030033_INSPECTIONS_20171231

■ Complete items 1, 2, and 3. Also complete
item 4 if Restricted Delivery is desired.
■ Printyour name and address on the reverse
so that we can return the card to'you.
■ Attach this card to the back of the mailpiece,
or on the front if space permits.
Article Addressed to:
Mr Dwayne Atwood
739 Elk Creek Church Road
Sparta NC 228675
A.
❑ Agent
❑ Addressee
B. Received by (P(inted Name) Q.-Pate of Delivery
A
D. is delivery address different t m.item 1? S. as
If YES, enter delivery ad6ress'below: ❑ No
�4A, t 12V
3' Service Type
'>9Z§ertified Mail ❑ Express Mail
110 Registered Return Receipt for Merchandise
1 ❑ Insured Mail ❑ C.O.D.
4. Restricted Delivery? (Extra Fee) ❑ Yes
2. Article Number r
(Transfer from service label) 7,0 14 3 goo oag (e , q 313 7 3 is ! j Ad d
PS Form 3811, August 2001 Domestic Return Receipt 102595-01-M-25V

UNITED STATES POSTAL SERVICE
First -Class Mail
Postage & Fees Paid
USPS
Permit No. G-10
• Sender: Please print your name, addreRnd ff,1Vti ;this box •
N.C, D'-:pl. ()f EW,u.
NC DENR MAY t 3 2002
WATER QUALITY SECTION - MIR
585 WAUGHTOWN STREET}m,
; SaIer
WINSTON SALEM NC 27107=224I.)naI C)ffiC%
P.
IstI&IIIIIIIIIIItIIIIIttlIitIiIttItIItttIEISIII1lIII1IILIIitII

Division of Water Resour
Facility Number - O Division of Soil and Wateservation
O Other Agency
Type of Visit: 19,
Compliance Inspection O Operation Review O Structure Evaluation p Technical Assistance
Reason for Visit: )Routine O Complaint O Follow-up O Referral O Emergency O Other O Denied Access
Date of Visit: Q a(j Arrival Time:�f =f J Departure Time: F]County: A Region: 4&) R
Farm Name: 44711jcc� lai r y Owner Email:
Owner Dame: i)Gvoojr t Phone: 3r;2 — g I la } ( U"
Flailing Address: -1,3 q � � Cr�e� �ifl l� (fit � S� 1''tLi`7� N C' tc IS
Physical Address: 393 ,our 5 tQr ., S pa r 6 7,57
T'
Facility Contact: (\kI tze-�d Title: Phone:
Onsite Representative: N1/�
Operator: M I ��� R� �} Q Q (`� Certification Number: _ �3 i C 2-
Certified S�
Back-up Operator:
Location of Farm:
Certification Number:
1
Latitude: 360 3 11 S _'� Longitude: � � D (Q � Q� t I
f"rb,fu_-ice:t�-� ` �h# N W� Z 21 sou'f'h ! (moo u �, o L
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 [mullets
Design Current
Wet Poultry Capacity Pop.
Layer
Non -La er TEI
Design Current
Dry Poultry Capacity Poo.
Layers
Non -Layers
Pullets
Turkeys
Turkey Poults
Other
Design Current
Cattle Capacity Pop.
Dairy Cow
Dairy Calf
Dairy Heifer
Dry Cow
Non -Dairy
Beef Stocker
Beef Feeder
Beef Brood Cow
I. 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 DWR)
❑ Yes
❑ No
❑ NA
❑ NE
c. What is the estimated volume that reached waters of the State (gallons)?
d. Does the discharge bypass the waste management system? (If yes, notify DWR)
❑ Yes
[] No
❑ NA
❑ NE
2. Is there evidence of a past discharge from any part of the operation'?
❑ Yes
[� No
❑ 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
21412015 Continued

Facili Number: D3- Date of Inspection: 9
Waste Collection & Treatment
4. Is storage capacity (structural plus storm storage plus heavy rainfall) less than adequate? ❑ Yes � No
a. If yes, is waste level into the structural freeboard? ❑ Yes ❑ No
Structure I Structure 2 Structure 3
z,
Identifier:
a Spillway?:
Designed Freeboard (in):
Observed Freeboard (in)
❑ NA ❑ NE
❑NA ❑NE
Structure 4 Structure 5 Structure 6
5. Are there any immediate threats to the integrity of any of the structures observed?
(i.e., large trees, severe erosion, seepage, etc.)
6. Are there structures on -site which are not properly addressed and/or managed through a
waste management or closure plan?
❑ Yes C] No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes VNo ❑ NA ❑ NE
If any of questions 4-6 were answered yes, and the situation poses an immediate public health or environmental threat, notify 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) 7�
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 6 No ❑ NA ❑ NE
maintenance or improvement?
11. Is there evidence of incorrect land application? If yes, check the appropriate box below. ❑ Yes F No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Excessive Ponding ❑ Hydraulic Overload ❑ Frozen Ground ❑ Heavy Metals (Cu, Zn, etc.)
❑ PAN ❑ PAN > 10% or l0 lbs. ❑ Total Phosphorus ❑ Failure to Incorporate Manure/Sludge into Bare Soil
❑ Outside of Acceptable Crop Window ❑ Evidence of Wind Drift ❑ Application Outside of Approved Area
12. Crop Type(s):
CMG VL &,*-
13. Soil Type(s): Q �-k I ? '
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 'P� No
18. Is there a lack of properly operating waste application equipment? ❑ Yes P No
Required Records & Documents
19. Did the facility fail to have the Certificate of Coverage & Permit readily available? ❑ Yes [x No
20. Does the facility fail to have all components of the CAWMP readily available'? If yes, check ❑ Yes 0 No
the appropriate box.
❑WUP ❑Checklists ❑ Design ❑ Maps ❑ Lease Agreements ❑Other:
21. Does record keeping need improvement? 1 f'ycs, Yes P No
�Wainfall
�ste Application [] W ekly Freeboard [Waste Analysis Soil Analysis
Stocking Crop Yield . . Monthly and 1" Rainfall Inspections
pp0.5{vr�
22_ Did the facility fail to install and maintain a rain gauge? ❑ Yespi No
23. If selected, did the facility fail to install and maintain rainbreakers on irrigation equipment? ❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ NA ❑ NE
❑NA ❑NE
❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ NA ❑ NE
❑NA ❑NE
[] leather Code
❑NA ❑NE
WA ❑ NE
Page 2 of 3 21412015 Continued

Facility Number: - 33 jDate of Inspection:
24. Did the facility fail to calibrate waste ap -ation 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. T
❑ 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?
24. 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
0 No
❑ NA
❑ NE
permit? (i.e., discharge, freeboard problems, over -application)
31. Do subsurface the drains exist at the facility? If yes, check the appropriate box below.
❑ Yes
❑ No
❑ NA
NE
❑ Application Field ❑ Lagoon/Storage fond ❑ Other:
IM
32. Were any additional problems noted which cause non-compliance of the permit or CAWMP?
❑ Yes
[X No
❑ NA
❑ NE
33. Did the Reviewer/Inspector fail to discuss review/inspection with an on -site representative?
4 Yes
❑ No
❑ NA
❑ NE
34. Does the facility require a follow-up visit by the same agency?
❑ Yes
[dNo
❑ NA
❑ NE
Comments (refer to question #): Explain any YES answers and/or any additional recommendations or any other comments. I
UseArawings of facility to better explain situations (use additional pages as necessary).
of �1e�aci�ar der 5LUR.-2-Grm U5e-3r Waste_ c i►&lys15 ? ti14 NOW(.9fe- `ipCoed
CoTL bra--Oov\ �4 v i n aot� • S YZc� i�AS t 1 ��y p �c-�'1��
i-e 5f5 n 60� U a
33 • l �C� w Ct 5 i1.�D r 1C i r) cL W a � 4o !� tC��rt�1 C Q� 5 a re C0(,r A•5
/ t) V_ Y—p \No L e-' j Q U S `QX` Ve A 1 v� �&JIA . 6 � W 5 P r b &Akv 11 5
55 r A�'��-+� nr.�an ��r t aar 5 C tS Cau f`c3�c�
C tb U lA (,L ul O S e
V\-ve. -t-b MCt,.>l 0\'`-'5 �r� -fO�r rof'tu�-V'S S`�u�c�Ayl o
Lv !
P - -�• 15 yam-. 'D 4�
Reviewer/inspector Name: ire,
Reviewer/Inspector Signature:
Page 3 of 3
6 roc_
Phone(a_N q _ 1
Date:
214. 015

i Division of Water Resources
`Facility Number - O Division of Soil and Water CQervation
O Other Agency A
Type of Visit: Compliance Inspection 0 Operation Review O Structure Evaluation O Technical Assistance
Reason for Visit: Routine O Complaint O hollow -up O Referral O Emergency O Other O Denied Access
Date of Visit: Arrival Time: Departure Time:
Farm Name: Ak T�Q� A bal r y Owner Email:
County � egion: VKR�
1
Owner Name: Ne— A+wood Phone: :3,3(p , 37 7 t% t �
Mailing Address: 6 � S
Physical Address:
Facility Contact:
Onsite Representative:
Certified Operator:
Back-up Operator:
Location of Farm:
Title:
Ph*!(
Integrator:
Certification Number:
//-� Certification Number:
Latitude: 3 CJ 3 1 r S-j I/Longitude:
vi W I Z 10 1 L k wY 2-Z 1 Sj oI G-oUVCou yl le_ varm p nL
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. Vet Poultry Capacity Pop.
Layer
Non -Layer
Dry Poultry
Layers
Non -Layers
Pullets
Turkeys
Turkey Poults
Other
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 a past discharge from any part of the operation?
3. Were there any observable adverse impacts or potential adverse impacts to the waters
of the State other than from a discharge?
Design Current
Cattle Capacity Pop.
Daia Cow
Dairy Calf
Dairy Heifer
Dry Cow
Non -Dairy
Stocker
kBeef
Beef Feeder
.Beef Brood Cow -
❑ Yes �No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes ❑ No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes ❑ No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑Yes No ❑NA ❑NE
❑Yes o ❑NA ❑NE
❑ Yes tNo ❑ NA ❑ NE
Page I of 3 21412015 Continued

Facili Number: ot- Date of Inspection: -712
Waste Collection & Treatment is
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
9. Structure IStructure 2 Structure 3 Structure 4 Structure 5 Structure 6
1 Identifier: V.JUt$kP-(��OrO
Spillway?:
Designed Freeboard (in):
Observed Freeboard (in):
5. Are there any immediate threats to the integrity of any of the structures observed? ❑ Yes �<N o ❑ NA ❑ NE
(i.e., large trees, severe erosion, seepage, etc.)
6. Are there structures on -site which are not properly addressed and/or managed through a ❑ Yes �(No ❑ NA ❑ NI
waste management or closure plan?
If any of questions 4-6 were answered yes, and the situation poses an immediate public health or environmental threat, notify DWR
7. Do any of the structures need maintenance or improvement? ❑ Yes rNo
❑ NA ❑ NE
8. Do any of the structures lack adequate markers as required by the permit? ❑ Yes ❑ NA ❑ NE
(not applicable to roofed pits, dry stacks, and/or wet stacks)
9. Does any part of the waste management system other than the waste structures require ❑ Yes ; No ❑ NA ❑ NE
maintenance or improvement?
Waste Application
10. Are there any required buffers, setbacks, or compliance alternatives that need ❑ Yes �No ❑ NA ❑ NE
maintenance or improvement? ,`�
l 1. Is there evidence of incorrect land application'? If yes, check the appropriate box below. ❑ Yes I r<o ❑ 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): he+ 0 GL. / ( c4
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
RKo
❑ NA
❑ NE
16. Did the facility fail to secure and/or operate per the irrigation design or wettable
❑ Yes
❑ No
IA
❑ 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
%o
❑ NA
❑ NE
Required Records & Documents
19. Did the facility fail to have the Certificate of Coverage & Permit readily available? 9 Yes ❑ o ❑ NA ❑ NE
20. Does the facility fail to have all components of the CAWMP readily available? If yes, check ❑Yes [o ❑ NA ❑ NE
the appropriate box.
❑ WUP ❑Checklists ❑ Design ❑ Maps ❑ Lease Agreements ❑Other:
21. es record keeping need provement? If ��] Yes ❑ No ❑ NA NE
Waste Application need
Freeboard Waste Analysis Analysis Weather Cod
Rainfall �ocking Crop Yield s Monthly and 1" Rainfall Inspections
22. Did the facility fail to install and maintain a rain gauge? ❑ Yes )CfNo ❑ NA ❑ NE
23. If selected, did the facility fail to install and maintain rainbreakers on irrigation equipment? ❑ Yes ❑ No 19 NA ❑ NE
Page 2 of 3 21412015 Continued

