROP TYPES lCorn, Silage I ISmall grain cover Orchard Grass (hay}
SPRAYFIELD
SOIL TYPES CeE CmE FnC2 FnE2
Cx
7. What type of technical assistance does the onsite representative feel is needed? (list in comment section)
03/10/03
® Dairy 275 180
❑ 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?
5• Is there evidence of improper dead animal disposal that poses a threat to the environment ❑ yes Ono
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) 40
CROP TYPES lCorn, Silage I ISmall grain cover Orchard Grass (hay}
SPRAYFIELD
SOIL TYPES CeE CmE FnC2 FnE2
Cx
7. What type of technical assistance does the onsite representative feel is needed? (list in comment section)
03/10/03

•
thl
Facility Number 03 - 8 Date:
10/26/04
PARAMETER
O No assistance provided/requested
❑ 8. Waste spill leaving site
TECHNICAL ASSISTANCE Needed
Provided
❑ 9. Waste spill contained on site
El 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
El13. 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. 21-1.0200 re -certification
❑ 16. Hydraulic overloading
31. Five & Thirty day Plans of Action (PoA)
❑
❑
32. Irrigation record keeping assistance
❑
❑
❑ 17. Deficient irrigation records
❑ 18. Late/missing waste analysis
❑ 19. Late/missing lagoon level records
33. Organizelcomputerization of records
❑
❑
34. Sludge Evaluation
❑
❑
❑ 20. Latelmissing soils analysis
❑ 21. 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
Cl 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
❑
❑
❑ Referred to NCDA Date:
43. Irrigation designlinstallation
❑
El
El Other...
system
Date:
44_ Secure irrigation information (maps, etc.)
El❑
LIST IMPROVEMENTS
45. Operating improvements (pull signs, etc.)
❑
❑
MADE BY OPERATION
46. Wettable Acre Determination
❑
❑
1 • Mr. Joines filled in the low areas along the creek
47. Evaluate WAD certification/rechecks
❑
❑
48. Crop evaluationlrecommendations
❑
❑
with Rock Dams to filter sediment runoff.
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.)
El
❑
4.
54. Mortality BMPs5.
❑
❑
55. Waste operator education (NPDES)
❑
❑
56. Operation & maintenance education
❑
❑
57. Record keeping education
❑
6.
58. Crop/forage management education
❑
❑
59. Soil and/or waste sampling education
❑
❑
03/10/03

•
Facility Number 03 - ® Date: 1 10/26 4 1
COMMENTS:
Waste analysis: 4/15/04 ALD (sl) 7.5 Ibs.N/1000 gals. B, SSD (s2) 5.4 lbs.Nlton B
Soil samples dated 3/31/04 looked OK.
Mr. Joines has received his new C.O.0 and general waste permit.
# 28. 1 provided Mr. Joines with some of the new record keeping forms.
# 57. 1 reviewed some of the new permit requirements with Mr. Joines.
Mr. Joines has just started hauling waste for the Fall crop applications. Records have not changed since
e last inspection, except for the freeboard and slurry / form.
Records and facility look good overall.
TECHNICAL SPECIALIST JRocky Durham
SIGNATURE
Date Entered: 10/27/04
Entered By: [Rocky Durham
03/10/03

on of Water uql ty
O.' tvision of Soil an'&Water Conservation
O Other Agency
Type of Visit © 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 08 Dale of Visit: 5/18/2004 Time: 1200
O Not O erational O Below Threshold
® Permitted ® Certified [3 Conditionally Certified [3 Registered Date Last Operated or Above Threshold: ..................
Farm Name: ,loincs.Rr.Qth s.Da.izy............................................. .............. County: Allgghau........................................ WSR.0........
,
Owner Name: EjjWjti..&.,liMMy................ joilleS........................................................... Phone No: - - .7.2-�kS3.9...d: �.3�2, 4.91 .....................
Mailing Address: 408$.H.wS.12.1,50.0h...............................................
Facility Contact: las wja.him.................................................. Title:
Onsite Representative: Ed..w.jmjoAnrs......................
Sflair.Xa...N.0.............................................................. 2S.6.7.5 ..............
Integrator:
Phone No:
Certified Operator:.Clay..E.....................................IOi10.15jj:.......................................... Operator Certification Number:2,1.445 .............................
Location of Farm:
Take Hwy 21 north from Sparta and make left onto Hwy 221 South.
❑ Swine ❑ Poultry ® Cattle ❑ Horse Latitude 36 • 30 31 f° Longitude 81 • 13 4 33 Lc
Design Current
Swine Canacity Population
❑ Wean to Feeder
❑ Feeder to Finish
❑ Farrow to Wean
❑ Farrow to Feeder
❑ Farrow to Finish
❑ Gilts
❑ Boars
Number of Lagoons 0 l
Discharp_es & Stream Impacts
Design Current Design Current
Poultry Capacity. Population Cattle Caoacitv Population
❑ Layer FC3
Dairy 275 234
❑ Non -Layer Non -Dairy
❑ Other
Total Design Capacity 275
Total SSLW 385,000
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 ® No
3. Were there any adverse impacts or potential adverse impacts to the Waters of the State other than from a discharge? ® Yes ❑ No
Waste Collection & Treatment
4. Is storage capacity (freeboard plus storm storage) less than adequate? ® Spillway ❑ Yes ® No
Structure I Structure 2 Structure 3 Structure 4 Structure 5 Structure 6
Identifier: ...... W.=C.Pond...... ....................................................................................................................................................
Freeboard (inches): 132
12112103 Continued

hacility Number: 03-08 Date of Inspection 1 5/18/2004 0 1 .
5. Are there any immediate threats to Veintegrity of any of the structures observed? (ie/ trees, severe erosion, ❑ Yes ® No
seepage, etc.)
6. Are there structures on -site which are not properly addressed and/or managed through a waste management or [] Yes ® No
closure plan?
(If any of questions 4-6 was answered yes, and the situation poses an
immediate public health or environmental threat, notify DWQ)
7. Do any of the structures need maintenance/improvement? [:]Yes ® No
8. Does any part of the waste management system other than waste structures require 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 ® 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) Small Grain Cover Fescue (Hay)
13. Do the receiving crops differ with those designated in the Certified Animal Waste Management Plan (CAWMP)? ❑ Yes ® No
14. a) Does the facility lack adequate acreage for land application? ❑ Yes ® No
b) Does the facility need a wettable acre determination? ❑ Yes ® No
c) This facility is pended for a wettable acre determination? ❑ Yes ® No
15. Does the receiving crop need improvement? ❑ Yes ® No
16. Is there a lack of adequate waste application equipment? ❑ Yes ® No
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 other comments.
-
Use drawings of facility to better explain situations. (use additional pages as necessary): s ❑ Field Copy ® Final NotesT
3. and 8. Need to fill in low areas along fence next to creek with rock to try to keep sediment and waste from channeling into creek.
+
Fence off corner of lot on west side of creek (below WSP) to allow vegetation to grow. These areas could be a water quality concern
during the winter. Check next visit.
7. Continue efforts to mow embankment of WSP.
21. Operator does not have most recent version. DWQ to mail copy to operator.
3. Fall `03 records look great. 2004 soil results look good.
9. Operator no longer has T-1908 so corn does NOT need to be added here (see 2003 review and inspection).
9. Need to add small grain to T-1908 F-3. Operator has not used yet, but may in the future.
/15/04 waste analyses: ALD=7.5 lbs. N/1000 gal and SSD=5.4 lbs. N/ton
Reviewer/Inspector Name iMelosa Rosebrock
Reviewer/Inspector Signature. Date: JC
12112103 Continued

FaFility Number: 03-08 I)&f Inspection 5/18/2004
Required Records & Documents
21. Fail to have Certificate of Coverage & General Permit or other Permit readily available? ® Yes ❑ No
22. Does the facility fail to have all components of the Certified Animal Waste Management Plan readily available?
(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
[0 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?
(iel discharge, freeboard problems, over application)
❑ Yes
® No
27.
Did Reviewer/]nspector 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
113
No violations or deficiencies were noted during this visit. You will receive no further correspondence about this visit.
12112103

0
vision of Water Quality'
tvision of Soil an'Cons a vatxan
_Q Other Ager►cy- = v
Type of Visit Compliance Inspection O Operation Review O Lagoon Evaluation
Reason for Visii JRoutine O Complaint O Follow up O Emergency Notification O Other ❑ Denied Access
Facility Number Date of Visit: s Time:
O Not Operational O Below Threshold
Permitted [3 Certified [] Conditionally Certified 13 Registered
T _t�l O
Name: ..;...1.n1.1 W_Zj......OLUO..
Owner Name:
Mailing Address:
Date Last Operatedfr Above Threshold: .........................
County: ,)qj"70
.........................
1Cf —
Phone No: 3��.cA..:..�.�1.....T.�`?........... . .
s� rn 3(0 Q , 4.� 5,
...--- .�---•--------------•------------...........................
FacilityContact: ,to ....11. �..�..ri �........ Title: ........................................................... Phone No: ...................................................
Onsite Representative:..... . .......�liQ. ne....................................... Integrator:...-----......... + J
Certified Operator:... .... .. /..........,PTO.'(;jet .:.................................. Operator Certification Number: .... a..I.. � ��_..
Location of Farm: rQ 4 J 61 lve'5
a I Cla" Pa
LeFf onfb Htov as 135uf-h e
❑ Swine ❑ Poultry VCattle ❑ Horse Latitude ®' F30' " Longitude • ' 4
Design. Current Design Current . _ -Deli _ .-­Cbrrenta.
Swine Pout
`Cattle
- _CacrPoCa aci . Po ulation. lY yplab-an ;
❑ Wean to Feeder
❑ Feeder to Finish
❑ Farrow to Wean
❑ Farrow to Feeder
❑ Farrow to Finish
❑ Gilts
❑ Boars
ti ber of Lagoons
Discharges & Stream Impacts
I . Is any discharge observed from any part of the operation? ❑ Yes ®No
Discharge originated at: ❑ Lagoon ❑ Spray Field ❑ Other I
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
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 IX
—
4. Is storage capacity (freeboard plus storm storage) less than adequate? X
pillway ❑ Yes �No
StruCCtir Structure 2 StructureStructure 4 Structure 5 Structure 6
\� Identifier: t..PO... .............................................
/I�rcboard (inches):
1 d /I2103 Continued