Facility Number: - Date of Ins ection: i
;No
24. Did the facility fail to calibrate waste application equipment as required by the permit?
❑ Yes
D NA ❑ NE
25. Is the facility out of compliance with permit conditions related to sludge? If yes, check
❑ Yes
❑ No
1�1 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
ffNo
❑ NA ❑ NE
27. Did the facility fail to secure a phosphorus loss assessments (PLAT) certification?
❑ Yes
19No
❑ 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
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)
31. 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:
7��`
32. Were any additional problems noted which cause non-compliance of the permit or CAWMP?
❑ Yes �TNo
❑ 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?
j2p
❑ Yes 10
❑ NA
❑ NE
Comments (refer to question #): Explain any YES answers and/or any additional recommendations or_any other comments.
U ings of facility to better explain situations (use additional pages as necessary).
— a2D4�
IRt ckV,4;;L1+ re -co v OJ5 ? � tl�Y15pe.L'skoins
V) i4s _kz C'OnA-ro I \4!!f�on
Cz
qpt i co sh G MrYCA Lk
w� a �� i c a o h 5 4 VI ���� q- owl 1 �(dl Vl a`�
\VWe- u)a'5 e Uutt 1515 wlort vi
5'�`�e� , Ind W Q fte-t-M3 I b 0 � ems- a-V-e \AA,
u
rL° S
Reviewer/Inspector Name:
Reviewer/Inspector Signatu
r
Date: Z,7
21412015
Page 3 of 3

z
�' � �'i� �•tl�� k` �. Feel^ .�, uy ��,° •1'.
41k x
s
s
w'.

.�,��
mob: �. i ,�
. = �,_
r
A ii K
�. r'?
�—
..:, °:re�^w ... • ••.• � ,* ,xi �, '" a ��r w ��,�w..
+aa A�rr u� M µ
.. � � .� �
�....: � �
WF � 55 �
�A� t p* .�
T!. � 'n jj
'. 4 ;4y � 6 j
"..w .„ "K
w � r.
.. � �: x ..
8'.� �°. �
P" a ..!� �., ` � d �g
m�a6e 8 �c � � a $ 8 ¢..
.• .q �' � �� � R
.�T i� �9 � dP �. rx k j ,g , _ w
rs
�,# a
� � ''`� F; � � � `,rr t:
� } s r � a� ' �¢�
1 -Tf � '''- t � t .�. f'` �' 4 i „� J�rt
e_ f �. � r' z a. < 7 s a':

M Division of Water Resources
Division of Soil and Water Conservation
❑❑
Other Agency
Facility Number:
030033
Facility Status: Active
Permit:AlA1CQ30033 Denied Access
Inpsection Type:
Structure Evaluation
Inactive Or Closed Date:
Reason for visit:
Emergency
County:
Aileghany Region: Winston-Salem
Date of visit:
1010512015 Entry Time: 12:20 pm Exit Time: 12:45 pm Incident #
Farm Name:
Atwood Dairy
Owner Email: ,
Owner:
Dwayne A Atwood
31'fti 9 `
Phone: [phone]
Mailing Address:
�' 2218
�..�.F?�+Y;�.,,,,;,..'
-xr--�• ._. sib e
�5parta=NC�28675=::,;,�,,� j11t1X2 �CEiI) �� • (OS� cgs
Physical Address:
130 US Hwy 221
Sparta NC 28675
Facility Status:
❑ Compliant
Not Compliant Integrator:
Location of Farm:
Latitude:
36" 31' 55" Longitude: 81° 10' 01"
Hwy 221 south of Sparta. Turn right on SR1347. Atwood Dairy is 112 mile on the left
Question Areas:
Waste Col, Stor, & Treat
Certified Operator: Mike A Atwood
Operator Certification Number: 21382
Secondary OIC(s):
On -Site Representative(s):
Name
Title Phone
24 hour contact name
!Nike Atwood
Phone : [phone]
On -site representative
Mike Atwood
Phone : [phone]'�%
Q
-7 �
Primary Inspector- Meh
Rosebrock
!
Phone: Cam^",
Inspector Signature:
IS
Date:VV
Secondary Inspector(s):
Inspection Summary:
Today's visit was to do an emergency check on the structural integrity of embankment after the recent storm. OIC waste not on
site.
Waste level is at top of embankment but was not dircharging today. OIC has dug a retention basin near WSP to contain any
animal waste that would leave the waste structure. Please mow embankment and cut small trees so that condition of
embankment can be viewed more thoroughly and to discourage animals from burrowing into the dam.
page: 1

i 0
Permit: AWC030033 Owner - Facility : Dwayne A Atwood Facility Number: 030033
Inspection Date: 10/05/15 Inpsection Type: Structure Evaluation Reason for Visit: Emergency
Waste Structures
Disignated Observed
Type Identifier Closed Date Start Date Freeboard Freeboard
Waste Pond WASTE POND
Waste Collection, Storage & Treatment
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, dry stacks ardlor wet stacks)
9. Does any part of the waste management system other than the waste structures require
maintenance or improvement?
Yes No Na No
❑ M ❑ ❑
❑ ❑ ❑
❑ ❑ ❑
❑ M ❑ ❑
page: .2

RECEIVED
N.C. Dept of ENR
JUN 2 9 205
EOALFERGIOFIC
Melissa Rosebrock
NC DENR
4S0 W Hanes Mill Rd
Suite 300
Winston Salem, NC 27105
We are aware of the new rule which allows a permitted farm with lower stocking numbers for 3 years or
greater to ask for the permit to be rescinded.
We have been stocking less than 100 confined cattle on our farm for greater than 3 years. Therefore, we
are requesting that our permit be rescinded at this time.
Please let me know if you need any additional information.
Thank you.
Mike Atwood
Atwood Farms
Sparta, NC

• 0
Division of Water Resources
Division of Soil and Water Conservation
❑. Other Agency
Facility Number:
030033 facility Sta.tus:
Active Permit: AWC030033
❑ Denied Access
Inpsection Type:
Compliance Inspection
Inactive Or Closed Date:
Reason for Visit:
Follow-up
County: Aleghany Region:
Winston-Salem
Date of Visit:
07/02/2015 Entry Time: 12:30 pm
Exit Time: 12:40 pm Incident X
Farm Name:
Atwood Dairy
Owner Email:
Owner:
Dwayne A Atwood
Phone:
336-372-8967
Mailing Address:
130 Hwy 221
Sparta NC 28675
Physical Address:
130 US Hwy 221
Sparta NC 28675
Facility Status:
Compliant El Not Compliant
Integrator:
Location of Farm:
Latitude: 36° 31' 55" Longitude:
81` 10' 01"
Hwy 221 south of Sparta. Turn right on SR1347. Atwood Dairy is 112
mile on the left.
Question Areas:
Certified Operator: Mike A Atwood Operator Certification Number: 21382
Secondary OIC(s):
On -Site Representativeis): Name Title Phone
24 hour contact name Mike Atwood Phone : [phone]
On -site representative Mike Atwood Phone : [phone]
Primary Inspector: Patrick Mitchell _ _ Phone:
Inspector Signature: �'•� _ Date:
Secondary Inspector(s):
Inspection Summary:
On June 29, 2015 WSRO received a request for permit rescission for the subject facility_ This request was made based on the
reported below threshold stocking for greater than three years. As a result an unannounced and unaccompanied reconnaissance
inspection of the wsp only was conducted- This was completed to ensure that the wsp freeboard level was returned well below
the max level to allow for sufficient storage capacity.
The waste level had not been lowered since the previous inspection. The facility reportedly will be land applying when field
conditions allow. A follow-up inspection will be conducted at a later date prior to permit rescission.
page: 1

• •
Permit: AWC030033 Owner - Facility - Dwayne A Atwood Facility Number: 030033
Inspection Date: 07/02/15 Inpsection Type: Compliance Inspection Reason for Visit: Follow-up
Waste Structures
Disignated Observed
Type Identifier Closed Date Start Date Freeboard Freeboard
Waste Pond WASTE POND 30.00
page: 2

low Division of Water Quality x,
Facility`Nuinber - 33 Division of Soil and Water Conservation
0 Other Agency
Type of Visit: q Compliance Inspection 0 Operation Review p Structure Evaluation O Technical Assistance
Reason for Visit: &� Routine 0 Complaint 0 Follow-up O Referral O Emergencv (:) Other O Denied Access
Date of Visit: fob /! / � Arrival Time: JO.'t10 Departure Time: ,' County: Region: Ws KV
Farm Name:-�tiJpai �t� Owner Email:
Owner Name: Dtnia ,%z 1`J���I HlO,_j Phone: 3 7 2 ` C? 61
Mailing Address: 13 U �s�, �Z� s p &f L i V C ZFG 7 5
Physical Address:
Facility Contact:
ry�, � /�t,•9Ded Title:
Onsite Representative:
Certified Operator:
Phone: Cc} 657- 6,,-4 -
Integrator:
Certification Number:
Back-up Operator: Certification Number: Q
Location of Farm: Latitude: t
�'tc 3 1 S� Longitude:
R wW 21 0 -, L Hr„ y ZZI S.,, F, otik, 64- �{7 G P,�j -M 6, ,i` —,
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
nry Poidtry C'anariry Pan -
Layers
Non -Layers
Pullets
Turkeys
Turkey Poults
Other
Discharges and Stream Impacts
1. is any discharge observed from any part of the operation?
Discharge originated at: ❑ Structure ❑ Application Field ❑ Other:
a. Was the conveyance man-made?
b. Did the discharge reach waters of the State? (if yes, notify DWQ)
c. What is the estimated volume that reached waters of the State (gallons)?
d. Does the discharge bypass the waste management system? (If yes, notify DWQ)
2. Is there evidence of a past discharge from any part of the operation?
3. Were there any observable adverse impacts or potential adverse impacts to the waters
of the State other than from a discharge?
Design Current
Cattle Capacity Pop.
Dairy Cow
Dairy Calf
Dairy Heifer
Dry Cow
N
.Non -Dairy
Beef Stocker
Beef Feeder
(p
Beef Brood Cow
❑ Yes x No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑Yes ❑No ❑NA ❑NE
❑ Yes ❑ No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes [:]No
❑ Yes No
❑ Yes No
[DNA ❑NE
❑NA ❑NE
[DNA ❑ NE
Page 1 of 3
21412011 Continued