` Facility Number: -- Date of Inspection 0 .
S. Are there any immediate threats to the integrity of any of the structures observed? (ie/ treesevere 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 XNO
closure plan?
(If any of questions 4-6 was answered yes, and the situation poses an
immediate public health or environmental threat, notify DWQ)
7. Do any of the structures need maintenance/improvement? ❑ Yes No
8. Does any part of the waste management system other than waste structures require maintenancelimprovement? Yes ❑ No
9. Do any stuctures lack adequate, gauged markers with required maximum and minimum liquid level ❑ Yes /b<No
elevation markings?
Waste Application
10. Are there any buffers that need maintenance/improvement? ❑ Yes 9No
11. Is there evidence of over application? If yes, check the appropriate box below. ElYes No
❑ Excessive Ponding ❑ PAN ❑ Hydraulic Overload ❑ Frozen Ground ❑ Copper and/or Zinc
12. Crop type (:(ern 1Ce..r-
13. Do the receiving crops differ with those designated in the Certified Animal Waste Management Plan (CAWMP)? ❑ Yes XNo
14, a) Does the facility lack adequate acreage for land application? ❑ Yes o
b) Does the facility need a wettable acre determination? ❑ Yes No
c) This facility is pended for a wettable acre determination? ❑ Yes o
15. Does the receiving crop need improvement? ❑ Yes o
16. Is there a lack of adequate waste application equipment? El Yes ;o
Odor 14sues
17. Does the discharge pipe from the confinement building to the storage pond or lagoon fail to discharge at/or below
liquid level of lagoon or storage pond with no agitation?
18. Are there any dead animals not disposed of properly within 24 hours? _ ❑ Yes No
19. Is there any evidence of wind drift during land application? (i.e. residue on neighboring vegetation, asphalt, ❑ Yes No
roads, building structure, and/or public property)
20. At the time of the inspection did the facility pose an odor or air quality concern? If yes, contact a regional ❑ Yes Yo
Air Quality representative immediately.
., -. �. ,.... .
Cornmehts-(refer to question-#) `Eiplain any YES ariswers•and/or any -recommendations 6r any otherr'comments. _ _
Use -drawings of:facility to better`explain situadoi (use:additional pages as necessary) Field Copy ❑Final Notes
U raft'03 re-w( s
e
n nt eft-� f
Tt\)k_e-,a +m �-R_in t600-ceaS Wbnq Vence
raC 4 4ry ­6 K e /LL)2_V� -rv-om Cha hel #r
(� C.r'e - ® xx'�oC�rn� of ion -on S ode of Cr`.��e
�b �d a U-)c� tc)n duri nq w lnf,o�. C .1�w Is
Reviewer/Inspector Name
Reviewer/Inspector Signature: Date: d
12112103 Continued

Facility Number: — 0 of Inspection
Required Records & Document~
21. Fail to have Certificate of Coverage & General Permit or other Permit readily available?
22. Does the facility fail to have all components of the Certified Animal Waste Management Plan readily available?
(ie/ WUP, checklists, design, maps, etc.)
23. Does record keeping need improvement? If yes, check the appropriate box below.
❑ 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?
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)
3I. 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?
Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes No
❑ Yes X
o
❑ Yes No
n
❑ Yes No
❑ Yes No
❑ Yes o
❑ Yes No
❑ Yes 'XNo
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ 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
113 No violations or deficiencies were noted during this visit. You will receive no further correspondence about this visit.
Add itrona orriments-an m rawings: -
J
At' AL
C)
ee-P�
lid 5m.4dt rca, h d —F � $ -t F - 3
OwGt� r pU ""'t vS� 1 1
%. N/ IbcO e -
Syb S_�E
Y
12112103

ical Assistance Site Visit Report.,-
0 DAWn of Soil and Water Conservatiorlo
O Natural Resources Conservation Service -
0 Soil and Water Conservation District
O Other...
Facility Number 03 - U Date: 10/14/03 Time: 1 9:45 Time On Farm: 65 WSRO
Faun Name Joines Brothers Dai
County Alleghany Phone: [phone]
Mailing Address 4088 Hwy 221 South Sparta NC 28675
Onsite
Representative Edwin Joines 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
OO 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
Wean to Feeder
❑ Feeder to Finish
❑ Non -Layer
❑ Farrow to Wean
❑ Farrow to Feeder
❑ Farrow to Finish
❑ Gilts
❑ Boars
® Dairy
❑ Non -Dairy
® Dairy
❑ Non -Dairy
275
210
❑ 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
Structure1 Structure 2 Structure 3 Structure 4 Structure S
Identifier WSp
Level (Inches) 36 F�—�
CROP TYPES lCorn, Silage Ismail grain silage I Jorchard Grass (hay)
SPRAYFIELD
SOIL TYPES CeE CmE FnC2 FnE2 Cx
7. What type of technical assistance does the onsite representative feel is needed? (list in comment section)
03/10/03

A
Facility Number 03 - 8 Date:
10/14/03
PARAMETER
Q No assistance provided/requested
❑ 8. Waste spill leaving site
TECHNICAL ASSISTANCE Needed
Provided
❑ 9. Waste spill contained on site
25. Waste Plan Revision or Amendment
®
❑
❑ % Level in structural freeboard
Waste Plan Conditional Amendment
❑
❑
❑ 11. Level in storm storage
26.
27. Review or Evaluate Waste Plan w/producer
❑
❑
[112. Waste structure integrity compromised
28. Forms Need (list in comment section)
❑
❑
[113. Waste structure needs maintenance
29. Missing Components (list in comments)
❑
❑
❑ 14. Over application >= 10% & 10 lbs.
❑
❑
❑ 15. Over application < 10% or < 10 lbs.
30. 21-I.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. Latelmissing lagoon level records
34. Sludge Evaluation
❑
❑
❑ 20. 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
❑
❑
❑ Referred to NCDA Date:
43. Irrigation design/installation
El
El
El 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 certificationlrec hacks
❑
❑
48. Crop evaluation/recommendations
❑
❑
2.
49. Drainage worklevaluation
❑
❑
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
El
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

6
Facility Number 03 - ® Date: 1 10/14/03 I
COMMENTS:
Waste analysis: 3-10-03 LSD 9.5 Ibs.N/1000 gals. B
Soil analysis dated 3-26-03
T1908 still needs to be changed from Hay to the corn/wheat rotation. The acres on T1966 still need to be
corrected.
Facility and records look good overall. No application records to look at since the Spring of 2003. Mr.
nines is hauling waste today for the Wheat crop.
TECHNICAL SPECIALIST lRocky Curham
SIGNATURE
Date Entered: 10/15/03
Entered By: Rock Durham
03/10/03

division of Water'Quality
ivision of Soil and Water Conservation
;Q'Other Agency
Type of Visit O Compliance Inspection O Operation Review O Lagoon Evaluation
Reason for Visit O Routine Q Complaint O Follow up O Emergency Notification O Other ❑ Denied Access
Daie,d•\'isit: 07/14/20(13 Time: 130fl
Facility Number 03 0$
Q Not O erational Q Below Threshold
® Permitted ® Certified [3 Conditionally Certified 0 Registered Date Last Operated or Above Threshold:
Farm Name: Jojmes�Rt:oAhemJ)airy.............................. ..................... ......... County: McghilaY ............................... }'.YSW------
Owner Name: Phone No: 331�-72:97_2.4C�Iimoly3f.3i_4443 ----
MailingAddress: 4QB . »Y.2 1. Autlx..........................................................................$P.4xU..x(;............................................................. 286.75 ..............
Facility Contact: Edri1a.J.Q!m..................................... Title: ............................................... Phone No: W11.3.36.30, 44.t............
Onsite Representative:iK�ul�Qixles - - - - - - - - - - - - ----- --- - -- Integrator: --- ----- ------------------ ----- - - -..
Certified Operator: Ctax.E................................... jolttle jrI......................................... Operator Certification Number: z149S.............................
Location of Farm:
rake Hwy 21 north from Sparta and make left onto Hwy 221 South. A
❑ Swine ❑ Poultry ® Cattle ❑ Horse Latitude ®• . 30 31 Li Longitude F-8—T-1 ' 13 1 33 «
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_Po ufation
❑ Layer ®-Dairy 275 210
❑ Non -Layer ❑ Nan -Dairy
❑ Other - -
__ ---.-Total Design Capacity 275
T Total SSLW 385,000
Number of Lagoons 0 ❑ Subsurface Drains Present In Lagoon Area 10 Spray Field Area
Holding Ponds / Solid Traps 1 ❑ N, 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 gal/min'?
d. Does discharge bypass it lagoon system'? (If yes. notify DWQ)
2. Is there evidence of past discharge from any part of the operation?
3. Were there any adverse impacts or potential adverse impacts to the Waters of the State other than from a discharge?
Waste Collection & Treatment _
4. Is storage capacity (freeboard plus storm storage) less than adequate? ® Spillway
Structure I Structure 2 Structure 3 Structure 4 Structure 5
Identifier: ---Wasw--•--•--•--•--•--•--•--•-------•--•--•--•--•--------•-- -
Freeboard (inches): 72 _
05103JOI
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes
❑ No
❑ Yes
® No
❑ Yes
® No
❑ Yes
® No
Structure 6
Continued

Facility,Number: 03-08 Dale of Inspection 07/14/2003 i
5. Are there any immediate threats to thegrity of any of the structures observed? (ie/ trees, severe erosion, 0 Yes 0 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) Fescue (Hay) Small Grain (Wheat, Barley,
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 or other Permit readily available?
18. Does the facility fail to have all components of the Certified Animal Waste Management Plan readily available?
(ie/ WUP, checklists, design, maps, etc.)
19. Does record keeping need improvement? (ie/ irrigation, freeboard, waste analysis & soil sample reports)
20. Is facility not in compliance with any applicable setback criteria in effect at the time of design?
21. Did the facility fail to have a actively certified operator in charge?
22. Fail to notify regional DWQ of emergency situations as required by General Permit?
(ie/ discharge, freeboard problems, over application)
23. Did Reviewer/Inspector fail to discuss review/inspection with on -site representative?
24. Does facility require a follow-up visit by same agency?
25. Were any additional problems noted which cause noncompliance of the Certified AWMP?
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes ® No
® Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes ® No
® Yes ❑ No
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 Notds
Waste analyses:
_
3/10/03 = 9.5 Ibs N/1000 gal. and 10124/02 = 9.5 lbs. N/1000 gal.
19. 2002 and 2003 soils ok.
19. Don't forget to deduct the PAN applied in the Fall on small grain from the Spring corn if the small grain is not harvested.
25. T-1908 needs to have corn added since waste was applied there this Spring.
Reviewer/Inspector Name el' Rwbrock
Reviewer/inspector Signatur Date:
05103101 _L U Continued

Facility Number: 03-08 40 a of I nspection 07/14/2003
Odor Issues
26. Does the discharge pipe from the confinement building to the storage pond or lagoon fail to discharge atlor below
liquid level of lagoon or storage pond with no agitation?
27. Are there any dead animals not disposed of properly within 24 hours?
28. Is there any evidence of wind drift during land application? (i.e. residue on neighboring vegetation, asphalt,
roads, building structure, and/or public property)
24. 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
itiona omments and/orDrawings:
05103101
05103101

Ad . • .IPM
Division of Water Quality
Q Division.of Soil and Water Conservation
O Other Agency
Type of Visit Compliance Inspection O Operation Review O Lagoon Evaluation
Reason for Visit )6 Routine O Complaint O Follow up O Emergency Notification O Other ❑ Denied Access
Faciliry Number Hate of�'isit: '—=�f- ime:
�f Not O erational Below Threshold
Permitted L� Certif ed O Conditionally Certified, [3Registered Date Last Operated or Above Threshold:
x
rm Name: / ' �Q� Q '�r� lL C�4 County:
Owner Name: d u)i n 4-� I Phone No:
Mailing Address: � Q as a '96 7�i I
Facility Contact: Edwin Z-Ct i r1la itle: Phone No:_
Onsite Representative: Integrator:
Certified Operator: ALAA P_rl Operator Certification Number:
Location of Farm:
[]Swine ❑ Poultry *-b� Cattle ❑ Horse Latitude 0" Longitude 0 y
Design Current
awine FMWeanto Feeder t,a actty� a utaaon
❑ Feeder to Finish
LJ Farrow to Feeder
❑ Farrow to Finish
❑ Gilts
Number of Lagoons
Holding Ponds / Solid.Traps .
Design Current Design Current
Poultry Capacity population Cattle Capacity Population
❑ Laver i M Dairy
❑ Non -Laver I I Non -Dairy I I X14
❑ Other
Total Design Capacity
. I Q. "% r
Total SSLW L
Subsurface Drains Present 11EILagoon Area
No Liuuid Waste
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 galimin?
d. Does discharge bypass a lagoon system? (If yes, notify DWQ)
2. Is there evidence of past discharge from any part of the operation?
3. Were there any adverse impacts or potential adverse 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? ON Spillway
Stru I Structure 2 Structure 3 Structure 4 Structure 5
Identifier:
Freeboard (inches): 74
05103101
❑ Sprav Field Area i
❑ Yes XNo
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes
❑ No
❑ Yes
)<t
`>rNo
El Yes
❑ Yes
< 0
Structure 6
Continued