Facili Number: 3- Date of Inspection: 6 l
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? ❑ Yes
Structure 1 Structure 2 Structure 3
Identifier: W 5
Spillway?:
Designed Freeboard (in):
Observed Freeboard (in):
Structure 4 Structure 5
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?
ANo ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ No ❑ NA ❑ NE
Structure 6
❑ Yes No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes No ❑ NA ❑ NE
If any of questions 4-6 were answered yes, and the situation poses an immediate public health or environmental threat, notify DWQ
7. Do any of the structures need maintenance or improvement? ❑ Yes No ❑ NA ❑ NE
8. Do any of the structures lack adequate markers as required by the permit? ❑ Yes No ❑ NA ❑ NE
(not applicable to roofed pits, dry stacks, and/or wet stacks) kr
9. Does any part of the waste management system other than the waste structures require [] Yes No ❑ NA ❑ NE
maintenance or improvement?
Waste Application
10. Are there any required buffers, setbacks, or compliance alternatives that need ❑ Yes ( No ❑ NA ❑ NE
maintenance or improvement? �[
11. Is there evidence of incorrect land application? If yes, check the appropriate box below. ❑ Yes No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Excessive Ponding ❑ Hydraulic Overload ❑ Frozen Ground ❑ Heavy Metals (Cu, Zn, etc.)
❑ PAN ❑ PAN > 10% or 10 lbs. ❑ Total Phosphorus ❑ Failure to Incorporate Manure/Sludge into Bare Soil
❑ Outside of Acceptable Crop Window ❑ Evidence of Wind Drift ❑ Application Outside of Approved Area
12. Crop Type(s):
U. 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?
❑ YeskNo
No
❑ NA
❑ NE
16. Did the facility fail to secure and/or operate per the irrigation design or wettable
❑ Yes
XNA
❑ NE
acres determination?
17. Does the facility lack adequate acreage for land application?
❑ Yes
No
❑ NA
❑ NE
18. Is there a lack of properly operating waste application equipment?
❑ Yes
No
❑ NA
❑ NE
Required Records & Documents
19. Did the facility fail to have the Certificate of Coverage & Permit readily available?
XYes
[:]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.
❑ Waste Application Weekly Freeboard ❑ Waste Analysis ❑ Soil Analysis
Yes ❑ No
[] aste Transfers
❑ NA ❑ NE
[] Weather Code
Rainfall Stocking ❑ Crop Yield 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
NA
❑ NE
Page 2 of 3
21412011 Continued

Waciiity Number: 03 - 3 Date of Inspection:
24. Did the facility fail to calibrate waste application equipment as required by the permit. ❑ Yes No ❑ NA ❑ NE
25. Is the facility out of compliance with permit conditions related to sludge? If yes, check ❑ Yes No ( NA ❑ NE
the appropriate box(es) below. �
❑ Failure to complete annual sludge survey ❑Failure to develop a POA for sludge levels
❑ Non -compliant sludge levels in any lagoon
List structure(s) and date of first survey indicating non-compliance:
26. Did the facility fail to provide documentation of an actively certified operator in charge? ❑ Yes �No ❑ NA ❑ NE
27. Did the facility fail to secure a phosphorus loss assessments (PLAT) certification? ❑ Yes No ❑ 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 ❑ Yes No ❑ NA ❑ NE
permit? (i.e., discharge, freeboard problems, over -application)
31. Do subsurface tile drains exist at the facility? If yes, check the appropriate box below
❑ Application Field ❑ Lagoon/Storage Pond ❑ Other:
❑ Yes 9 No ❑ NA ❑ NE
32. Were any additional problems noted which cause non-compliance of the permit or CAWMP? ❑ Yes
MNo
❑ NA
❑ NE
33. Did the Reviewer/Inspector fail to discuss review/inspection with an on -site representative? ❑ Yes
No
9No
❑ NA
❑ NE
34. Does the facility require a follow-up visit by the same agency? ❑ Yes
❑ 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 1. <�,,i1 J:s jc on ye'lr 11 xe>4 4.1d, �
NC's� W v 10 r',\ pe4 I n ' �t.n+lc,� � xf 4v zA,_!/ Ir1� O v t c aA< �, b L- f/j^y5,,
'� jVev/d 4 MOW LISP
!G �;%►�a� �q5 ne� feel gal cre- or tvvv parm) —: k{a i Mg'�l cofex,
I ofl
l�`
I YICfaI �GOf�J Qte;eA � "lr' �1L.L Qi �i
D dS ? r 2 ) 9
J
1 r , j Q�• Gt� r InJ � F ri p (e
� o�. "',re 1•vt�rc Refs � U�r'^ �s� v�� t, �s�� , tt
a Suers Utz are kd 4 'r��r S 1 5 11 ass � ,r• W Der r
sac' a� R4—�'4rd-� �� Rr�1 Ian
Reviewer/Inspector Name: �p�-�-f; a�[ r Phone:
Reviewer/Inspector Signature:-' Date: Z ZO
Page 3 of 3 21412011

t
Facility Number
r
Division of Water Quality r
d3 3-3 ,
0 Division of Soil and Water Conservation
0 Other.Agency.. s �:
Type of Visit: Vmpliance Inspection Operation Review Q Structure Evaluation O Technical AssistanceReason for Visit:Routine (:)Complaint O Follow-up ()Referral O Emergency 0 Other O Denied Access
Date of Visit: Arrival Time: ew, Departure Time: Z' D ounty: i� ��, h�,tt, Region: '�%-Sad Q
Farm Name: A�wood t aN- Owner Email:
Owner Name: 0 WAS, e -(r_ �, Phone: 3%Z— V 9 {v 7 i lW
Mailing Address: 1 *3b 4' j" SV S A t , C
Physical Address: 6.o t f ' t1_0"' 91 11
Facility Contact: , I4t k"[n106 J Title: Phone: C Sri — 095-�
Onsite Representative: Integrator:
Certified Operator: Certification Number:
Back-up Operator:
Location of Farm:
Certification Number:
Latitude: 34 3 j ✓`S Longitude:
$1 ' 10 /O1 //
4w y 21 0' L 4w 7 2 21 S, , IF- c,4, (G oC F 43u rJa lid,) / �.tv►� 0^ Lt(T_
Swine
Wean to Finish
Wean to Feeder
Feeder to Finish
Farrow to Wean
Farrow to Feeder
Farrow to Finish
Gilts
Boars
Other
Other
Design Current Design Current
Capacity Pop. Wet Poultry Capacity Pop.
La er
Non -La er
Non-L
Pullets
Other
Poults
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 DWQ)
c. What is the estimated volume that reached waters of the State (gallons)?
d. Does the discharge bypass the waste management system? (If yes, notify DWQ)
2. Is there evidence of a past discharge from any part of the operation?
3. Were there any observable adverse impacts or potential adverse impacts to the waters
of the State other than from a discharge?
Design Current
Cattle Capacity Pop.
Dairy Cow
Dairy Calf
Dairy Heifer
Dry Cow
Non -Dairy
Beef Stocker
Beef Feeder
Beef Brood Cow
-..Cu
0',17 1 1 .low
❑ Yes b No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes ❑ No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes [] No 0 NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes No
❑ Yes A
No
❑ NA ❑ NE
[]NA ❑NE
❑ NA ❑ NE
Page 1 of 3 21412011 Continued

Facili Number: 63 - 3 is Date of inspection:
Waste Collection & Treatment
4. Is storage capacity (structural plus storm storage plus heavy rainfall) less than adequate? ❑ Yes 9
No ❑ NA ❑ NE
a. If yes, is waste level into the structural freeboard? ❑ Yes ❑ No ❑ NA ❑ NE
l
Structure I Structure 2 Structure 3 Structure 4 Structure 5 Structure 6
Identifier: WP-fr - P0Aj
Spillway?:
Designed Freeboard (in):
Observed Freeboard (in): 3
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.) J�
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 M No ❑ NA ❑ NE
(not applicable to roofed pits, dry stacks, and/or wet stacks)
9. Does any part of the waste management system other than the waste structures require ❑ Yes No ❑ NA ❑ NE
maintenance or improvement? �<
Waste Application
10. Are there any required buffers, setbacks, or compliance alternatives that need
❑ Yes No
❑ NA
❑ NE
maintenance or improvement?
11. Is there evidence of incorrect land application? If yes, check the appropriate box below.
❑ Yes 9 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): e,s c,t a gay Pc f -e_
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
0 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
Reguired Records & Documents
19. Did the facility fail to have the Certificate of Coverage & Permit readily available?
❑ Yes No
0 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
❑ Waste Transfers
❑ Weather
Code
❑ Rainfall ❑ Stocking ❑ Crop Yield ❑ Monthly and 1" Rainfall Inspections
22. Did the facility fail to install and maintain a rain gauge?
❑ Yes No
❑ NA
0 NE
23. If selected, did the facility fail to install and maintain rainbreakers on irrigation equipment?
❑ Yes ❑ No
NA
0
❑ NE
Page 2 of 3
21412011 Continued

Facili Number: 6 3 - -3,3—j Date of Inspection: 470 1
24. Did the facility fail to calibrate waste application equipment as required by the permit? ❑ Yes No
25. Is the facility out of compliance with permit conditions related to sludge? If yes, check ❑ Yes [] No
the appropriate box(es) below.
❑ Failure to complete annual sludge survey ❑Failure to develop a POA for sludge levels
❑ Non -compliant sludge levels in any lagoon
List structure(s) and date of first survey indicating non-compliance:
26. Did the facility fail to provide documentation of an actively certified operator in charge?
27. Did the facility fail to secure a phosphorus loss assessments (PLAT) certification?
Other Issues
28. Did the facility fail to properly dispose of dead animals with 24 hours and/or document
and report mortality rates that were higher than normal?
29. At the time of the inspection did the facility pose an odor or air quality concern?
If yes, contact a regional Air Quality representative immediately.
30. Did the facility fail to notify the Regional Office of emergency situations as required by the
permit? (i.e., discharge, freeboard problems, over -application)
31. Do subsurface tile drains exist at the facility? If yes, check the appropriate box below.
❑ Application Field ❑ Lagoon/Storage Pond ❑ Other:
❑ Yes
9No
❑ Yes
XNo
❑ Yes
No
❑ Yes
No
❑ NA
❑ NE
j NA
❑ NE
❑NA
❑NE
❑NA
❑NE
❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes 0 No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes No ❑ NA ❑ NE
32. Were any additional problems noted which cause non-compliance of the permit or CAWMP? ❑ Yes ® No ❑ NA ❑ NE
33. Did the Reviewer/Inspector fail to discuss review/inspection with an on -site representative? ❑ Yes M No ❑ NA ❑ NE
34. Does the facility require a follow-up visit by the same agency? ❑ Yes Rj] 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).
�-I, S.T) etIVfl3 d"I, d^ 441 01r/16)(� (c.Ad af. Pam►`;
A,,) �1n�It d 4 Holc, pdJ 5, AeA- DUOKL- 2W 57 ki I wt4e
f -
P.
C fdt T° i
Reviewer/Inspector Name: �y i G AA j
Reviewer/Inspector Signature: /��
Page 3 of 3
Phone: C-331 ' '7 1-sag
Date: fzj f u i
21412011

Division of Water Quality
Facility"Number - O. Division of Soil and"Water Conservation
.O Other:Agency.;
(Type of Visit: Compliance Inspection U Operation Review O Structure Evaluation O Technical Assistance I
Reason for Visit: ( Routine O Complaint Q Follow-up O Referral 0 Emerizencv O Other O Denied Access
Date of Visit: Arrival Time: 1 Sa Departure Time: v�i County: J g Region: W5A0
Farm Name: wool DGl44 Owner Email:
Owner Name: Dvd-"'%UA4 Mvd ock� Phone: �!l L
Mailing Address: ,3 a 14 L-j� 22l (4,,-�
Physical Address:
Facility Contact:
L%r�['r �ua-c 1 ten_ t l�
M, 4 A�e0d Title:
Onsite Representative:
Certified Operator:
Phone: (4 6's-7— 0�s�
Integrator:
Certification Number:
Sack -up Operator: Certification Number:
Location of Farm: Latitude: 34 , i! f l 0 1 31 SS Longitude: 0 Q �
14WI 2-1 N.� L ��'i 221 �,� K an4 5K013L/% (614�6ww- "j/ F_� I _.r_j
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 Capacity Pop.
Layers
Non -Layers
Pullets
Turkeys
Turkev Poults
Discharges and Stream Impacts
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
Dai Calf
Dairy Heifer
Dry Cow
Non -Dairy
Beef Stocker
Beef Feeder
Beef Brood Cow
ern
❑ Yes XNo ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes [:]No
[:]Yes ❑ No
[:]Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes No
❑ Yes No
❑ NA ❑ NE
❑NA ❑NE
❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ NA ❑ NE
Page 1 of 3 21412011 Continued

M Facilf Number: r73 jDate of Inspection:
Waste Collection & Treatment
4. Is storage capacity (structural plus storm storage plus heavy rainfall) less than adequate? ❑ Yes XNo ❑ 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: k- 'tJ
Spillway?:
Designed Freeboard (in):
Observed Freeboard (in): 1118 hr
5. Are there any immediate threats to the integrity of any of the structures observed? ❑ Yes No ❑ NA ❑ NE
(i.e., large trees, severe erosion, seepage, etc.)
6. Are there structures on -site which are not properly addressed and/or managed through a ❑ Yes No ❑ NA ❑ NE
waste management or closure plan?
If any of questions 4-6 were answered yes, and the situation poses an immediate public health or environmental threat, notify DWQ
7. Do any of the structures need maintenance or improvement? ❑ Yes 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 `F,�I No ❑ NA ❑ NE
maintenance or improvement? ll``''��
Waste Application
10. Are there any required buffers, setbacks, or compliance alternatives that need ❑ Yes ( No ❑ NA ❑ NE
maintenance or improvement? Jt
11. Is there evidence of incorrect land application? If yes, check the appropriate box below. ❑ Yes * No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Excessive Ponding ❑ Hydraulic Overload ❑ Frozen Ground ❑ Heavy Metals (Cu, Zn, etc.)
❑ PAN ❑ PAN > 10% or 10 lbs. ❑ Total Phosphorus ❑ Failure to Incorporate Manure/Sludge into Bare Soil
❑ Outside of Acceptable Crop Window ❑ Evidence of Wind Drift ❑ Application Outside of Approved Area
12. Crop Type(s):
13. Soil Type(s):
14. Do the receiving crops differ from those designated in the CAWMP? ❑ Yes XNo ❑ NA ❑ NE
15. Does the receiving crop and/or land application site need improvement? ❑ Yes No ❑ NA ❑ NE
16. Did the facility fail to secure and/or operate per the irrigation design or wettable ❑ Yes 3 No ❑ NA ❑ NE
acres determination?
17. Does the facility lack adequate acreage for land application?
❑ Yes
1 o
❑ NA
❑ NE
18. Is there a lack of properly operating waste application equipment?
[:]Yes
gNo
❑ NA
❑ NE
Reouired Records & Documents Records & Documents
19. Did the facility fail to have the Certificate of Coverage & Permit readily available?
❑ Yes
❑ NA
❑ NE
20. Does the facility fail to have all components of the CAWMP readily available? If yes, check
❑ Yes
;4r]No
o
❑ 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 XNo ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Waste Application ❑ Weekly Freeboard ❑ Waste Analysis ❑ Soil Analysis ❑ Weather Code
❑ Rainfall [:]Stocking ❑ Crop Yield ❑ Monthly and 1" Rainfall Inspections
22. Did the facility fail to install and maintain a rain gauge? ❑ Yes XNo ❑ NA ❑ NE
23. If selected, did the facility fail to install and maintain rainbreakers on irrigation equipment? ❑ Yes❑ No t9fNA ❑ NE
Page 2 of 3 21412011 Continued

Facili Number: -.
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 ❑ 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?
27. Did the facility fail to secure a phosphorus loss assessments (PLAT) certification?
Other Issues
28. Did the facility fail to properly dispose of dead animals with 24 hours and/or document
and report mortality rates that were higher than normal?
29. At the time of the inspection did the facility pose an odor or air quality concern?
If yes, contact a regional Air Quality representative immediately.
30. Did the facility fail to notify the Regional Office of emergency situations as required by the
permit? (i.e., discharge, freeboard problems, over -application)
31. Do subsurface tile drains exist at the facility? If yes, check the appropriate box below.
❑ Application Field ❑ Lagoon/Storage Pond ❑ Other:
32. Were any additional problems noted which cause non-compliance of the permit or CAWMP?
33. Did the Reviewer/Inspector fail to discuss review/inspection with an on -site representative?
34. Does the facility require a follow-up visit by the same agency?
❑ Yes ' FkNo
❑ Yes XNo
❑ Yes * No
❑ NA ❑ NE
❑NA ❑NE
❑NA [3 NE
❑ Yes
No
[] NA
❑ NE
❑ Yes
No
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Yes
XNo
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Yes
No
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Yes
IV
No
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Yes
9No
❑ NA
0 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).
20
;7 j AW 1 �
Reviewer/]nspector Name: LI t Phone: 630 1 % j 572.$5'_
Reviewer/Inspector Signature: Date: 4/v) 3
Page 3 of 3 21412011

R. Division of Water Quality M.
Facility Number D 3 - O Division of Soil and Water M. ervation
O Other Agency
Type of Visit: R Compliance Inspection U Operation Review U Structure Evaluation U Technical Assistance j
Reason for Visit: Routine O Complaint O Follow-up O Referral O Emergency O Other O Denied Access II
Date of Visit: pL i 3 Arrival Time: Departure Time: D�a,`, County: 1 art Region: WS KO
Farm Name: Al'yiOQCS DA rv, Owner Email:
Owner Name: DU.IOLy Af, 4�ja p'A Phone:
Mailing Address: -3a Pt wy A t !
Physical Address: O �Dit l,s,D F
Facility Contact: AA k-e_ /k'��Title: Phone:
Onsite Representative: Integrator:
Certified Operator: Certification Number: 31 / 201 Z
Back-up Operator:
Location of Farm:
Certification Number:
a
Latitude: 36" 3 j SS Longitude:
�„ti SPa� ��y 22r S,� lZ o�� SR 13'(7 Gory C � r 4j, f Ara., or, 1
Swine
Design Current Design Current
Capacity Pop. Wet Poultry Capacity Pop.
La er
Non -La er
Wean to Finish
Wean to Feeder
Feeder to Finish
Farrow to Wean
Farrow to Feeder
Farrow to Finish
Gilts
Boars
Other
Other
Design Current
Dry Poultry Canacity Pon.
La ers
Non -Layers
Pullets
Turke s
Turkey Poults
Other
Discharges and Stream Impacts
1. Is any discharge observed from any part of the operation?
Discharge originated at: ❑ Structure ❑ Application Field ❑ Other:
a. Was the conveyance man-made?
b. Did the discharge reach waters of the State? (If yes, notify DWQ)
c. What is the estimated volume that reached waters of the State (gallons)?
d. Does the discharge bypass the waste management system? (If yes, notify DWQ)
2. is there evidence of a past discharge from any part of the operation?
3. Were there any observable adverse impacts or potential adverse impacts to the waters
of the State other than from a discharge?
Design Current
Cattle Capacity Pop.
Dairy Cow
Dairy Calf
Dairy Heifer
Dry Cow
Non -Dairy
Beef Stocker
Beef Feeder
Beef Brood Cow
❑ Yes XNo ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes ❑ No ❑ NA
❑ Yes [:]No ❑ NA
❑ Yes [:]No
❑ Yes tN
o
❑ Yes o
❑ NE
❑ NE
❑NA ❑NE
❑NA ❑NE
❑ NA ❑ NE
Page 1 of 3 21412011 Continued

Facility Number: - . Date of inspection: Q G y v
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 Structure 2
Identifier:
Spillway?:
Designed Freeboard (in):
❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ NA ❑ NE
Structure 3 Structure 4 Structure 5 Structure 6
u
Observed Freeboard (in): -30
5. Are there any immediate threats to the integrity of any of the structures observed?
❑ Yes]
No
❑ NA
❑ NE
(i.e., large trees, severe erosion, seepage, etc.)
1
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
dNo
❑ NA
❑ NE
(not applicable to roofed pits, dry stacks, and/or wet stacks)
9. Does any part of the waste management system other than the waste structures require
❑ Yes No
❑ NA
❑ NE
maintenance or improvement?
Waste Application
10. Are there any required buffers, setbacks, or compliance alternatives that need
❑ Yes .#No
❑ NA
❑ NE
maintenance or improvement?
%T
11. Is there evidence of incorrect land application? If yes, check the appropriate box below.
❑ Yes No
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Excessive Panding Hydraulic Overload ❑Frozen Ground ❑ Heavy Metals (Cu, Zn, etc.)
❑ PAN ❑ PAN > 10% or 10 lbs. ❑ Total Phosphorus ❑ Failure to Incorporate Manure/Sludge into Bare Soil
❑ Outside of Acceptable Crop Window ❑ Evidence of Wind Drift ❑ Application Outside of Approved Area
12. Crop Type(s):
13. Soil Type(s):
14. Do the receiving crops differ from those designated in the CAWMP?
❑ Yes No
❑ NA
❑ NE
15. Does the receiving crop and/or land application site need improvement?
❑ Yes 1 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
I S. Is there a lack of properly operating waste application equipment?
❑ Yes No
❑ NA
❑ NE
Required Records & Documents
19. Did the facility fail to have the Certificate of Coverage & Permit readily available?
❑ Yes No
❑ NA
❑ NE
20. Does the facility fail to have all components of the CAWMP readily available? If yes, check
❑ Yes No
❑ NA
❑ NE
the appropriate box.
❑WUP ❑Checklists [:]Design ❑ Maps ❑ Lease Agreements
❑Other:
21. Does record keeping need improvement?
❑ Yes 2No
8
❑ NA
❑ NE
[] Waste Application Weekly Freeboard aste Analysis Soil Analysis
a 40, .5+&
Weather Code
El-ka—infall [2'St cking rop Yield Qlao_nthly 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 ❑ o
9NA
❑ NE
Page 2 of 3
21412011 Continued