Facility Number: — Date of inspection
5. Are there any immediate threats to the integrity of any of the structures observed? (ie/ trees, severe erosion, ❑ Yes X
No
seepage.'ete.)
6. Are there structures on -site which are not properly addressed and/or managed through a waste management or
closure plan? El Yes X 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 anv 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 )jNo
9. Do any stuctures lack adequate, gauged markers with required maximum and minimum liquid level
elevation markings? ❑ Yes No
%i'aste Auplication
10. Are there any buffers that need maintenance/improvement? ❑ Yes No
11. Is there evidence of over application? ❑ Exicessive Ponding ❑JAN El Hydraulic Overload ❑Yes �rNo
12. Crop type to
13. Do the receiving crops differ with those designated in die Certified Animal Waste Management Plan (CAWMP)?
❑ Yes
o
14. a) Does the facility lack adequate acreage for land application?
El Yes
b) Does the facility need a wettable acre determination?
ElYeso
jNo
c) This facility is pended for a wettable acre determination?
ElYeso
15. Does the receiving crop need improvement?
ElYeso
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?
(ieI «'UP, checklists, design, maps. etc.)
❑ Yes
bNo
19. Does record keeping need improvement? (ieI irrigation, freeboard. waste analysis & soil sample reports)
Yes
❑ No
20. is facility not in compliance with any applicable setback criteria in effect at the time of design?
❑ Yes
o
21. Did the facility fail to have a actively certified operator in charge?
❑ Yes
to
22. Fail to notify regional DWQ of emergency situations as required by General Permit?
(ieI discharge, freeboard problems. over application)
❑ Yes
ANo
21 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 A%VMP?
XYes
❑ No
0 No violations or deficiencies were noted during this visit. You will receive no further correspondence about this visit.
Continents (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 Cory ❑Final Notes
3�Ib /0 3 b5 ficoo L 1
la� a��o Z � � � •S 1��5 /�o o L ��
I
Reviewer/Inspector Name - -- - _ _ _�._ __ ___ . . _- _ -- _ •- -- - ,--- -- - --- _ -. -.. -...
�2
Reviewer/Inspector Signatur Date:
05103101 1 1 t; _ -' 1 1— I f Continued

-7117111)
Facility- lumber: — ate of lnspccti�wt
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?
2T 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 submersed fill pipe or a permanentftemporary cover`?
Additional Comments and/or Drawin_s:
Yes \`o
❑ Yes No
as. T
I q • �� b�2 � boa , a 003 „ a;e,�
O5103101

,iston of Water Quality
Dtvivision of Soil and Water Conservation
Q 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
Facility Number 03 8 Chute of Visit: l0l7/2t?02 Time: 11:45
0 Not Operational Q Below Threshold
® Permitted ® Certified E3 Conditionally Certified 0 Registered pate Last Operated or Above Threshold
Farm Name: J.oimecprot1kmDairY........................................................... County: ARcgha" ............................... W-S&?--.--.
Owner Name: �d`3an>&-limmy - - --- James-- _ - - - - --- - - - - - - Phone No: 3�C'12=47g - - --- ---------- --- - -
MailingAddress:..4. $$.II.yY.y. 1. 0utbl.......................................................................... $P-0r'k'.NQ-- ......................................................... 2867.5 ..............
Facilitv Contact:........................................................... Title Phone No
Onsite Representative: - - - - -------- --- --- - - - - ---- Integrator: ---------- --- -- ---- - - - --- - - ---
Certified Operator: Clay-E. ............................... J.oiu1.�mjjrn......................................... Operator Certification Number: 21445.............................
Location of Farm:
Take Hwy 21 north from Sparta and make left onto Hwy 221 South.
❑ Swine ❑ Poultry ® Cattle ❑ Horse Latitude ®e 30 L 316C Longitude Sl • 13 { 33 44
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 Cavacitv Population Cattle Capacity Population
❑ Layer I I ®:Dairy 275 1 200
❑ Non -Layer I ❑ Non -Dairy
❑ Other
Total Design Capacity 275
Total SSLW 385,000
Number of Lagoons ❑ Subsurface Drains Present ❑ Lagoon Area 10 Spray Field Area
Holding Ponds / Solid Traps 1 JE1 No Liquid Waste Management System
DischarUes & Stream Impact
I, Is any discharge observed from any part of the operation?
Discharge originated at: ❑ Lagoon ❑ Spray Field []Other
a. If discharge is observed, was the conveyance man-made'?
b, li' discharge is observed. did it reach Water of the State'? (If yes, notify DWQ)
c. li'discharge is observed, what is the estimated flow in gal/mini
d. Does discharpe bypass a lagoon system? (ll'yes, notify DIN'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 1 Structure 2 Structure 3 Structure 4 Structure 5
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes ® No
Structure 6
Identi fier:--.--.--.--.-..-.
Freeboard (inches): 50
05103101
Continued

Facility Number: 03-8 Dale (it' Inspection 10/7/21102 0
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 Ammlicalion
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 (Wheat, Barley,
13. Do the receiving crops differ with those designated in the Certified Animal Waste Management Plan (CAWMP)? ❑ Yes ® No
14. a) Does the facility lack adequate acreage for land application? ❑ Yes ® No
b) Does the facility need a wettable acre determination? ❑ Yes ® No
c) This facility is pended for a wettable acre determination? ❑ Yes ® No
15.
Does the receiving crop need improvement?
❑ Yes
® No
16.
Is there a lack of adequate waste application equipment?
❑ Yes
® No
Required
Records & Documents
17.
Fail to have Certificate of Coverage & General Permit or other Permit readily available?
❑ Yes
® No
18,
Does the facility fail to have all components of the Certified Animal Waste Management Plan readily available?
(ie/ WUP, checklists, design, maps, etc.)
❑ Yes
® No
19.
Does record keeping need improvement? (ie/ irrigation, freeboard, waste analysis & soil sample reports)
❑ Yes
® No
20.
Is facility not in compliance with any applicable setback criteria in effect at the time of design?
❑ Yes
® No
21.
Did the facility fail to have a actively certified operator in charge?
❑ Yes
® No
22.
Fail to notify regional DWQ of emergency situations as required by General Permit?
(ie/ discharge, freeboard problems, over application)
❑ Yes
® No
23.
Did Reviewer/Inspector fail to discuss review/inspection with on -site representative?
❑ Yes
® No
24.
Does facility require a follow-up visit by same agency?
❑ Yes
® No
25.
Were any additional problems noted which cause noncompliance of the Certified AWMP?
❑ Yes
® No
0 No violations or deficiencies were noted during this visit. You will receive no further correspondence about this visit.
Comments (refer to question #): Explain any YES answers and/or any recommendations or any other comments.
Use drawings of facility to better explain situations. (use additional pages as necessary): ❑ Field Copy ❑ Fina] Notes
Facility and records are in compliance.
_
* The WUP still needs to be updated for T 1966 ( field acres don't match the maps)
Reviewer/Inspector Name Rocky Durham
Reviewer/Inspector Signature: Date:
O5103101 Continued

Facility Number: 03-8 a 4)f Irispccti1)n lo/7/2002
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 Comments and/orDrawings:
Waste analysis: 4-29-02 ALD 9.5 lbs.N/1000 gals. B
Soil analysis dated 4-16-02 : A couple of fields were calling for around one ton of lime per acre.
IA
05103101

�i ision of Water Quality
ivision of Soil and Water Conservation
O Other Agency
Type of Visit O Compliance Inspection O Operation Review O Lagoon Evaluation
Reason for Visit O Routine O Complaint Q Follow up O Emergency Notification O Other ❑ Denied Access
Date of Visit: 4/tb12002 Time: 1300
Facility Number 03 OS
0 Not O erational 0 Beloiv'l'hreshold
® Permitted ® Certified © Conditionally Certified 0 Registered Date Last Operated or Above Threshold: ...................
Farm Name: ............................................................................... county: Allcgkamy ................................. N SRQ........
Owner Name: fj3[AO sS .,laAMMy................ a.9iftos........................................... Phone No: 33.6-31Z-4579 ...........................................................
MailingAddress: 49.$$.,Uw,.,.2Z.1..5.Q.Mht......................................................................... Spar.1.a... NC............................................................. zb.73 ..............
Facility Contact: Ediv a.JIQ1wu.................................................. Title: ................................................................ Phone No:...................................................
Onsite Representative: I;xa.{.d1yjA).J.Ritles..aLjd.C.raitgjl2llnt $.......................... Integrator:.................
Certified Operator:Clay.E.................................... J.Wrics.Jr......................................... Operator Certification Number:Z1445 .............................
Location of Farm:
Take Hwy 21 north from Sparta and make left onto Hwy 221 South. +
❑ Swine ❑ Poultry ® Cattle ❑ Horse Latitude F 36 • 30 31 Longitude 81 •
Design Current
Swine Cauacity 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 275 209
❑ Non -Layer JEI Non -Dairy
❑ Other
Total Design Capacity 275
Total SSLW 385,000
Number of Lagoons 0 ❑ Subsurface Drains Present ❑ Lagoon Area 10 Spray 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/min?
d, Does discharge bypass a lagoon system? (if yes, notify DWQ) ❑ Yes ❑ No
2. Is there evidence of past discharge from any part of the operation? ❑ Yes ® No
3. Were there any adverse impacts or potential adverse impacts to the Waters of the State other than from a discharge? ❑ Yes ® No
Waste Collection & Treatment
4. Is storage capacity (freeboard plus storm storage) less than adequate? ® Spillway ❑ Yes ® No
Structure 1 Structure 2 Structure 3 Structure 4 Structure 5 Stricture 6
Identifier: ......Wasie.QA.nd.................................................................
Freeboard (inches): 48
05103101 # 3 �� �h� Continued

Facility Number: 03-08 Date of Inspection 1 4/16/2002
5. Are there any immediate threats to the inteb'TnY of any of the structures observed? (ie/ trees, 3'h4ere erosion,
seepage, etc.)
6. Are there structures on -site which are not properly addressed and/or managed through a waste management or
closure plan?
(If any of questions 4-6 was answered yes, and the situation poses an
immediate public health or environmental threat, notify DWQ)
7. Do any of the structures need maintenance/improvement?
8. Does any part of the waste management system other than waste structures require maintenance/improvement?
9. Do any stuctures lack adequate, gauged markers with required maximum and minimum liquid level
elevation markings?
Waste Application
10. Are there any buffers that need maintenance/improvement?
11. Is there evidence of over application? ❑ Excessive Ponding ❑ PAN ❑ Hydraulic Overload
❑ Yes N No
❑ Yes N No
❑ Yes N No
❑ Yes N No
❑ Yes N No
❑ Yes N No
❑ Yes N No
12. Crop type Corn (Silage & Grain) Fescue (Graze) Small Grain (Wheat, Barley, Small Grain Overseed
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 deternnation? ❑ 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
Reouired Records & Documents
17.
Fail to have Certificate of Coverage & General Permit or other Permit readily available?
N 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
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 fait 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 4): 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): Fq Field Copy N Final Notes
17. Operator did not have copy of COC and permit. DWQ will send copy.
19. T-1966 F-1 and 2 could not be matched to maps in CAWMP and doesn't match operators records. T-1966 F-1CL is 19.3 acres on
map and CAWMp lists 38.8 acres. Need to check on this.
19. 2002 soil samples taken, results not back yet.
19. Don't forget to write in commercial nitrogen applied to fields receiving animal waste. Also, if winter crop is not harvested or grazed
then the PAN applied in Fall must be deducted from corn PAN allowed.
19. CAWMP lists PAN for animal as 120, and 200 total. Operator wants to use up to 200 lbs. animal PAN.
Reviewer/Inspector Name 114eliss Rosebrock
Reviewer/Inspector Signature: Date:
05103101 Continued