FaciliY Number: 6j jDate of Inspection: off, 72Z
24. Did the facility fail to calibrate waste application equipment as required by the permit? ❑ Yes ANo [3 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. IN
❑ 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
0
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 ❑ NA ❑ NE
If yes, contact a regional Air Quality representative immediately.
JkNo
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 XNo ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Application Field ❑ Lagoon/Storage Pond ❑ Other:
32. Were any additional problems noted which cause non-compliance of the permit or CAWMP?
❑ Yes
No ❑ NA ❑ NE
33. Did the Reviewer/Inspector fail to discuss review/inspection with an on -site representative?
❑ Yes No ❑ NA ❑ NE
34. Does the facility require a follow-up visit by the same agency?
❑ Yes No ❑ NA ❑ NE
Comments (refer to question #): Explain any YES answers and/or any additional recommendations or any other comments.
Use drawings of facility to better explain situations (use additional pages as necessary).
yRn4�r�7
�Js�l <�t�) ,i �ue�
►�itie�► n�X7` t,reif4t
0�4A AZX�
12.
• L,k,c� F�l, �,l�hy W tl �G �3rw
Reviewer/Inspector Name:—�i`ZM TZri►��� Phone: (336)
Reviewer/Inspector Signature: Date: 0��T O ) 2—
Page 3 of 3 21412011

la
Divi on of Water Quality
Facility Number ©� - O Division of Soil and Water ,nervation 1 1-1 m
O Other Agency
Type of Visit: Compliance Inspection O Operation Review p Structure Evaluation O Technical Assistance
Reason for Visit: 1Lu Routine O Complaint O Follow-up O Referral O Emergency O Other O Denied Access
Date of Visit: aaf 1 Arrival Time: 10 Departure Time: Ll 1. , � I v .] County: an Region: W_5 P,0
Farm Name: { wog Qi r` Owner Email:
Owner Name: WOwr 11 �. k-w00Q Phone: 3 -7 2-
Mailing Address: at L a $ 6
Physical Address:
Facility Contact: M l P-,,P A+u_,no 0 Title:
Onsite Representative:
Certified Operator:
Back-up Operator:
Location of Farm:
Phone (C} (o5 -7 — O S S y
Integrator:
Certifir,kion Nu ber:
Certifica�umber,.'l
Latitude: 3&o 111 5 S " Longitude: :2 1° I 0 1 6 1 r1
14vj y a o- I So L>- -t, V -p +nn s p o_r+ct , R i c3 h+ o n+o 5 2 1 3 4 -7 �; o W
course_ ". . Farm on kc+ -
Swine
Wean to Finish
Wean to Feeder
Feeder to Finish
Farrow to Wean
Farrow to Feeder
Farrow to Finish
Gilts
Boars
Other
Other
Design Current Design Current
Capacity Pop. Wet Poultry Capacity Pop.
I kLayer
Non -La er
Non-L.
Pullets
Pouets
Design Current
Design Current
Cattle Capacity Pop.
Dairy Cow
Dairy Calf
Dairy Heifer
Dry Cow
Non -Dairy
Beef Stocker
Beef Feeder
Ll 4;
Beef Brood Cow
Discharges and Stream Impacts
1. Is any discharge observed from any part of the operation? ❑ Yes 0 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
E�No
❑ NA
❑ NE
3. Were there any observable adverse impacts or potential adverse impacts to the waters
❑ Yes
9No
❑ NA
❑ NE
of the State other than from a discharge?
Page I of 3 21412011 Continued

Facility Number: - jDate of Inspection: S
�6
Waste Collection & Treatment
4. Is storage capacity (structural plus storm storage plus heavy rainfall) less than adequate?
❑ Yes
P No
❑ NA
❑ NE
a. If yes, is waste level into the structural freeboard?
❑ Yes
❑ No
❑ NA
❑ NE
Structure I Structure 2 Structure 3 Structure 4
Structure 5
Structure 6
Identifier: W a S+e_ l`j� o (d
Spillway?:
Designed Freeboard (in):
Observed Freeboard (in): O
5. Are there any immediate threats to the integrity of any of the structures observed?
❑ Yes
No
❑ NA
❑ NE
(i.e., large trees, severe erosion, seepage, etc.)
/6
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?
T
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?
P Yes
❑ No
❑ NA
❑ NE
8. Do any of the structures lack adequate markers as required by the permit?
❑ Yes
Ej 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 D No ❑ NA ❑ NE
maintenance or improvement?
Waste Application
10. Are there any required buffers, setbacks, or compliance alternatives that need [:]Yes C%No ❑ NA ❑ NE
maintenance or improvement?
11. Is there evidence of incorrect land application? If yes, check the appropriate box below. ❑ Yes 0 No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Excessive Ponding ❑ Hydraulic Overload ❑ Frozen Ground ❑ Heavy Metals (Cu, Zn, etc.)
❑ PAN ❑ PAN > 10% or l0 lbs. ❑ Total Phosphorus ❑ Failure to Incorporate Manure/Sludge into Bare Soil
❑ Outside of Acceptable Crop Window ❑ Evidence of Wind Drift ❑ Application Outside of Approved Area
12. Crop Type(s):
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
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
XNo
❑ NA
❑ NE
20. Does the facility fail to have all components of the CAWMP readily available? If yes, check
❑ Yes
V No
❑ NA
❑ NE
the appropriate box.
❑ WUP []Checklists ❑ Design ❑ Maps ❑ Lease Agreements
❑Other:
21. oes record keeping need improvement?-I�+es; else piete-Hex-
❑ Yes
No
❑ NA
❑ NE
ste A plica on eekly Freeboard Waste Analysis oil Analysis
P
ga'infull Stocking Crop Yield onthly and I" Rainfall
TTT��� Weather Code
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
NA
❑ NE
Page 2 of 3
21412011 Continued

Facili Number: 0jr- Date of Inspection: S
6LLJ
24. Did the facility fail to calibrate waste app« ation 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 CA 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
9
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
0
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 N71 No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Application Field ❑ Lagoon/Storage Pond ❑ Other:
77��
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 swings of facility to better explain situations (use additional pages as necessary).
t-D� �IIJt k-
Vi . dL(� Soil t e. S f- re—Por+ ? �5 Co�u 2 a vk-
� o�. t t b rati on i r\ ab 1 O. NO
�# % 17N r i
Imo
.2ac)? .
a. AJo °
�.C�-� �pr � � �ZC�
ux' car
-7� 7 P /U-k-e , a.
07 Cat. a Mt&)L)
�i[ �l a fi t , 1971r 04 A L_/ sn 41 . ) .
Reviewer/Inspector
Reviewer/Inspector Signature:
Page 3 of 3
Pis' e __1 -1 f 5 JLSf
Date: slsl a C) t
21412011
O

Division of Water Quality
Facility Number f7� 9Division of Soil and Water Conservation low
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: Q 14 10 Arrival Time: ® Departure Time: U115D County: Region:
Farm Name: balruOwner Email: [�
Owner Name: A 1/ Phone: r $ r
Mailing Address: 13 0 P�!~C�3V aa� � � 4 •� NK -796 76
Physical Address: Q/-m /��� / -7 /
Facility Contact: ��+l,l �[� ht" � Title: Phone No: ! P i 6 � f — 6 S
Onsite Representative: Integrator:
Certified Operator: Operator Certification Number:.
Back-up Operator:
Back-up Certification Number:
Location of Farm: Latitude: ® o M I IMI Longitude: fuo m ,
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
❑ Layer
❑ Non -Laver
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
❑ 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: Mi
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 DNo ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes
❑ No
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Yes
❑ No
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Yes
❑ No
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Yes
o
El NA
El NE
El Yes
7No
❑ NA
❑ NE
Page 1 of 3 12128104 Continued

Facility Number: b — 0 Date of Inspection "rt'�'t''�' •
Waste Collection & Treatment
4. Is storage capacity (structural plus storm storage plus heavy rainfall) less than adequate? ❑ Yes No ❑ NA ❑ NE
�'W_ a. If yes, is waste level into the structural freeboard? El Yes El No El NA ❑ NE
Structure Structure 2 Structure 3 Structure 4 Structure 5 Structure 6
/� Identifier: _1a5t
Spillway?:
Designed Freeboard (in):
Observed Freeboard (in):
5. Are there any immediate threats to the integrity of any of the structures observed? ❑ Yes 4No
❑ NA ❑ NE
(ie/ large trees, severe erosion, seepage, etc.)
6. Are there structures on -site which are not properly addressed and/or managed ❑ Yes XNo
❑ NA ❑ NE
through a waste management or closure plan?
If any of questions 4-6 were answered yes, and the situation poses an immediate public health or environmental threat,
notify DWQ
7. Do any of the structures need maintenance or improvement? Yes ❑ No
❑ NA ❑ NE
8. Do any of the stuctures lack adequate markers as required by the permit'? ❑ Yes WNo
❑ NA ❑ NE
(Not applicable to roofed pits, dry stacks and/or wet stacks)
9. Does any part of the waste management system other than the waste structures require ❑ Yes No
❑ NA ❑ NE
maintenance or improvement?
Waste Application
10. Are there any required buffers, setbacks, or compliance alternatives that need ❑ Yes No
❑ NA ❑ NE
maintenance/improvement?
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 El 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
IS. Is there a lack of properly operating waste application equipment'? ❑ Yes
XNo
❑ NA
❑ NE
�rNo
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ No
NA
El NE
]?'NO
❑ NA
❑ NE
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):
�, rid less eons
o,� Yet. lease. s� r { l o� �near
S TAI C a
e
Reviewer/Inspector Name
Phone:_
Reviewer/Inspector Signature:
Date: Q
Page 2 of 3 L' 12128704 ' Continued

Facility Number: 0017 Inspection I D Z)
Required Records & Documents
19. Did the facility fail to have Certificate of Coverage & Permit readily available? ❑ Yes P4o ❑ NA ❑ NE
20. Does the facility fail to have all components of the CAWMP readily available? If yes, check ❑ Yes ❑ NA [INE
ElEl❑ Design ❑Maps ❑Otherthe appropriate box. WUP Checklists ;I(No
21. D s record keeping need ' provement? ❑ Yes WNo ❑ NA ❑ NE
Waste Applicat We
-illy Freeboard Waste Analysis Soil alysis [ante-grmt�€ers
Rainfall Stockin Yield 120 Minute Inspections onthl and 1" Rain Ins ections �Weath=Code
g P Y P
22. Did the facility fail to install and maintain a rain gauge? ❑ Yes )jj'No❑ NA ❑ NE
23. If selected, did the facility fail to install and maintain rainbreakers on irrigation equipment? ❑ Yes ❑ No [)(NA ❑ NE
24. Did the facility fail to calibrate waste application equipment as required by the permit?
❑ Yes 2jfNo
❑ NA
❑ NE
25. Did the facility fail to conduct a sludge survey as required by the permit?
❑ Yes ❑ No
0 NA
❑ NE
26. Did the facility fail to have an actively certified operator in charge?
❑ Yes XNo
❑ NA
❑ NE
27. Did the facility fail to secure a phosphorus loss assessment (PLAT) certification?
❑ Yes 0 No
❑ NA
ElNE
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?
lAdditional Comments and/or Drawings:
❑ Yes �iNo
❑ Yes NrNo
❑ NA ❑ NE
❑NA ❑NE
❑ Yes X No
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Yes jbj�No
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Yes lNo
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Yes ANo
❑ NA
❑ NE
ao �o Sat 1-s+ ?NO r1"fi GtL+.
.�.�� ✓z d
U'41'-bj o?
V_JA- a 114
0
Page 3 of 3 12128104

r
0F 4'',lAT Incident Report
Report Number: 201001653 n f O V PC -
{ 1
Incident Type: Non -Compliance Reporting
On -Site Contact:
Category: APS - Animal
First/Mid/Last Name:
[Incident"Started-101/2212010
Company Name:
County: Alleghany
Phone:
City: Sparta
Pager/Mobile Phone: !
Farm #: 003-0033
Responsible Party:
Reported By:
Owner:
First/Mid/Last Name:
Permit: AWC030033
Company Name:
Facility: Atwood Dairy
Address:
First Name: Dwayne
Middle Name: A
City/State/Zip:
Last Name: Atwood
Phone:
Address 130 Hwy 221
Pager/Mobile Phone: 1
City/State/Zip: Sparta NC 28675
Phone:
Material Category: Estimated Qty: UOM
Chemical Name Reportable Qty. lbs. Reportable Qty. kgs.
DD:MM:SS Decimal
Latitude:
Longitude:
Location of Incident: Ihvy 221
Address:
City/State/Zip
Position Method:
Position Accuracy:
Position Datum:
Report Created 05/14/10 12:45 PM Page I

Cause/Observation: Directions:
Action Taken: Comments:
Incident Questions:
Did the Material reach the Surface Water? Unknown Conveyance:
Surface Water Name?
Did the Spill result in a Fish Kill? Unknown
If the Spill was from a storage tank indicate type.
Containment? Unknown
Cleanup Complete? Unknown
Water Supply Wells within 1500ft : Unknown
Access to Farm
■ Structure Questions
0 Animal Population
Estimated Number of fish?
(Above Ground or Under Ground)
Groundwater Impacted : Unknown
0 Spray Availability
Report Created 05/14/10 12:45 PM Page 2

Access to Farm
Farm accessible From the main road? Q Yes ❑ No ❑ NA ❑ NE
Animal Population
Confined?
❑ Yes ❑ No ❑ NA ❑ NE
Depop? ❑ Yes ❑ No ❑ NA ❑ NE
Feed Available?
❑ Yes ❑ No ❑ NA ❑ NE
Mortality?
❑ Yes ❑ No ❑ NA ❑ NE
Spray Availability
Pumping equipment? ❑ Yes ❑ No ❑ NA ❑ NE
Available Fields?
❑ Yes ❑ No ❑ NA ❑ NE
Structure Questions
Breached?
Inundated?
Overtopped?
Water on outside wall?
Poor dike conditions?
Waste Structure Type Waste Structure Identi inches Plan Due Date
Waste Pond WASTE POND 18.00
Event Type Event Date Due Date
Incident closed
Requested Additional Information
Report Received
Referred to Regional Office - Primary Contact
Report Entered 2010-05-11 12:41:09
Incident Start 2010-01-22 08:00:00
❑ Yes ❑ No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes ❑ No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes ❑ No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes ❑ No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes ❑ No ❑ NA ❑ NE
Plan Recieved Date Level OK Date
Comment
Report Created 05/14/10 12:45 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:
DatetTime: 2010-05-11 12:41!09 PM
Referred Via:
Did DWQ request an additional written report?
If yes, What additional information is needed?
Report Created 05/14/10 12:45 PM Page 4

Type of Visit x Compliance Inspection 0 Operation Review 0 Structure Evaluation 0 Technical Assistance
Reason for Visit Aoutine 0 Complaint 0 Follow up 0 Referral 0 Emergency 0 Other ❑ Denied Access
Date of Visit: 5' arrival Time: Departure Time: i 1 :. County: Region:
Farm Name: ry Owner Email: Owner Name: 0 P• 1� Phone: 3 7 d- � $2 6 7 -axxa �
Mailing Address: �l V C— �;—g 7s
Physical Address:
Facility Contact:,±I�Ot Title:
Onsite Representative: AU
Certified Operator: M-1 L`UtffA
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
0
Latitude: FTtl
Phone No:
S-i - 0S 5
Integrator:
Operator Certification Number:
Back-up Certification Number:
557
❑ lSSJ Longitude: LOLL
o afd . ©,,
Design Current Design Current': Design*; Currei
Capacity Population Wet'Poultry. Capacity, apulattoti'' Celtic Capacity °Popul'a#i
4 ❑ La er
❑ Non -Laver
Dry Poultry
Pullets
Other ❑ Turke
❑ Other _ _ J _❑ Other
Dairy Cow
Dairy Calf
❑ Dairy Heifer
❑ Dry Cow
❑ Non -Dairy
❑ Beef Stocker
Beef Feeder
❑ Beef Brood Cowl
I
Poults
Numb"e
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 Haters of the State? (If yes, notify DWQ)
c. What is the estimated volume that reached waters of the State (gallons)?
d. Does discharge bypass the waste management system? (If yes, notify DWQ)
2. Is there evidence of a past discharge from any part of the operation?
3. Were there any adverse impacts or potential adverse impacts to the Waters of the State
other than from a discharge?
❑ Yes XNo ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes
❑ No
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Yes
❑ No
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Yes
❑ No
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Yes ,, (No ❑ NA ❑ NE
ElYes ❑QNo ❑ NA ❑ NE
12128104 Continued

Facility Number: • Date of Inspection 9�
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
t
Structure 1 Structure 2 Structure 3 Structure 4 Structure 5 Structure 6
/Idrl
entifier: L4(
'�1�pilhvay?:
Designed Freeboard (in):
Observed Freeboard (in):
5. Are there any immediate threats to the integrity of any of the structures observed? ❑ Yes �No ElNA ElNE
(ie/ large trees, severe erosion, seepage, etc.)
6. Are there structures on -site which are not properly addressed and/or managed ❑ Yes XNo ❑ NA ❑ NE
through a waste management or closure plan?
If any of questions 4-6 were answered yes, and the situation poses an immediate public health or environmental threat, notify DWQ
7. Do any of the structures need maintenance or improvement? K Yes ElNo ❑ NA ❑ NE
8. Do any of the stuctures lack adequate markers as required by the permit? ❑ Yes *o ❑ NA ❑ NE
(Not applicable to roofed pits, dry stacks and/or wet stacks)
9. Does any part of the waste management system other than the waste structures require ❑ Yes No ❑ NA ❑ NE
maintenance or improvement?
Waste Application
10. Are there any required buffers, setbacks, or compliance alternatives that need ❑ Yes No ElNA ElNE
maintenance/improvement?
]I. is there evidence of incorrect application? If yes, check the appropriate box below. ❑ Yes ANo ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Excessive Ponding ❑ Hydraulic Overload ❑ Frozen Ground ❑ Heavy Metals (Cu, Zn, etc.)
[]PAN ❑ PAN > 10% or 10 lbs ❑ Total Phosphorus ❑ Failure to Incorporate Manure/Sludge into Bare Soil
❑ Outside of Acceptable Crop Window ❑ Evidence of Wind Drift ❑ Application Outside of Area
12. Crop tvpe(s) 8 (r
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 ❑ NE
No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ NoP�NA❑ NE
0No ❑ NA ❑ NE
bdNo ❑ 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):
PEI
IReviewer/Inspector Name 1 i [Phone: 1' a8
Reviewer/Inspector Signatur� 0 JA=gd7 j Date:
12128104 Continued

Facility Number: — 33 Date of Inspection •
_Required Records & Documents
19. Did the facility fail to have Certificate of Coverage & Permit readily available? ❑ Yes t I No ❑ NA ❑ NE
20. Does the facility fail to have all components of the CAWMP readily available? If yes, check ❑ yes U No ❑ NA ❑ NE
the appropriate box.
❑ WUP El Checklists El Design El maps El Other
21.Doe�ecord keeping nee7wteklyFreeboard
ovement? If yes, chec a appropriate
,box
�below. El Yes No ❑ NA ❑ NE
U W ste Applic ion Waste Analysis as/oil Analysis n
Rainfall Mocking ❑ Crop Yield ionthly and V Rain Inspections Weather Code
22. Did the facility fail to install and maintain a rain gauge?
23. If selected, did the facility fail to install and maintain rainbreakers on irrigation equipment?
24. Did the facility fail to calibrate waste application equipment as required by the permit?
25. Did the facility fail to conduct a sludge survey as required by the permit?
26. Did the facility fail to have an actively certified operator in charge?
27. Did the facility fail to secure a phosphorus loss assessment (PLAT) certification?
Other Issues
28. Were any additional problems noted which cause non-compliance of the permit or CAWMP?
29. Did the facility fail to properly dispose of dead animals within 24 hours and/or document
and report the mortality rates that were higher than normal?
30. At the time of the inspection did the facility pose an odor or air quality concern?
If yes, contact a regional Air Quality representative immediately
31. Did the facility fail to notify the regional office of emergency situations as required by
General Permit? (ie/ discharge, freeboard problems, over application)
32. Did Reviewer/inspector fail to discuss review/inspection with an on -site representative?
33. Does facility require a follow-up visit by same agency?
❑ Yes
❑ Yes
❑ Yes
❑ Yes
❑ Yes
❑ Yes
❑ Yes
❑ Yes
,No ❑ NA
❑��/o
No XNA
❑ NA
WNo ❑ NA
ONo ❑ NA
LNo ❑ NA
4No
Wo
❑ Yes wlo
Cl Yes >(No
❑ Yes OirNo
❑ Yes (No
❑ NE
❑ NE
❑ NE
❑ NE
❑ NE
❑ NE
❑NA ❑NE
[I NA ❑NE
❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ NA ❑ NE
Additional Comments and/or Drawings:
AL
0 �o
12128104

Division of Water Quali
Facility Number �" Division of Soil and Water=onservation ' P[q
J — O Other Agency
Type of Vlsit O; compliance Inspection 0 Operation Review 0 Structure Evaluation 0 Technical Assistance
Reason for Visit SC.I Routine 0 Complaint 0 Fallow up 0 Referral 0 Emergency 0 Other ❑ Denied Access
Date of Visit:T Arrival Time: ®
Departure Time: County:
Region:2
Farm Name:
t Y- V
Owner Email:
Owner Name: �l l� P 431
Phone:
Mailing Address: L 2)b u �a
`, a 86
Physical Address:
Facility Contact: An'I Y—,e P41AMn4lj_
t +
f I
Phone No: e-
3 -2 W ! �1
�S � +d $s✓
Title:
Onsite Representative:: `�—
Integrator:
Certified Operator:
A i a )A
Operator Certification Number:
Back-up Operator:
Back-up Certification Number:
Location of Farm: Latitude: ®O M Longitude: ® ° 1 ® {dq EA
31t.
�1
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
❑ Layer
I❑ 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)
Design rent
Cattle Capacity Populatioi
KLDairy Cow
I asg<&,
❑ 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: 17-1
d. Does discharge bypass the waste management system? (If yes, notify DWQ)
2. Is there evidence of a past discharge from any part of the operation'?
3. Were there any adverse impacts or potential adverse impacts to the Waters of the State
other than from a discharge?
❑ Yes )(No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes ❑ No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes ❑ No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes ❑ No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes �No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes gNo ❑ NA ❑ NE
Page I of 3
12,128104 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
Structure
Structure Structure 2 Structure 3 Structure 4
Structure 5
Structure 6
;I
Identifier: �\51 C� FOjnj
Spillway?:
Designed Freeboard (in):
Observed Freeboard (in): CPO
5. Are there any immediate threats to the integrity of any of the structures observed?
❑ Yes XNo
❑ NA
❑ NE
(ie/ large trees, severe erosion, seepage, etc.)
6. Are there structures on -site which are not properly addressed and/or managed
❑ Yes o
❑ NA
❑ NE
through a waste management or closure plan?
If any of questions 4-6 were answered yes, and the situation poses an immediate public health or environmental threat, notify DWQ
7. Do any of the structures need maintenance or improvement? ❑ Yes YNo ❑ 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 y(No ❑ NA ❑ NE
maintenance or improvement?
Waste ADDlication
10. Are there any required buffers, setbacks, or compliance alternatives that need ❑ Yes N(NNo ❑ NA ❑ NE
maintenance/improvement?
11. Is there evidence of incorrect application? If yes, check the appropriate box below. ❑ Yes XNo ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Excessive Ponding El Hydraulic Overload ❑ Frozen Ground El 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 A No
❑ NA
❑ NE
15. Does the receiving crop and/or land application site need improvement?
❑ Yes
No
❑ NA
❑ NE
16. Did the facility fail to secure and/or operate per the irrigation design or wettable acre determination ?
❑ Yes
❑ No
NA
❑ NE
17. Does the facility lack adequate acreage for land application?
❑ Yes
VNo
❑ 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):
Cr :; R; r
01C, s V-�'Oq- sQ neoAex- -� r Kano re,
Ana
Reviewer/] nspedYor blame I Phone: — oZ
Reviewer/Inspector Signature: Date:
Page 2 of-3 1 12128104 Confinued

c,XI V kk � j �a_ Uz
c' Number: Date of Inspection •
Required Records & Documents
19. Did the facility fail to have Certificate of Coverage & Permit readily available? ❑ Yes .YNo ❑ NA ❑ NE
20. Does the facility fail to have all components of the CAWMP readily available? If yes, check ❑ Yes ;00 ❑ NA ❑ NE
the appropriate box. ❑ WUP ❑ Checklists ❑ Design ❑ Maps ❑ g Other
p
21. Do s record keeping need improvement? If yes ,(Yes ❑ No ❑ NA ❑ NE
ste A lication L�'VJee Freeboard ❑Waste Analysis. Soil Anal sis srsFers� n
PP Y
VRainfall Stockin Cro Yield ❑ s onthl and 1" Rain Inspections
Weather Code
g P Y P
22. Did the facility fail to install and maintain a rain gauge? ❑ Yes X No ❑ NA ❑ NE
23. If selected, did the facility fail to install and maintain rainbreakers on irrigation equipment? ❑ Yes ❑ No 0 NA ❑ NE
24. Did the facility fail to 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 IN NA ❑ NE
26. Did the facility fail to have an actively certified operator in charge? ❑ Yes No ❑ NA ❑ NE
27. Did the facility fail to secure a phosphorus loss assessment (PLAT) certification? ❑ Yes t%Vo ❑ NA ❑ NE
Other Issues
28. Were any additional problems noted which cause non-compliance of the permit or CAWMP? ❑ Yes ,(No ❑ NA ❑ NE
29. Did the facility fail to properly dispose of dead animals within 24 hours and/or document ❑ Yes o ❑ NA ❑ NE
and report the mortality rates that were higher than normal? [[ __
30. At the time of the inspection did the facility pose an odor or air quality concern? El 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) �w
32. Did Reviewer/Inspector fail to discuss review/inspection with an on -site representative? ❑ Yes OeNo ❑ NA ❑ NE
33. Does facility require a follow-up visit by same agency? ❑ Yes 56 No ❑ NA ❑ NE
A iitional Comments and/or Drawings: n
rev Sc?be e✓C ea ^�.
a Ca b miion d u e- 6U a069
a � ///&/0? --ll� �a7
7- r ,
Page 3 of 3 12128104