Facility Number: 03-08 6 of Inspection 4/16/2002 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.)
3 I. 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?
47
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes ❑ No
O5103101
J

•
pt rYQ su r
s
d? DIyLSI©R.Of Water Q,,,}.,s0
f A
Division of Soil and'. Water Conservattoa •'
- a
-
Agency
O Other;
Type of Visit
Compliance Inspection O Operation Review O Lagoon Evaluation
Reason for Visit
)e Routine
O Complaint O Follow up O Emergency Notffication O Other
❑ Denied Access
Facility Number Date of Visit: Q -me: ®O
10 Not Operational Q Below Threshold
OPermitted A Certified [3 Conditionally Certified 0 Registered Date Last Operated or Above Threshold:
Farm Name: .. Q.025..... &&.yr ....b .u:....................... I....-...... County..IC7I1< t"� .. - c - ------- ...........
—�` .s79
Owner Name:.......�4,}.� �....-......�Lii!j.�..- ....�,.J.I�.LC]i2.S... .. Phone No: ;� � ...........1.........:.
.................. ..........................................
Facility Contact: .. .............• .. ..4: ...-.` i 1: tle:........................ ...................................... Phone No:
Mailing Address:.... $.�... ...a: .. ... ` ir...r. ...1.
r
.. .........I..... .........
Onsite Representative:...... ........................... Giy",l'�Integrator:........................ i l
.-..F. ....................................... ..
Certified Operator:......•, I. (,�, .1'i , �. �Operator Certification Number:
Location of Farm: �]
y a N• m 5 Le one ' a-ar
❑ Swine ❑ Poultry cattle ❑ Horse Latitude ®a �� �66 Longitude • 4 ®64
Design Current
Swine Canneity Ponulation
❑ Wean to Feeder
❑ Feeder to Finish
❑ Farrow to Wean
❑ Farrow to Feeder
❑ Farrow to Finish
❑ Gilts
❑ Boars
Design Current
Poultry Capacity . Population Ca tie
❑ Layer I I Dairy
❑ Non -Layer I 1 ❑ Non -Dail
❑ Other
Total Design Capacity
Total SSLW
Design Current
a
Number of Lagoons ❑ Subsurface Drains Present ❑ Lagoon Area ❑ Spray Field Area
Holdiing Ponds I 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 [I 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)
r
c. II' 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?
/! �.S^trtuc ure Structure 2 Structure 3
Identifier: .1 ........
................................................................ 1
Freeboard (inches): `4
5/00
Spillway
/ Structure 4 Structure 5
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes PNO
o
ElYes
❑ Yes )� No
Structure 6
Continued on back

Facility Number: — Date of Inspection
• 5. Are there any immediate threats to the integrity of any of the structures observed? (ie/ trees, severe erosion, ❑ Yes XNo
seepage, etc.)
6. Are there structures on -site which are not properly addressed and/or managed through a waste management or
closure plan? ❑Yes � 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 KNo
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 No
11. Is there evidence of er application? ❑ Excessive Ponding ❑ PAN ❑ Hydraulic Overload ❑ Yes No
A 1 1_r L, ,
13. Do the receiving crops differ with those designated in the Certified Animal W
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?
Management Plan (CAWMP)? ❑ Yes ' No
❑ Yes o
❑ Yes No
❑ Yes bdNo
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?
o viQlaiioris :oi- deficiencies •wire no(ed• ooing �his'visit! - Y;oii wiil-r, eceiytz no futt�gr ;
corresporicience.'about: this visit:
[I Yes ],No
❑ Yes W No
XYes ❑ No
❑ Yes )(No
Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes
No
❑ Yes
❑ Yes XNo
❑ Yes o
❑ Yes No
❑ Yes XNo
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):
-F_ t q to b Fi e-05 14-a 4Lit, _exe 4 VLA, ft PAN — UD V � 'WA ?fo
-
Reviewer/Inspector Name
Reviewer/Inspector Signature: Date: 5100

IHaivility Number: — Ote 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 o
liquid level of lagoon or storage pond with no agitation?
27. Are there any dead animals not disposed of properly within 24 hours? ❑ Yes No
28. Is there any evidence of wind drift during land application? (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? 110
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? ❑ Yes P(`0
32. Do the flush tanks lack a submerged fill pipe or a permanent/temporary cover? o
C?
14,L) e4-7�V)Pel� Nl-,,f�L)
uutel,' W zg Air-,
th4,_ rev PAN Y#Z-ed 6A.A" 4k4"U-1-
a.¢pvwweel-
19 CAS �/rx-k PAS M oN
5100

'` vision of Water Quality
vision of Soil and Water Conservation 0
0 Other Agency z
f
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 g Date of Visit: 8/23I2001 Time: 12:30
Q Not O perational Q Below Threshold
13Permitted ® Certified O Conditionally Certified [3Registered Date Last Operated or Above Threshold: ..............
Farm Name: dollads.i r.Qtli�xs.I7ai�y.................................................................... .. County: AjIgglially ........................................ W.S13Q........
Owner Name: Edwin.&,TM][17.Y................ JSIhms.................. ........................................ Phone No: 33.fir.3.72.4579 ...........................................................
MailingAddress: ......................................................................... Sputa ... NC............................................................. N.675 ..............
FacilityContact: .............................................................................. Title:................................................................ Phone No:...................................................
Onsite Representative: E.0yim.1.91au.............................................................................. Integrator:...............................................................................
Certified Operator:Clay......................................... J.Qjges ................................................ Operator Certification Number: 2.1.4.45.............................
Location of farm:
Take Hwy 21 north from Sparta and make left onto Hwy 221 South. +
❑ Swine ❑ Poultry ® Cattle ❑ Horse Latitude 36 •F 30 31 4= Longitude 81 • 13 33
-11
Design Current
Swine Canneity Ponnlation
❑ 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 275 200
❑ Non -Layer ❑Non -Dairy
❑ Other
Total Design Capacity 275
Total SSLW 385,000
Number of Lagoons JE1 Subsurface Drains Present ❑ Lagoon Area ❑ Spray Field Area
Holding Ponds / Solid Traps I ❑ 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 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
Stricture 6
ldenti Fier:.......................................................................... .........................................................................................................................................
Freeboard (inches): 36
05103101 Continued

Facility Number: 03-8 Date of Inspection 8/23/2001 .. ..
5. Are there any immediate threats to the into ity of any of the structures observed? (ie/ treeoere 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 N 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 N 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
N No
11. Is there evidence of over application? ❑ Excessive Ponding ❑ PAN ❑ Hydraulic Overload
❑ Yes
N No
12. Crop type Corn (Silage & Grain) Small Grain (Wheat, Barley, Timothy, Orchard, & Rye
13. Do the receiving crops differ with those designated in the Certified Animal Waste Management PIan (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
N No
16. Is there a tack 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
❑ 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)
❑ Yes
N 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?
(iel discharge, freeboard problems, over application)
❑ Yes
N No
23.
Did ReviewerlInspector fail to discuss review/inspection with on -site representative?
❑ Yes
® No
24.
Does facility require a follow-up visit by same agency?
❑ Yes
N No
25.
Were any additional problems noted which cause noncompliance of the Certified AWMP?
❑ Yes
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
# 9. Recommend a graduated marker ( every 6 inches } with top of spillway and max. liquid level indicated for the general permit.
Facility is in compliance and records look good.
Reviewer/Inspector Name Rocky Durham
Reviewer/Inspector Signature: Date:
05103101 Continued

Facilly Number: 03-8 Date of Inspection 8/23/2001
Odor Issues
26.
Does the discharge pipe from the confinement building to the storage pond or lagoon fail to discharge at/or below
❑ Yes ❑ 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
an orr
05103101
J

ivision of Water Quality
'vision of Soil and Water Conservation
Other Agency
of Visit Q 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 OS Date of Visit: 5/18/2001 Time: 1060
tO Not Operational O Below Threshold
E] Permitted ® Certified 13 Conditionally Certified [3 Registered Date Last Operated or Above Threshold: •.....•..•..•.
Farm Name: dai>at:S.totbtt<us.)ailcy................................................. ..................... County: A►A9ghatotx......................................... WSRQ........
Owner Name: FdWlitxs&.J.ipnlo y................ Joinm.5............................ ...... Phone No: 336-3. 2:45.7.9........................... ........................ ................................
Mailing Address: 4.$$.Hryx_�zJ.rSA.RII)1............
Facility Contact: EdwirlJoi1m_.........................
Onsile Representative: lid.?y,UR.j9jRc&................
Certified Operator: .1;ay ....................
Location of Farm:
................................................... Suarla...N.0 ............................................................. 28.6.7.5 ..............
............ Title: ............................................................... . Phone No:................................. ..................
................................................... Integrator:......................................................................................
Jpipto................................................ Operator Certification Number:Z1.445......
rake Hwy 21 north from Sparta and make left onto Hwy 221 South.
❑ Swine ❑ Poultry ® Cattle ❑ Horse Latitude 36 • 30 1 3144 Longitude 81 ' 13 4 33
Design Current
Swine Canacity Ponulation
❑ Wean to Feeder
Cl Feeder to Finish
❑ Farrow to Wean
❑ Farrow to Feeder
❑ Farrow to Finish
❑ Gilts
❑ Boars
Design Current
Design Current
Poultry
Capacity Population Cattle
Capacity Population
❑ Layer
I
I
® Dairy
275
206
❑ Non -Layer
I
I
JE1 Non -Dairy
❑ Other
Total Design Capacity
275
Total SSLW
385,000
Number of Lagoons 0 ❑ Subsurface Drains Present ❑ Lagoon Area ❑ Spray Field Area
Holding Ponds / Solid Traps 1 10 No Liquid Waste Management System
Discharges & Streun Impact
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 ® No
3. Were there any adverse impacts or potential adverse impacts to the Waters of the State other than from a discharge? ❑ Yes ® No
Wastte, 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: Wasze.Ponds....................................... .................................... ................................... ....................................................................
Freeboard (inches): 96
05103101 Continued

Facility Number: 03-08 is Date of Inspection 5/18/2001
5. Are there any immediate threats to the integrity of any of the structures observed? (ie/ trees severe erosion,
seepage, etc.)
6. Are there structures on -site which are not properly addressed and/or managed through a waste management or
closure plan?
(If any of questions 4-6 was answered yes, and the situation poses an
immediate public health or environmental threat, notify DWQ)
7. Do any of the structures need maintenance/improvement?
8. Does any part of the waste management system other than waste structures require maintenance/improvement?
9. Do any stuctures lack adequate, gauged markers with required maximum and minimum liquid level
elevation markings?
Waste Application
10. Are there any buffers that need maintenance/improvement?
❑ Yes
® No
❑ Yes
® No
❑ Yes
® No
❑ Yes
® No
❑ Yes
® No
❑ 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 wheat
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 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 Rev iewerAnspector fail to discuss review/inspection with on -site representative?
24. Does facility require a follow-up visit by same agency?
25. Were any additional problems noted which cause noncompliance of the Certified AWMP?
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes ® No
® Yes ❑ No
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 YE�lnsw-erslanc/ora�
ny recommendations oany other commenUse
drawings of facility to better explain situatio(use additional pages as necessary): El Field Copy EFEalNotes
25. Rented, newly purchased, and newly cleared fields need to be added to WUP since waste is/is going to be applied to these areas.
AAL
_
im Wooten is in process of revising WUP per 5/16/01 letter from Linda Hash to me.
27. Dead cattle are buried at least 450 feet from the nearest creek.
aste analysis dated 3/7/01 had 4.9 lbs. nitrogen per 1000 gal.
Soil analysis dated 3121/01 looked ok for the most part. Rented land has some fields with high zinc (600s).
Reviewer/Inspector Name iMe issa Rosebrock
Reviewer/Inspector Signature: Date:
05103101 1 Continued

Facility Number: U3-08 of Inspection 5/18/2001 • Printed on: 5/18/2001
Odor Issues
26. Does the discharge pipe from the confinement building to the storage pond or lagoon fail to discharge at/or below
liquid level of lagoon or storage pond with no agitation?
27. Are there any dead animals not disposed of properly within 24 hours?
28. Is there any evidence of wind drift during land application? (i.e. residue on neighboring vegetation, asphalt,
roads, building structure, and/or public property)
29. Is the land application spray system intake not located near the liquid surface of the lagoon?
30. Were any major maintenance problems with the ventilation fan(s) noted? (i.e. broken fan belts, missing or
or broken fan blade(s), inoperable shutters, etc.)
31. Do the animals feed storage bins fail to have appropriate cover?
32. Do the flush tanks lack a submerged fill pipe or a permanentitemporary cover?
❑ Yes ® No
Cl Yes ® No
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes CO No
❑ Yes ❑ No
J
05103101

16AM
•k 4 = - ivision of Water Quality ra
s" t' Division of Soil and Water Conservation" t
a Q Other Agency
'. k
Type of Visit Compliance Inspection Q Operation Review O Lagoon Evaluation
Reason for Visit 16 Routine O Complaint Q Follow up O Emergency Notification O Other ❑ Denied Access
Date of Visit: Oi Time: 11600
Facility Number
Q Not Operational Q Below Threshold
Permitted 0 Certified 0 Conditionally Certified (3 Registered Date Last Operated or Above Threshold:
Farm Name: ..w1.C?..I St.... .f OS.:.... l .L .......... County:..A.f. .LT.a .1.......................................
Owner Name:.......LL1 itJ.�l... �..l.r'1..........: D.1.i�.Q Phone No: „33f%4�..3 Z . 7s.7. .......................
Facility Contact: .... E ..w.1n........- 16J.1le-5r .............. Title:.................... Phone No: .........................................
Mailing Address:. �..Q .......f..l. ......°Z .!........ �.l� .C.l...j......!,app�r.j'a..../.r ..............n�'....g.6.75... ..........................
Onsite Representative: .... Ld..�..n........... .................................. Integrator:................................................................... ............
Certified Operator: .... ti ........�t............TQ.IW1 5... �r.:.................. Operator Certification Number: .......
Location'of Farm:
p p rn 14 56 ifi 0 n as .
rA,
❑ Swine ❑ Poultry � Cattle ❑ Horse Latitude ®' ®6 .6 Longitude ®• ` 64
Design Current
'Design Current
Design Current' ' -
Swine Capacitv Population
Poultry
Capacity Population Cattle
CRacity Po elation
❑ Wean to Feeder
JE1 Layer
Dairy
1 2.7�
�0
❑ Feeder to Finish
❑ Non -Layer
JE3 Non -Dairy
❑ Farrow to Wean
❑ Farrow to Feeder
❑Other
❑ Farrow to Finish
Total Design Capacity
p 7
❑ Gilts
Total SSLW
❑ Boars
Number of Lagoons ❑ Subsurface Drains Present ❑ Lagoon Area ❑ Spray Field Area
Holding Ponds / Solid Traps 1 ❑ No Liquid Waste Management System
Discharges & Stream I.m acts
1. Is any discharge observed from any part of the operation? ❑ Yes No
Discharge originated at: ❑ Lagoon ❑ Spray Field ❑ Other
a. If discharge is observed, was the conveyance man-made? ❑ Yes ❑ No
b. If discharge is observed, did it reach Water of the State'? (If yes, notify DWQ)
c. li' 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? pillway
40 Struciture A Structure 2 Structure 3 y Structure 4 Structure, 5
VreeaIdentifier: 1.r..!.i1....................................................................................................................................
rd
(inches):
5100
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes A No
❑ Yes XNo
❑ Yes JgNo
Structure 6
Continued on back

Facifity Number: Vj — Date of Inspection 0 Printed on: 1/9/2001
5. Are there any immediate threats to the0grity 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 /KNo
9. Do any stuctures lack adequate, gauged markers with required maximum and minimum liquid level
elevation markings? ❑ Yes y No
Waste Application
10. Are there any buffers that need maintenance/improvement? ❑ Yes KNo
11. Is there evidence of over application? ❑ Excessive Ponding` ❑ PAN ❑ Hydraulic Overload ❑ yes 4110
12. Crop type CO Si IA A e,
13.
Do the receiving crops differ with those designated in the Certified Animal Waste Management Pl�n (CAWMP)?
❑ Yes VNNo
14,
a) Does the facility lack adequate acreage for land application?
❑ Yes o
b) Does the facility need a wettable acre determination?
❑ Yeso
rNo
c) This facility is pended for a wettable acre determination?
❑ Yes
15.
Does the receiving crop need improvement?
❑ Yes A110
16.
Is there a lack of adequate waste application equipment?
❑ Yes ,�Qo
``
Required
Records & Documents
IT
Fail to have Certificate of Coverage & General Permit readily available?
18.
Does the facility fail to have all components of the Certified Animal Wast Management Plan readily available?
(ie/ WUP, checklists, design, maps, etc.) `
❑ Yes Al�o
-
19.
Does record keeping need improvement? (ie/,irrigation, freo6ard, waste analysis & soil sample reports)
❑ Yes >ro
20.
Is facility not in compliance with any applicable setback criteria in effect at the time of design?
❑ Yes XNo
21.
Did the facility fail to have a actively certified operator in charge?
❑ Yes 9No
22.
Fail to notify regional DWQ of emergency situations as required by General Permit?
(ie/ discharge, freeboard problems, over application)
❑ Yes h1Vo
23.
Did Reviewer/Inspector fail to discuss review/inspection with on -site representative?
❑ Yes XNo
24.
Does facility require a follow-up visit by same agency?
❑ Yes �o
25.
Were any additional problems noted which cause noncompliance of the Certified AWMP?
�f
Yeso
0•.�4yiola(iQrs:or dffleienc{es rvre noted(rririg this:vasit: Yoaj>} wiil tec�iye lei ]FOther'
icorresponce>Rce. about this visit:
Comments (refer to question #): Explain any YES answers and/or any recommendations or'anybm� thercomeuti: `+
Use drawinp of facility to better ex lain situations. (use additional pages as neCessa
� as+e, oLxl q 1� s`i�
31;2-r/o I
Reviewer/Inspector Name d .``
Reviewer/Inspector Signatur Date: Q 5/pp

Facility Number: 0 — e of inspection . Printed on: 1/9/2001
Odor Is.Sues
4
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 YNO
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 x 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? o
i I �
A -1 - aj CAL& 5 av-'e' b b r If J -� g5) T-r oVn (±�reeP- ,
5100

W%J60"L
ton%f4Water Quality
o0614nd'Water Conservation
60dicr Agencyr:. .
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
Hate ur Visit: 11/14/2©OU Time: 12:00 t'rinted nn: 4/10/2001
Facility Number 03 8
0 Not O erational 0 Below Threshold
13 Permitted ® Certified 0 Conditionally Certified [,] Registered Date Last Operated or Aboyc Threshold: ................
Farm Name: .10ijm.jjro.dx rlCS.])ail[ '..................... .... County: Afthw..
.......................................................
Owner Name: Ftl<r1Ala.&..1110 My ................ jf)j VA.......................................................... Phone No: 33.(?n3.72:45.79 ...........
Facility Contact:.............................................................................. Title:.................... Phone No:
MailingAddress. M.P...wy.221.Slutta......................................................................... Sparta-M ..................................
Onsite Representative: Clay..1!ixti.................................................................................. Integrator:
M.1Z0 ........
........ M$6:15..............
Certified Operator.c.lay......................................... J.Qkto ................................................ Operator Certification Number: Z1445.............................
Location of Farm: _
Approx. 7.5 miles South on 221.
❑ Swine ❑ Poultry 0 Cattle ❑ Horse Latitude 36 • 3fJ ' 31 Longitude $1 • 13 33
Design Current
Swine Canneity Pnnulation
❑ Wean to Feeder
❑ Feeder to Finish
❑ Farrow to Wean
❑ Farrow to Feeder
❑ Farrow to Finish
❑ Gilts
❑ Boars
Design Current Design Current
Poultry Capacity Population Cattle Capacity Population
❑ Layer IN Dairy 275 2 } }
❑ Non -Layer ❑ Non -Dairy
❑ Other
Total Design Capacity 275
Total SSLW 385,000
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
b. If discharge is observed. did it reach Water of the State? (If'yes. notity I)WQ) El Yes ❑ No
c. If discharge is observed. what is the estimated flow in gal/min?
d. Does discharge bypass a lagoon system? (Ifyes. 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 K 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): 96
5100 Continued on back

Facility Number: 03-5 Date 44Ins pectioll 11/14/2000 Printed on: 4/10/2001
5. Are there any immediate threats to Agrity of any of the structures observed? (ie/ t"Ibsevere 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) Wheat Timothy, Orchard, & Rye Fescue (Hay)
13. Do the receiving crops differ with those designated in the Certified Animal Waste Management Plan (CAWMP)? ❑ Yes ® No
14, a) Does the facility lack adequate acreage for land application? ❑ Yes ® No
b) Does the facility need a wettable acre determination? ❑ Yes ® No
c) This facility is pended for a wettable acre determination? ❑ Yes ® No
15. Does the receiving crop need improvement?
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?
0: Nti•yiulatioris;oT deficiencies-wetre-noted duti•ing-thK visit: ;You;rvill i-eceive.nofu:rther-
correspofidence 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
13. Need to have new rented land added to the WUP with crop options. •
19. Missing waste analysis for the July applications. Will need'to get waste analysis for the Fall applications.
verall records and facility look good.
'aste analysis: 4118100 LSD 11.2 lbs.N/1000 gals. B
Reviewer/Inspector Name 'Rocky Durham
Reviewer/Inspector Signature: Date- 5100