-F Aivision of Water Quality.
Facility Numbed Dj 0 Division of Soil and Water Conservation
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 ❑ Denied Access
Date of Visit: ~] p� �� Arrival Time: I 1 I N ti 1 Departure Time: County: I e hezn Y Region:
Farm Name: 1" 1 iA2DQ tr'S:f _ -- — Owner Email:
Owner Name: I,c7U-�.y ii Tft_l04 Phone:.
Mailing Address: L3 �-
� � l� � - � a � � Qr'J Ta--
Physical Address:
Facility Contact: t t Title:
~��
Onsite Representative: i}-
� E1lntA
Certified Operator: M_-11 i�_ETE�oC
Integrator:
Phone No: — " a 7-
to
Operator Certification Number: 0
Back-up Operator: Back-up Certification Number:
Location of Farm:
y a a 1 5. From
Swine
Wean to Finish
Wean to Feeder
Feeder to Finish
Farrow to Wean
Farrow to Feeder
Farrow to Finish
Gilts
Boars
Other
❑ Other
o
Latitude: ,j
Longitude:
_ o
O
S pox+ Q • f� �. G i'1 �b
s IQ 1
3 q7`
�'�-• 1'Yl 11 C
Design Current Design Current
Capacity Population 'Vet Poultry Capacity Population
❑ La er
C ❑ Non-Layet
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 Populktion
IN Dairy Cow
Dairy Calf
❑ Dairy Heifei
❑ Dry Cow
❑ Non -Dairy
❑ Beef Stocker
❑ Beef Feeder
❑ Beef Brood Cow
c. What is the estimated volume that reached waters of the State (gallons)?
Number of Structures:
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 NNo ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Yes ❑
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Yes fNo
❑ NA
El NE
El Yes
❑ NA
❑ NE
12128104 Continued

Facility \`umber: — Date of Inspection -1 10
Waste Collection & Treatment
4. Is storage capacity (structural plus storm storage plus heavy rainfall) less than adequate?
❑ Yes
XNo ❑ NA ❑ NE
a. If yes, is waste level into the structural freeboard?
❑Yes
❑ No ❑ NA ❑ NE
Structure IStructure 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
o ❑ NA El NE
(ie/ large trees, severe erosion, seepage, etc.)
/rr/// '''"'
6. Are there structures on -site which are not properly addressed and/or managed
❑ Yes
VNo ❑ 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?
Wyes
NNo ElNA ElNE
❑Wo
8. Do any of the stuctures lack adequate markers as required by the permit?
ElYes
ElNA ElNE
(Not applicable to roofed pits, dry stacks and/or wet stacks)
9. Does any part of the waste management system other than the waste structures require
❑ Yes
Xo ElNA ❑ NE
maintenance or improvement?
Waste Application
10. Are there any required buffers, setbacks, or compliance alternatives that need
❑ Yes!
❑ NA ❑ NE
maintenance/improvement?
!�No/[:INA
11. Is there evidence of incorrect application? If yes, check the appropriate box below.
❑ Yes
❑ NE
❑ Excessive Ponding ❑ Hydraulic Overload ❑ Frozen Ground ❑ Heavy Metals (Cu, Zn, etc.)
❑ PAN ❑ PAN > 10% or 10 lbs ❑ Total Phosphorus ❑ Failure to Incorporate Manure/Sludge
into
Bare Soil
❑ Outside of Acceptable Crop Window ❑ Evidence of Wind Drift ❑ Application Outside
of Area
12. Crop type(s)
13. Soil type(s)
14. Do the receiving crops differ from those designated in the CAWMP?
)� Yes
El No
❑ NA
❑ NE
15. Does the receiving crop and/or land application site need improvement?
❑ Yes
�No
❑ NA
ElNE
16. Did the facility fail to secure and/or operate per the irrigation design or wettable acre determination?❑ Yes
❑No
INA
❑ 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
1� 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):
rUa oil `c n ej- effA ��9_ S'r ll ce_ ly) 2 00
3I� I0? = 3.4 1 65 . Nl Cdoo
�0-0-d Js Mow) iA W[ oSS'i
Reviewer/Inspector Name as&('� Phone: 1 1 1 sa
Reviewer/Inspector Signature: Date: Q
Mu S `' ` 11118104 Continued
�4f
_ r`' 1 �Q_ I 0

Facility Number: 3 — o 0Date of Inspection 1 0
Required Records & Documents
19. Did the facility fail to have Certificate of Coverage & Permit readily available?
❑ Yes OJ No ❑ NA ❑ NE
20. Does the facility fail to have all components of the CAWMP readily available? If yes, check ❑ Yes pdNo ❑ NA ❑ NE
the appropirate box. ❑ WUP ❑ Checklists ❑ Design El Maps [I Other
21. Does ecord keeping need i ovement? Yes LI No ❑ NA NE
P g ❑ ❑
� Obl
Waste Ap�4king
n Wee Freeboard Waste Analysis Soil A ysis s.
Rainfall Crop Yield Monthly and 1" Rain InspectioYoo
ather Code
22. Did the facility fail to install and maintain a rain gauge? El Yes NA ❑ NE
23. If selected, did the facility fail to install and maintain rainbreakers on irrigation equipment? ❑ Yes ❑ No X 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 ❑ N ' NA El NE
26. Did the facility fail to have an actively certified operator in charge? El Yes No ❑ NA ❑ NE
27.
Did the facility fail to secure a phosphorus loss assessment (PLAT) certification?
❑ Yes ❑ No
[XNA
❑ NE
Other Issues
28.
Were any additional problems noted which cause non-compliance of the permit or CAWMP?
V Yes ❑ No
❑ NA
❑ NE
29.
Did the facility fail to properly dispose of dead animals within 24 hours and/or document
❑ Yes XNo
❑ 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?
❑ YesNo
A
❑ NE
If yes, contact a regional Air Quality representative immediately
31.
Did the facility fail to notify the regional office of emergency situations as required by
❑ Yes No
❑ NA
❑ NE
General Permit? (ie/ discharge, freeboard problems, over application)
32.
Did Reviewer/Inspector fail to discuss review/inspection with an on -site representative?
El Yes ip No
❑ NA
❑ NE
33.
Does facility require a follow-up visit by same agency?
❑ Yes No
❑ NA
❑ NE
Additional Comments and/or Drawings:
Cal' bra-} do � ue-- Q a'I n QC4. aoo�.
$ . v P rev't 5e d � b e e- ? Cm_ > -gym ha--7 7
n Lo . t S u_j,� r lei
a�. 3`
r �
a I (jo s f o c-wt n r�Cnrn� S l� u f(, r-eJ v(I� S_7 QV)t M at5
/taAkh J*�
1
12128104

Division of Water Quality
n Division of Soil and Water Conservation
❑ Other Agency
Facility Number: 030033 Facility Status: Active Permit: AWC 30033 ❑ Denied Access
Inspection Type: Compliance Inspection Inactive or Closed Date:
Reason for Visit: Routine County: Alleghanny Region: Winston-Salem
Date of Visit: / ! Entry Time:1120 AMExit Time: 12:30 PM Incident #:
Farm Name: Atwood Dairy _
Owner: Dwayne
Mailing Address: 130 Hwy 221
Physical Address:
Facility Status: ❑ Compliant ❑ Not Compliant Integrator:
Owner Email:
C•Y•i-TiW- 11 Z
Phone: - 7 -
Location of Farm: Latitude: 36°31'55" Longitude: 81°10'01"
Hwy 221 south of Sparta. Turn right on SR1347. Atwood Dairy is 112 mile on the left.
Question Areas:
Discharges & Stream Impacts
Records and Documents
Certified Operator: Mike A Atwood
Secondary OIC(s):
Waste Collection & Treatment Waste Application
Otherissues .
Operator Certification Number: 21382
On -Site Representative(s): Name Title Phone
On -site representative Mike Atwood Phone: [phone]
24 hour contact name Mike Atwood Phone: [phone]
Primary Inspector: qjs a Rosebrock Phone:
Inspector Signature: (k Date:
1
Secondary Inspector(s):
Inspection Summary:
7. Vegetation on dam has been mowed and looks much better. Suggest spraying with herbicide for broadleaves next Spring.
14. Need to change all corn fields to include fescue hay.
21. Need to re -sample #15883 since zinc was about 6500! Could have been contaminated by nail bucket used to collect samples.
21. 200 soil samples reportedly lost. Operator did not re -sample in 2005.
21. Need to update PAN balance for waste applied to fescue in November 2006. Send to DWQ.
22. Rain gauge is across road (Hwy 221).
24. Must send calibration to DWQ by Dec. 31st.
28. WMP needs to be changed to reflect change from dairy to beef operation.
Page: 1
C

Permit: AWC030033 Owner - Facility: Dwayne A Atwood Facility Number : 030033
Inspection Date: 12106/2006 Inspection Type: Compliance Inspection Reason for Visit: Routine
Regulated Operations Design Capacity Current Population
Cattle
Cattle - Beef Stocker Calf
1
72
G Cattle -Milk Cow
1 288
0
Total Design Capacity: 288
Total SSLW: 403,200
Type Identifier Closed Date Start Date Designed Freeboard Observed Freeboard
k1ste Pond WASTE POND 24.00
IN
Page: 2

r
Permit: AWC030033 Owner - Facility: Dwayne A Atwood Facility
Number:
030033
inspection Date: 1210612006 Inspection Type: Compliance Inspection Reason for Visit: Routine
Discharges & Stream Impacts
Yes
No
NA
NE
1. Is any discharge observed from any part of the operation?
❑
■
❑
❑
Discharge originated at:
Structure
❑
Application Field
❑
Other
❑
a. Was conveyance man-made?
❑
■
❑
❑
b. Did discharge reach Waters of the State? (if yes, notify DWQ)
❑
■
❑
❑
c. Estimated volume reaching surface waters?
d. Does discharge bypass the waste management system? (if yes, notify DWQ)
❑
■
❑
❑
2. Is there evidence of a past discharge from any part of the operation?
❑
■
❑
❑
3. Were there any adverse impacts or potential adverse impacts to Waters of the State other than from a
❑
■
❑
❑
discharge?
Waste Collection, Storage & Treatment
Yes
No
NA
NE
4. Is storage capacity less than adequate?
❑
■
❑
n
if yes, is waste level into structural freeboard?
❑
5. Are there any immediate threats to the integrity of any of the structures observed (I.e.l 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?
❑
■
❑
❑
B. Do any of the structures lack adequate markers as required by the permit? (Not applicable to roofed pits,
❑
■
❑
0
dry stacks andlor wet stacks)
9. Does any part of the waste management system other than the waste structures require maintenance or
❑
■
❑
❑
improvement?
Waste Application
Yes, No
NA
NE
10, Are there any required buffers, setbacks, or compliance alternatives that need maintenance or
❑
■
❑
❑
improvement?
11. Is there evidence of incorrect application?
❑
■
❑
❑
If yes, check the appropriate box below
Excessive Ponding?
❑
Hydraulic Overload?
❑
Frozen Ground?
❑
Heavy metals (Cu, Zn, etc)?
❑
Page: 3