Fagi!idy Number: 03-8 I ial, In>pectPoll 11/14/2004 � Primed nn: 4/10/2001
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
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 Comments an orb' ,rnwings::
5100
5100

ision of Water Quality
ision of Soil and Water Conservation
Q Other Agency
Pe of Visit *Compliance Inspection O Operation Review O Lagoon Evaluation
(Reason for Visit OO Routine O Complaint O Follow up O Emergency Notification O Other ❑ Denied Access
Facility Number ate lot'\�icil: 6/13/2000 Time: 100o Printed on: 6/19/2000
03 OS D
FO Not Operational O Below Threshold
Permitted ® Certified 0 Conditionally Certified [3 Registered pate Last Operated or Above Threshold: ••••.•..•.•..•
Farm Name:. toiAtcs.B.nAhf rs.Dairy............................................................................... County: A►Uggl any......................................... !'l'SRQ........
Owner Name: >ate.whiA.1. m my ................ him .......................................................... Phone No: 336-3Z2:457.9..........................................
Facility Contact: Ed-ArjU Joi.U95.................................................. Title:................................................................ Phone No:
MailingAddress: 4058.Hwy.. 2.1.So................. tttht........................................................ S.Carta... NC............................................................. MAU .............
Onsile Representative: YsaT4..1S?a[xeS........................................... ................................... Integrator:....................
Certified Operator:.C.lA°.k .................................... .IOim.dl;.......................................... Operator Certification Number:7,1¢45.
Location of Farm:
.................................................................................................................................................................................................................................. .......... I ..............................
r� Irox...7...5.angles.youtbt.on.2)<........................................................................................................................................................................................................._
EI
..
❑ Swine [3 Poultry IN Cattle ❑ Horse Latitude 36 • 30 4 31 Longitude 81 • 13 33
Design Current
Swine Canacitv Ponulation
❑ Wean to Feeder
❑ Feeder to Finish
❑ Farrow to Wean
❑ Farrow to Feeder
❑ Farrow to Finish
❑ Gilts
❑ Boars
Design Current Design Current
Poultry Capacity Population Cattle Capacity Population
❑ Layer IN Dairy 275 195
❑ Non -Layer JEI Non -Dairy
❑ Other
Total Design Capacity F 275
Total SSL W 385,000
Number of Lagoons © 10 Subsurface Drains Present ifff Lagoon Area 10 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
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 sal/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 K 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: ......V1laste.Pond....................................................
Freeboard (inches): 54
Continued on back

Facility Number: 03—t18 Date. of Inspection 6/13/2i)U!1
Prinled on: 6/19/2000
5. Are there any immediate threats to thel!TCegrity of any of the structures observed? (ie/ tr ss-, severe erosion, [:]Yes ® No
seepage, etc.)
6. Are there structures on -site which are not properly addressed and/or managed through a waste management or
closure plan? ❑ Yes ® No
(If any of questions 4-6 was answered yes, and the situation poses an
immediate public health or environmental threat, notify DWQ)
7. Do any of the structures need maintenance/improvement? ❑ Yes ® No
8. Does any part of the waste management system other than waste structures require maintenance/improvement? ® Yes ❑ No
9. Do any stuctures lack adequate, gauged markers with required maximum and minimum liquid level
elevation markings? ❑ Yes ® No
Waste Application
10. Are there any buffers that need maintenance/improvement? ❑ Yes ® No
11. Is there evidence of over application? ❑ Excessive Ponding []PAN [-]Hydraulic Overload ❑ Yes ® No
12. Crop type Corn (Silage & Grain)
13. Do the receiving crops differ with those designated in the Certified Animal Waste Management Plan (CAWMP)? ® Yes ❑ No
14. a) Does the facility lack adequate acreage for land application? ❑ Yes ® No
b) Does the facility need a wettable acre determination? ❑ Yes ® No
c) This facility is pended for a wettable acre determination? ❑ Yes ® No
15. Does the receiving crop need improvement?
16. Is there a lack of adequate waste application equipment?
Required Records & Document
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?
0: No-yiolati6ris:olrdeficiencies-were noted :during -this: visit.• 'You;wi11 r&eive•n6- rther• : • ' •
corresootidence: 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):
f7. Barn pasture is denuded. Edwin to seed fescue when we get some rain.
i13. Have NRCS add wheat to WUP.
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes ® No
Reviewer/Inspector Name 'Melissa Rosebrock
Reviewer/Inspector Signaturey v � 1 [ r1.4 11 ., __) Date:

Facility Number: 03-08 DO.1nspcction 1 6/13/2000 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 ® 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
A'diditional Comrrients an. ,or rawtngs:

142
(] Division of , nd Water Conservation - Operation Revi
ivision of S and Water Conservation - Compliance Ins ron
9LLIvls)on of Water Quality - Compliance Inspection _
Other Agency - Operation Review
10 Routine O Complaint Q Follow-up of DWQ inspection Q Follow-up of DSVV'C review Q Other
Facility Number - Date of lnspectio>`• 6
Time of Inspection 24 hr. (hh:mm)
0 PermittedxCertified © Conditionally Certified [3 Registered 113 Not O erational Date Last Operated:
Farm Name: ... Q.i' .> ,5.....-$ ..- .....bq-j-.P_y--...-..- County • AL 6.6—,8 &A..y................................
Owner Name: ...... rr��-71jN..� .'�-I�M � 610.�.............................. Phone No: 33&_'...3_-7-�---4577..-..........................
Facility Contact: -.�II.W .m.... ,Td1N.. .............. Title: ....................... ....-. ..... Phone No: / ^�
Mailing Address.Q....0.........pwy...e�aZL....V.......�jt..aA....t...............aSt� /
g .........
Onsite Representative:.....4../4(. .I..`..1.......1, n. .... Integrator:.............................................r..............................
Certified Operator:.JaLk j......�r...,....:TQJ..h.��r ..�. TIC' Operator Certification Number:....j.#..`I".......��1
t........................
Location of Farm:
.Appra ..........---.....6 ..... -... .n...... .--................................ ............--........-......................... ............................................
...........................................................•---............-............................................................................................................................1-1.1--11-...---•-....... '. '.. '."..'..................I
Latitude a!�0 6 •• Longitude ®° ©& ©&:
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 E= FCVDairy oZ
❑ Non -Layer I I ID Non -Dairy
❑ Other
Total Design Capacity
Total SSLW
Number of Lagoons 10 Subsurface Drains Present 1111 Lagoon Area ❑Spray Field Area
Holding Ponds / Solid Traps JEJ No Liquid Waste Management System
Discharges & Stream Impacts
I. Is any discharge observed from any part of the operation?
Discharge originated at: ❑ Lagoon ❑ Spray Field ❑ Other
a, li discharge is observed, was the conveyance man-made'?
b- If discharge is observed. did it reach Water of the State? (If ycs, notify DWQ)
c. If discharge is observed, what is the estimated flow in gal/min'?
)�`oj{ d. Does discharge bypass a lagoon system? (byes, 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? x Spillway
Structure I Structure 2 Structure 3 Structure 4 Structure 5
Identifier: W (Xbk&�04
Freeboard(inches): 4-.r1 .................................................................... .............................
5. Are there any immediate threats to the integrity of any of the structures observed? (ie/ trees, severe erosion,
seepage, etc.)
3/23/99
❑ Yes )(No
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes bjrNo
❑ Yes ` "o
❑ Yes Vo
Structure b
.........................
❑ Yes No
Continued on Uack

Facility Number: tl3— 0 I):Inspection0
Odor Issues i
26. Does the discharge pipe from the confinement building to the storage pond or lagoon fail to discharge at/or below-=es�.�}No
liquid level of lagoon or storage pond with no agitation? Qm I r ;2f d
27. Are there any dead animals not disposed of properly within 24 hours? ❑ Yeslo
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 XNo
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 VNo
31, Do the animals feed storage bins fail to have appropriate cover? ❑ YesXNo
32. Do the flush tanks lack a submerged fill pipe or a permanent/temporary cover? om 1 TT aox �o
r'%
��d--►or}ct�� v�- o • Sw4- re oLC-a 10 PA N Pr0a 1-)�-
s 'ra Q P, pond e.apac t 1 40
6b+aly) Fierds .
� P-5�rt dVnuded P� -6 seeJ Ease- ue
Some V-
13. � a v� Ni�� 5 ►4dd i,�h�-� .f� � p.

o 1 0
Facilit} Number: — Q I of Inspection OQ
6. Are there structures on -site which are not properly addressed and/or managed through a wT51e 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? io Yes $ No
S. Does any part of the waste management system other than waste structures require maintenance/improvement? V 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 ❑ Yes No
— - r
12. Crop type
13. Do the receiving crops differ with thase designated in the Certified Animal Waste Management Plan (CAWMP)?
"VYes
A No
14. a) Does the facility lack adequate acreage for land application?
❑ Yes
19No
b) Does the facility need a wettable acre determination?
❑ Yes
%No
c) This facility is pended for a wettable acre determination?
❑ Yes
XNo
15. Does the receiving crop need improvement?
❑ Yes
(No
16. Is there a lack of adequate waste application equipment?
❑ Yes
XNo
Required Records & Documents
17. Fail to have Certificate of Coverage & General Permit readily available? N J�❑ 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 :KNo
19_ Does record keeping need improvement? (ie/ irrigation, freeboard, waste analysis & soil sample reports) ❑ Yes )<'No
20. Is facility not in compliance with any applicable setback criteria in effect at the time of design? ❑ Yes XNo
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?
(ic/ 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 •yiolatiotis:oi. deficiencies -mere ngted• during tbis:v AL • -"ir :will reeeiye Rio further
correspondence. about this visit. . . .. . . ...
❑ Yes -ANo
❑ Yes )(No
[:]Yes *0
❑ Yes KNO
Comments {refer to question #): Explain any YES answers and/or any recommendations or atiy other"comments. -
Use drawings of facility to.better explain situations. (use additional pages as necessary):
S �
Reviewer/Inspector
Name--
Reviewer/Inspector Signatu
Date:
3/23/99

� C
s
1I3 o Qbow 3--q nA' leS on

.. Y.
'gency -
ecnon.°
�K
10 Routine 0 Complaint 0 Follow-up of DWQ inspection 0 Follow-up of DSWC review 0 Other
Facility Number 03 08 Date of Inspection 11-9-99
Time of Inspection 11:00 24 hr. (hh:mm)
Permitted ® Certified 0 Conditionally Certified 0 Registered © Not Q erational Date Last Operated:
Farm Name: J.QJ=s.B.ro.(bttuJ)ai>r•Y............................................................................... County: Allitg1lanY ........................................ W-SRO........
Owner Name: Edwi t.&..1.it7t1MY................ .1.Rime,S.......................................................... Phone No: 336n3.72:4579 ..........................................................
Facility Contact: .............................................................................. Title .. Phone No:
MailingAddress: 498$..HNv'jy.221Soxd1x......................................................................... SpArfA... N.C............................................................. U.615 ..............
OnsiteRepresentative............................................................................................................ Integrator:......................................................................................
Certified Operator:Glry.K .................................... I.Q.ino.jr .......................................... Operator Certification Number:;�1'445.............................
Location of Farm:
.........................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................
Latitude 36 • 30 30 Longitude 81 • 13 30
Design Current
Swine Capacity Ponulation
❑ Wean to Feeder
❑ Feeder to Finish
❑ Farrow to Wean
❑ Farrow to Feeder
❑ Farrow to Finish
❑ Gilts
❑ Boars
Number of Lagoons 1
Holding Ponds / Solid Traps
Design Current
Design Current
Poultry
Capacity Population Cattle
Capacity Population
❑ Layer
I
®:Dairy
275
205
❑ Non -Layer
---d
JEI Non -Dairy
❑ Other
Total Design Capacity
275
Total SSLW
385,000
Q Subsurface Drains Present II❑ Lagoon Area I❑ Spray Field Area
❑ 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 ® 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 l Structure 2 Structure 3 Structure 4 Structure 5 Structure 6
Identifier: 1
Freeboard(inches): ............... 12 ............... ... ......... ........................ ................................... .........................................................
5. Are there any immediate threats to the integrity of any of the structures observed? (ie/ trees, severe erosion, ❑ Yes ® No
seepage, etc.)
3/23/99 Continued on back
Printed on 11/9/99

fF cility Number: 03-08 of Inspection
6. Are there structures on -site which are Aperly addressed and/or managed through a' 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 Corn (Silage & Grain) Fescue (Hay)
l I-9-99
❑ 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)?
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?
®: Nb -yiolatioris;or ;defieieneies •were ;noted duriirg• this; visit.• :You;wii.l receive• irb.fttrther-
correspondence: about this :visit. •. • . • . - . .. ... ..
Reviewer/Inspector Name /Jenny Rankin
❑ 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
Reviewer/Inspector Signature: C I Date: J i- V - Lf `-/
Printed on 11/9/99

€Division of Soil Water Conservation - Operation Review
Q-Division of Soil ater Conservation - Compliance'Inspec
ie
Division of -Compliance"In' a tibV 0 a_ [r ty sp, ,c n
1 Other Agency - Operation Review
UP Routine 0 Complaint 0 Follow-up of DWQ inspection 0 Follow-up of DSWC review 0 Other
Facility Number 03 g Date of Inspection 6/7199
Time of Inspection 13:00 24 hr. (hh:mm)
0 Permitted ® Certified [3 Conditionally Certified 0 Registered JEJ Not O erationaf Date Last Operated:
Farm Name: .101xt£s. >Qtlxexs.?ai]cy.................................... County: Allmhany ......................................... WSRQ........
Owner Name: Ed-drt.&Jimm ................ 1Qim.......................................................... Phone No: 33.G-3.7.2:45.7.9. ............ .......................
Facility Contact:...............................:.................................. ...... Title Phone No:
Mailing Address: 40S$.k wy.Z2.1,59nthl......................................................................... SpArta.-N.0 ............................................................. 23.6.7.5 ..............
Onsite Representative:,1.11U?7R1Y.a.Qjmg5.............................................................................. Integrator:
Certified Operator:.QlAy..E................................... JpilarS.Ir......................................... Operator Certification Number:2,X44S.
Location of Farm:
............................. ............... ....................... ........................................................................................................................................ I ..................
+
A, rox-74.miles.$ th.m.2ZI.. ...............................................................................................................................................................................................
Latitude 36 • 30 i 306, Longitude F 81 • 13 4 3066
Design Current
Design Current
Design Current
Swine Capacity Population
Poultry
Capacity Population Cattle
Capacity Population
❑ Wean to Feeder
❑ Layer
I
1
19 Dairy
275
f 220
❑ Feeder to Finish
10 Non -Layer
❑ Non -Dairy
❑ Farrow to Wean
❑ Farrow to Feeder
❑ Other
❑ Farrow to Finish
Total Design Capacity
275
❑ Giits
Total SSLW
3851000
[IBoars
Number of Lagoons I0 Subsurface Drains Present ❑ Lagoon Area 10 Spray Field Area
Holding Ponds / Solid Traps 1 I0 No Liquid Waste Management System
Discharges 1C Stream Impacts
I. is any discharge observed from any part of the operation? ❑ Yes ® No
Discharge originated at: ❑ Lagoon ❑ Spray Field ❑ Other -
a. If discharge is observed. was the conveyance man-made? ❑ Yes ❑ No
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?
Waste oI t•on & Treatment
4. Is storage capacity (freeboard plus storm storage) less than adequate? ® Spillway
Structure 1 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? (iel trees, severe erosion,
seepage, etc.)
3/23/99
❑ Yes 0 No
Continued on back
Printed on 1118199

Facility Number: 03-5 Date of Inspection 6n199
6. Are there structures on -site which are not porly addressed and/or managed through a was 0nagement 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 Applicat�n
10. Are there any buffers that need maintenance/improvement? [:]Yes ® No
11. Is there evidence of over application? ❑ Excessive Ponding ❑ PAN ❑ Yes ® No
12. Crop type Corn (Silage & Grain) Fescue,Orchard, clover(hay)
13. Do the receiving crops differ with those designated in the Certified Animal Waste Management Plan (CAWMP)? ❑ Yes ® No
14. a) Does the facility lack adequate acreage for land application? ❑ Yes ® No
b) Does the facility need a wettable acre determination? ❑ Yes ® No
c)'This facility is pended for a wettable acre determination? ❑ Yes ® No
15. Does the receiving crop need improvement? ❑ Yes ® No
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 reviewlinspection 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?
�: Nd•yiol_ati6ris:or detieieneies,were.noted :dui,ing•this: visit., N6W Will :reeeive- no-ftfrttier, : - : -
�cor.respondence. ab"f this .visit. .
❑ 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)
8 Still have some livestock exclusion fencing to do.
19 Need to transfer records of loads to application forms and balance nitrogen.
ertified animal waste plan needs odor control, insect control and mortality checklists. Also need a site schematic of the farm {
erns, WSP, livestock exclusions, livestock trails, stream crossings, etc.)
Reviewer/Inspector Name Rocky Durham I
Reviewer/Inspector Signature: Date: 1!
Printed on 11/8/99

State of North Carolina
Department of Environn, _ it
and Natural Resources
Division of Water Quality
James B. Hunt, Jr., Governor
Wayne McDevitt, Secretary
Kerr T. Stevens, Director
CERTIFIED MAIL
RETURN RECEIPT REQUESTED
Edwin & Jimmy Joines
Joines Brothers Dairy
4088 Hwy 221 South
Sparta NC 28675
Farm Number: 03 - 8
Dear Edwin & Jimmy Joines:
0 •
NCDENR
NORTH CAROLINA DEPARTMENT OF
ENVIRONMENT AND NATURAL RESOURCES
April 6, 1999
RECENED
N.C. Dept. of ENNR
APR 12 1999
Winston-Salem
Regional Office
You are hereby notified that Joines Brothers Dairy, in accordance with G.S. 143-215.1OC, must
apply for coverage under an Animal Waste Operation General Permit. Upon receipt of this letter, your
farm has sixty (60) days to submit the attached application and all supporting documentation. In
accordance with Chapter 626 of 1995 Session Laws (Regular Session 1996), Section 19(c)(2), any
owner or operator who fails to submit an application by the date specified by the Department
SHALL NOT OPERATE the animal waste system after the specified date. Your application must
be returned within sixty (60) days of receipt of this letter. Failure to submit the application as required
may also subject your facility to a civil penalty and other enforcement actions for each day the facility is
operated following the due date of the application.
The attached application has been partially completed using information listed in your Animal
Waste Management Plan Certification Form. If any of the general or operation information listed is
incorrect please make corrections as noted on the application before returning the application package.
The signed original application, one copy of the signed application, two copies of a general location
map, and two copies of the Certified Animal Waste Management Plan must be returned to complete the
application package. The completed package should be sent to the following address:
North Carolina Division of Water Quality
Water Quality Section
Non -Discharge Permitting Unit
Post Office Box 29535
Raleigh, NC 27626-0535
If you have any questions concerning this letter, please call Dianne Thomas at [phone]
extension 364 or Ron Linville with the Winston-Salem Regional Office at [phone].
Si rely,
for Kerr T. Stevens
cc: Permit File (w/o encl.)
Winston-Salem Regional Office (w/o encl,)
P.O. Box 29535, Raleigh, North Carolina 27626-0535 Telephone [phone] FAX [phone]
An Equal Opportunity Affirmative Action Employer 50% recycled/ 10% post -consumer paper

r1EF p Division otSoil and er Conservation Operation Review
p Division of Soil and er Conservation - Complianceanspection,.
Division of Water Q661ify - Compliance- Insection
p Other Agency - Operation Review
16 Routine 0 C omplantt 0 Follow-up of Uw12 inspection 0 hollow -up of 1)*�11'C: review 0 Other
Facility Numbe Date of' Inspection
1,imc of Inspection L� 24 hr. (hh:mm)
p Registered ■ Certified p Applied for Permit p Permitted p r got perattona [).lie Last Operated:
FArm Name: doineu.Brnthnrs.D.airy................................................................................ County: Alleghany WSRO
O►►'ncr Name: Ed.r i&&...Timmy................jaines .......................................................... I'llonc,No: 9.111-172-4579 ..........................................................
FacilitvContact:...............................................................................Title:............................................................... Phone No:
M:iilinr Address: A08&.Rwy..221..S.ouLh.............................................................
OnsiteRepresentative: ..............................................................................................
Certified Operator•:C1ay..E.. .................................. jolwa.,lrr..........
Location of Farm:
S plairta:..J1IC............................................................. 28675 ..............
Intel;ralor:.......................................................................................
.......... Operaror Cer'tillCation Number:2.1.445 .............................
Latitude ®� ® ® Longitude ®0 ©:
Swine Capacity Population
❑ Wean to Feeder
p ee er to P Ints
❑ Farrow to can
p Farrow to Feeder
❑ Farrow to Finish
❑ Gilts
0 Boars
...........
Poultry Capacity Population Cattle Capacity Population
❑ ayer In Dairy Ll 215 210
p Non -Layer JE3 Non -Dairy
❑ Other
Total Design Capacity 27
Total SSLW I 3hS.U00
Number of Lagoons / Holding Ponds ❑Subsurface Drains Present 1113 Lagoon Area 13 S pray F re c rep
13 N o riquid Waste Management Syssem
(general
1. Are there any buffers that need maintenance/improvement? ❑ Yes ® No
2. Is any discharge observed from any part of the operation? p Yes ® No
Dischar-.e ori�,inated at: p Lagoon p Spray Field p Other
a. If dischar e is observed. was the conveyance man-made? p Yes ❑ No
b. tl'discharue is observed, did it reach Surlace NVMer? (II'yes, notify DWQ) []Yes ❑ No
c. If dischan-,e is observed, what is the estimated flow in -0111in?
d. Does discharge bypass a lagoon system'? (lfvcs. notify DWQ) Yes p No
3. Is there evidence of past discharge from any part of the operation? p Yes ® No
4. Were there any averse impacts to the waters of the State other than from a discharge? El 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? Yes ® No
7. Did the facility fail to have a certified operator in responsible charge? p Yes ® No
7/25/97
vim"

act ity Number: 03_08 D'Ite v, �+lte -6 )11
r
8. Are there lagoons or storage ponds on sitl�hich need to be properly closed? ❑ Yes ® No
Structures (l..,1!oo11s.l-loldi114,'Ponds, Plush Pils, et
9. Is storage capacity (freeboard plus storm storage) less than adequate? ❑ Yes ® No
St17tClt]rC I Structure 2 Structure 3 Structure 4 Structure 5 Structure 6
Identifier:
Freeboard(ft): 2.It................................................. ........................ ........... ................................... ......................................................................
10. Is seepage observed from any of the structures? p Yes ® No
11. Is erosion, or any other threats to the integrity of any of the structures observed? ❑ Yes ® No
12. Do any of the structures need maintenance/improvement? p Yes ® No
(if any of questions 9-12 was answered yes, and the situation poses an
immediate public health or environmental threat, notify DWQ)
13. Do any of the structures lack adequate minimum or maximum liquid level markers? p Yes ® No
Waste Attplicotion
14. Is there physical evidence of over application? ❑ Yes ® No
(If in excess of WMP, or runoff entering waters of the State, notify DWQ)
15. Crop type ......Coastal.Berzrtttda.Grass...... ............... utde 4&igge.).........................................................................................................................
16. Do the receiving crops differ with those designated in the Animal Waste Management Plan (AWMP)? p Yes ® No
IT
Does the facility have a lack of adequate acreage for land application?
p Yes
® No
18,
Does the receiving crop need improvement?
p Yes
®No
19.
Is there a lack of available waste application equipment?
❑ Yes
® No
20.
Does facility require a follow-up visit by same agency?
p Yes
®No
21.
Did Reviewer/Inspector fail to discuss review/inspection with on -site representative?
p Yes
® No
22.
Does record keeping need improvement?
p Yes
®No
For Certified or Vermitted Fociiilics 0111V
23.
Does the facility fail to have a copy of the Animal Waste Management Plan readily available?
❑ Yes
®No
24.
Were any additional problems noted which cause noncompliance of the Certified AWMP?
❑ Yes
®No
25.
Were any additional problems noted which cause noncompliance of the Permit?
p Yes
® No
t . N.o -violations. or deficiencies•were.note . unng this visit... You. will.receive no, further .: .
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):
Reviewer/inspector Name Jenny Rankin
Reviewerllnspector Signature: Date: -?_0

p Division of Soil =Water
Division of Wate uality
p utner
I* Routine p C:omplaint p fouow-up of uwtj inspection p P'(
)Facility Number
® Registered p Certified 13 Applied for Permit p Permitted
Farm Dame: Ed►yinilinuny.Jaines.Earm.....
up of 1)SWC: review 0 Other
Date of Inspection
Time of Inspection 24 hr. (hh:mm)
In Not Uperational I Date -Last Operated:
County: Alleghany WSRO
OwnerName: Edwin ..................................... .mines.......................................................... Phone No: 9.0-372-.4579 ..........................................................
Facility Contact:.................................................................. ....Title: . Phone No:
Mailing Address: 40R&Hwy..221..S.uuth.......................................................................... sparla.Ac .............................................................. 2867.5 ..............
Onsite Representative: .........................................................................
Certified Operator:Edxvxti.(.Clay)...................... JoitLm .................
Location of farm:
........ Integrator: ............................................................
........ Operator Certification Number:2.1.445 .............................
gprax,::.-..::m.. ........................................................................................................................................................................................................ 1A
:I
F
7
Latitude ®0 .30 Longitude ®•
esign nrren = esign urrent Uesign.urren
Swtne `s = ��CapacitywPopalation Poultry Capacity Population 'Cattle Cajacity. Population
,z
❑ Wean to Feeder
❑ Feeder to Finish
❑ Farrow to can
❑ Farrow to ee er
❑ Farrow to Finish
❑ Gilts
❑ Boars
® airy140
❑ on- airy
❑ ter
a
To"tal Design�.Capacity
ry
Total SSLW
General
1. Are there any buffers that need maintenance/improvement? Ij Yes ® No
2. Is any discharge observed from any part of the operation? ❑ Yes ® No
Discharge originated at: ❑ Lagoon ❑ Spray Field ❑ Other
a. If discharge is observed, was the conveyance man-made? ❑ Yes p No
b. If discharge is observed, did it reach Surface Water? (If yes, notify DWQ) ❑ Yes ❑ No
c. If discharge is observed, what is the estimated flow in gal/min?
d. Does discharge bypass a lagoon system? (If yes, notify DWQ) ❑Yes ❑ No
3. Is there evidence of past discharge from any part of the operation? ❑ Yes ®No
4. Were there any adverse impacts to the waters of the State other than from a discharge? p Yes INNo
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? ❑Yes ®No
7. Did the facility fail to have a certified operator in responsible charge? p Yes ® No
7/25/97
❑
ayer
❑
Non -Layer

aci i _um er: 3_8
8. Are there lagoons or storage ponds on sitL'Efihich need to be properly closed?
Structures agoons.Holdine Ponds, Flush Pits, etc.)
.9. Is storage capacity (freeboard plus storm storage) less than adequate?
Structure I Structure 2 Structure 3 Structure 4
Identifier: 1
Freeboard(ft):..............................................•...........................
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 Annlication
14. Is there physical evidence of over application?
(If in excess of WMP, or runoff entering waters of the State, notify DWQ)
[]Yes N No
p Yes ® No
Structure 5 Structure 6
15. Crop type ..........................Rye.................................................................................................................................................
16. Do the receiving crops differ with those designated in the Animal Waste Management Plan (A WMP)?
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 ReviewerAnspector 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 A WMP?
25. Were any additional problems noted which cause noncompliance of the Permit?
Yes ® No
p Yes H No
p Yes IN No
® Yes p No
p Yes ® No
p Yes
p No
p Yes
Cl No
p Yes
® No
p Yes
® No
p Yes
® No
p Yes
® No
p Yes
® No
Q . No -or urencies-were.njofe . unng t rs visit:. ion. wi .receive no_ further ...
.. +�o �eS�jo $ e about t�iis visit::.. ... ...: ......... .
[]Yes []No
[]Yes []No
p Yes p No
Reviewer/inspector Name rJenn ARankin '_-_¢'
Reviewer/Inspector Signature:
Date:

10--1 3-1997 1 2 : 41 PM FROM 6PARTA FIELD OFFICE 1 910 372 4645 P. 4
�M., ..tn,.::.'.�u'�.s4•e,� � �„...�.��.;�r,, "..^Uo-s.�:�.�,�".;r•�.,., , .:.s<;�t;;x�•:::�a..�.�,�„ <"� �.`a,�..,,,.,�'...�':�:'°�'�.`'.;�`.Es��,',.,�;:.w;;,^ ",''��.sa6.�
n��!;,.• sy 'x
a,"��17SWC Anil Feedlot Operation Review
:�' maeeon
0 DWQ Animal Feedlot Operation Site Inspection
�. �,�.-,�-., • :� � � ,� : era
10 Routine O Complaint O Follow-up of >!)WO inspection Q Follow-up ofl)SWC review Q Other I
Facility Number I
Farm status: B Registered ❑ Applied for Permit
0 Certified ❑ Permitted
Date of Inspection
Time of Inspection [�� 24 fir. (hh:mm)
Total Time (in fraction of laours-
[ex :l.2a for I hr I mitt)) Spent on Review
or Inspection (includes travel and processing)
E3Not O )erDate Last Operated: ........ ....... . ....... . ............... . ...................................................................................................
Farm dame:f.. . a1W:.n_L .. .. r..-..-.-t.-n...5........r...m....... .. County: —AP e'J - C .................. ............. -
n
T.
Ownerl�ataae:. 1t .1.�1� tiJilj�/7►(� Phone No: .......�.Q'......- -.- .�.. .........................
y .act .���?�.n. ....��... �,�?X_j-. %�t` Phone No:�,t4�... .......................7`-'1
F'acalat Cont• • : .......... ....•....- t .... �............ 'I'atic: ..... ..... ................---..--..--.- �+��%'`�
lailingAddress. ... �. .......�_W-Lf...�.J .J.,.....5... .................. �.i^.� ....4..., ...... �.�.�./,--ti.% .........•...............
Onslte Rep rescntAtive:.. Q it_� Ai1......JL7..l..j ... ........••... Intctiratar:..........................................
............................................
Certified Operator:._.�.��...�..�..�................... ..5 .� 1.� �.� .. Oper:tt<�t' Certific:�tiun Number :, �........
Location of Farm.
..... ........... _................. ......... ..G.-...................................-..........-.......-------------------•-••-.........,,.........,.,...........................--..--...-.......... ,..
r..- ..r �-ta..-fit........... ........ .a..l.........,....,.............-......---------------------....................................................... ..-...........�
Latitude ®` ®:° Longitude
Type. of Operation Design - Current Design Current
Swine,...' "".. " Capacity 'Population, Poultry. Capacity Population
❑ Gayer
❑ Non -Layer
El Wean
to FeGdcr
❑ Feeder to Finish
❑ Farrow to Wcan
❑ Farrow to Feeder
❑ Farrow to Finish
Other
Total Design Capacity
'total SSLW
Design.- Currenta
Cattle Capacity Population ...
13 Dairy
❑ Non-Dairy
:;h'utiabei Spray Field area Area of.Laoaoszs/ Hiildi'rt Pvgids Y ❑ Subsurface Drains Present
b ©l.a,trata Ca
k
1, Are there any buffers that need maintenance/iniprovemt nt?
2- IS any discharge observed from any part of the operation?
17ischar e on inatzd ar. fl Lagoon O Spray Fuld ❑ Other
a. If discharg4 is observed. tv:ts the conveyance man-niade?
b, It'dischLrge is observed, did it reach Surf ice \Vatcr'' {.If ycs, notify UWQ)
c. If di charze i•.i observed. whist is the cstitimted flow in-11/niin?
d. Does dischrrar bypass a la;aota systetaa'? (If yes. no fy DWQ)
3. Is there evidence of past discharge from any parr of the operation's
4- Wcre there any adverse irnpact.s to the %vater.5 of the State other than from a discharge?
S. Does any part of the waste nmanca_einent system (other than ponds) require
❑ Yes 14 No
❑ Yes ffi No
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ Ycs ❑ No
.41A El
❑ Yes 9 No
Yes S3 No
❑ Yes 10 No

1 O-1 3-1997 12 : dOPh3 FROt-t SPARTA FIELD OFFICE 1 910 372 464S
Facility Number; 3— 2
6. Is facility not in compliance with any applicable setback criteria in effect at the time of design?
7. Did the facility fail to have a certified operator in responsible charge'?
8. Are there lagoons or storage ponds on site wbich need to be properly closed?
,Structures (I a non • 2ngar MIding. Ponds
9. Is storage capacity (freeboard plus storm storage) less than adequate?
Freeboard (ft): Structure I Structure 2 Structure 3
r.
10. Is seepage observed from any of the structures?
Structure 4
11. Is erosion, or any other threats to the integrity of any of [he structures observed?
P. 3
p Yes
No
© Yes
No
❑ Yes
No
❑ Yes
J`No
Structure 5
Structure 6
❑ Yes 14 No
© Yes 60 No
12, Do any of the structures need maintenance/improvement? © Yes f No
(If any of questions 9-12 was answered yes, and the situation poses
an immediate public health or environmental threat, notify DWQ)
13. Do any of the structures lack adequate minimum or maximum liquid level markers? Yes ❑ No
Waste AnIZligation
14. Is there physical evidence of over application:? Q Yes ® No
(If in excess of WW, or runoff entering waters of the State, notify DWQ)
}
j
15. Crop type?.Y'..l 1..... �.�. 4S5 F1 4
16. Do the receiving crops differ with those designated in the Animal Waste Management Plan (A'V4 M'W ❑ Yes iJ No
17.
Does the facility have a lade of adequate acreage for land application?
Q Yes
50 No
18,
Does the receiving crop need improvement?
❑ Yes
[R No
19.
Is there a lack of available waste application equipment?
❑ Yes
Aj No
20.
Does facility require a follow --up visit by same agency?
0 Yes
CE No
21-
Did Reviewer/Inspector fail to discuss review/inspection with on -site representative?
0 Yes
IV No
For Certified Facilities Only
22.
Does the facility fail to have a copy of the Animal Waste Management Plan readily available?
I] Yes
❑ No
23.
Were any additional problems noted which cause noncompliance of the Certified AWMP?
❑ Yes
❑ No
24.
Does record keeping need improvement?
❑ Yes
❑ No
13
�'Yl�� m [s � �,riin� o �nS-�qlf >tiew w�rsfe_ 54ofcyp�
4 c--( re- Pe- r mcc ne rti.4 m Q r kt- C.J r c rr n e
kAC
Name
Reviewer/Inspector lame a'�5�'*z L'�- c^ /�yy/ _/'�3 z` y�,,f .v t€�';�y��^.,,� s�? �t �. c cl„'':✓ w_ra �w `i ' � a Y„ {'
12evieµ-er/Inspector Signature; f Date: j(] -