•
•
Permit: AWC030033 Owner - Facility: Dwayne A Atwood
Facility Number: 030033
Inspection Date: 12106/2006 Inspection Type: Compliance Inspection
Reason for Visit: Routine
Waste Application
Yes No NA NE
PAN?
❑
Is PAN n 10%/10 lbs.?
n
Total P205?
❑
Failure to incorporate manure/sludge into bare soil?
Outside of acceptable crop window?
Evidence of wind drift?
Application outside of application area?
Crop Type 1
Fescue (Hay)
Crop Type 2
Crop Type 3
Crop Type 4
Crop Type 5
Crop Type 6
Soil Type 1
Soil Type 2
Soil Type 3
Soil Type 4
Soil Type 5
Soil Type 6
14. Do the receiving crops differ from those designated in the Certified Animal Waste Management
■
n
n
n
Plan(CAWMP)?
15. Does the receiving crop and/or land application site need improvement?
0
■
❑
Cl
16. Did the facility fail to secure and/or operate per the irrigation design or wettable acre determination?
0
■
❑
11
17. Does the facility lack adequate acreage for land application?
❑
■
n
n
18. is there a lack of properly operating waste application equipment?
n
■
Cl
El
Records and Documents
Yes
No
NA
NE
19. Did the facility fail to have Certificate of Coverage an%ermriteadily available?20.
Does the facility fail to have all components of the Cdily available?
❑
■
0
❑
If yes, check the appropriate box below.
Wu P?
Page; 4

Permit: AWC030033 Owner - Facility; Dwayne A Atwood
Facility Number:
030033
Inspection Date: 12/06/2006 Inspection Type: Compliance Inspection
Reason for Vlsit: Routine
Records and Documents
Yes
No
NA NE
Checklists?
❑
Design?
❑
Maps?
❑
Other?
❑
21. Does record keeping need improvement?
■
❑
❑ ❑
If yes, check the appropriate box below.
Waste Application?
❑
120 Minute inspections?
❑
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?
❑
■
❑ n
26. Did the facility fail to have an actively certified operator in charge?
❑
■
❑ ❑
27. Did the facility fail to secure a phosphorous loss assessment (PEAT) certification?
❑
■
❑ ❑
V..
Idn
IUA MF
28. Were any additional problems noted which cause non-compliance of the Permit or CAWMP? ■ D ❑ ❑
29. Did the facility fail to properly dispose of dead animals within 24 hours and/or document and report those ❑ ■ 0 ❑
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 ❑ ■ ❑ 0
Quality representative immediately_
Page: 5

Permit: AWC030033 Owner - Facility: Dwayne A Atwood Facility Number: 030033
Inspection Date: 12/0612006 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? ❑ ■ D
32. Did Reviewerllnspector fail to discuss review/inspection with on -site representative? D ■ D D
33. Does facility require a follow-up visit by same agency? ❑ ■ D D
Page: 6

Adik Division of Water Quality
Facility Number 9Division of Soil and Water Conservation P
Q Other Agency
Type of Visit OkCompliance Inspection 0 Operation Review 0 Structure Evaluation 0 Technical Assistance
Reason for Visit j Routine 0 Complaint 0 Follow up 0 Referral 0 Emergency 0 Other ❑ Denied Access
Date of Visit: oZ Arrival Time: a Departure Time: 1 mo County: A Region: Ws P_a
Farm Name: �l f i.�or C)cLl i^�V_,j Owner Email:
Owner Name: �,� l Lt� n P_. A + I�t� Phone: r ` 3 7
Mailing Address: _L 3 6 "IA-) V � a 1 S togr+I 4P 7 S-
T�
Physical Address:
Facility Contact: 1 I Ke-. PfLk3ccd Title:
Onsite Representative: 4 e-
Certified Operator: _ i P1 P
Back-up Operator:
Location of Farm:
4 a'd_1
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: 3-7 R T °2 7 / 7
- c9- )
Operator Certification Number:
Back-up Certification Number:
Latitude: [MO
o Of-�) ro R Spy . N . o In to 5 It-1 13
Design Current Design Current
Capacity Population Wet Poultry Capacity Population
❑ La er
I li JEI Non -Layer
Dry Poultry
❑ Layers
❑ Non -Layers
❑ Pullets
❑ Turkeys
❑ Turkey Poults
❑ Other
Discharges & Stream Impacts ��t
���
1. Is any discharge observed from any part of the operation?
Discharge originated at: ❑ Structure ❑ Application Field ❑ Other
a. Was the conveyance man-made?
Longitude: ®o ®' t7
7 Fa-r-m o rL [ e- -C4,
Design Current
Cattle Capacity Population
Dairy Cow
Dairy Calf
❑
Dairy Heifer
❑
D Cow
❑
Non-Dai
❑
Beef Stocker
--
❑
Beef Feeder
-
❑
Beef Brood Cow
Number of Structures:
A -- '
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 EXNo ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes
❑ No
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Yes
❑ No
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Yes
❑ No
❑ Yes 0No ElNA ElNE
ElYes No ❑ NA ❑ NE
12128104 Continued

II
Facility Number: O — Date of Inspection
Waste Collection & Treatment
4. Is storage capacity (structural plus storm storage plus heavy rainfall) less than adequate?
❑ Yes XNo
❑ NA
❑ NE
a. If yes, is waste level into the structural freeboard?
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ NA
❑ NE
Structure I Structure 2 Structure 3 Structure 4
Structure 5
Structure 6
Identifier:��
Spillway?:
Designed Freeboard (in):
Observed Freeboard (in):
5. Are there any immediate threats to the integrity of any of the structures observed?
❑ Yes O(N.
❑ NA
❑ NE
(ie/ large trees, severe erosion, seepage, etc.)
6. Are there structures on -site which are not properly addressed and/or managed
❑ Yes A 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 KNo ❑ NA ❑ NE
$. Do any of the stuctures lack adequate markers as required by the permit? ❑ Yes gNo ❑ NA ❑ NE
(Not applicable to roofed pits, dry stacks and/or wet stacks) XNo
9. Does any part of the waste management system other than the waste structures require ❑yes ElNA ElNE
maintenance or improvement?
Waste Application
10. Are there any required buffers, setbacks, or compliance alternatives that need ❑ Yes
VNo ❑ 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 l0 lbs ❑ Total Phosphorus ❑ Failure to Incorporate Manure/Sludge into Bare Soil
❑ Outside of Acceptable Crop Window ❑ Evidence of Wind Drift ❑ Application Outside of Area
12.
Crop type(s)
13.
Soil type(s)
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
lNE
16.
Did the facility fail to secure and/or operate per the irrigation design or wettable acre determination ? ❑ yes
,❑NA
El,/
No I,� NA
[-INE
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
1A 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):
(DJe�&aclo on on do.m <' ba#:eJ I
Reviewer/Inspector Name 1 Phone: a
Reviewerllnspector Signatur Date:
Jp o 7 nr.7

Facility Number: — gate of Inspection r
Required Records & Documents /
19. Did the facility fail to have Certificate of Coverage & Permit readily available? El Yes �7No
o ❑ NA El NE
20. Does the facility fail to have all components of the CAWMP readily available? If yes, check Yes ❑ NA ❑ NE
the appropriate box. ❑ WUP ❑ Checklists ❑ Design El Maps El Other
21. Does ecord keeping need improvement. Yes ❑ No ❑ NA ❑ NE
u W to Application ee y Freeboard 4aste Analysis�Sovilrnalysisainfall L1�'Stocking Crop Yield 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? ❑ Yes ❑ No INNA ❑ NE
24. Did the facility fail to calibrate waste application equipment as required by the permit?
AYes
❑ No
❑ NA
❑ NE
25. Did the facility fail to conduct a sludge survey as required by the permit?
❑ Yes
❑No
XA
ElNE
26. Did the facility fail to have an actively certified operator in charge?
❑ Yes
No
A
❑ NA
[INE
27. Did the facility fail to secure a phosphorus loss assessment (PLAT) certification?
ElYes
❑ No
XNA
❑ NE
Other Issues
28. Were any additional problems noted which cause non-compliance of the permit or CAWMP?
Yes [:3No
A
❑ NA ❑NE
29. Did the facility fail to properly dispose of dead animals within 24 hours and/or document
❑ Yes No
❑ NA ❑ NE
and report the mortality rates that were higher than normal?
30. At the time of the inspection did the facility pose an odor or air quality concern?
❑ Yesl %,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 X No
❑ NA ❑ NE
General Permit? (ie/ discharge, freeboard problems, over application)
32. Did Reviewer/Inspector fail to discuss review/inspection with an on -site representative?
❑ Yes �No
❑ NA ❑ NE
33. Does facility require a follow-up visit by same agency?
❑ Yes No
❑ NA ❑ NE
kdditional Comments and/or Drawings:
50 �a !. /� es 1 e #I5�$ �_3 —� z ►, = "4S-c> a 1 I a doh C .Q-�
e
IQaP
(.vo,5+e rdl��/ol�
= 3.L1165.
N//oo0C 00.
Page 3 of 3 Il 12128104

Division of Water Quality
❑ Division of Soil and Water Conservation
❑ Other Agency
Facility Number: 03QO33 Facility Status: Active Permit: AWC030033❑ Denied Access
Inspection Type: Compliance In section Inactive or Closed Date:
Reason for Visit: Routine _ County: Allleghanv Region: Winston-Salem
Date of Visit: 04/26/2005 _ Entry Time: 01:00 PM Exit Time: 02:30 PM
Farm Name: &Wood Dai[y
Owner: Dwayne A Atwood
Incident #.
Owner Email:
Mailing Address: 130 Hwy 221 _ Sparta NC 28675
Physical Address:
Facility Status: ❑ Compliant ❑ Not Compliant Integrator:
Phone: [phone]
Location of Farm: Latitude: 36°31'55" Longitude: 81'10'01"
Hwy 221 south of Sparta. Turn right on SR1347. Atwood Dairy is 112 mile on the left.
Question Areas:
0 Discharges & Stream Impacts
0 Records and Documents
0 Waste Collection & Treatment 0 Waste Application
0 Other issues
Certified Operator: Mike A Atwood Operator Certification Number: 21382
Secondary OIC(s):
On -Site Representative(s): Name Title Phone
24 hour contact name Mike Atwood Phone: [phone]
Primary Inspector: Me' 336-771-4600 a M Rosebrock Phone: Ext.383 _
Inspector Signature: Date: oZ
Secondary Inspector(s):
Phone:
Phone:
Inspection Summary:
7. Need to mow/cut the vegetation on the dam before Summer.
9. Need to sample and spread manure stockpiled outside barn and record PAN balance
21. Went over new permit requirements with operator.
Must install rain gauge within 30 days.
21. Could not locate 2004 soil test results nor the one for 2005 yet. NOV for 2004.
28. Need to add 4 acres below the barn (T-610) to WUP.
4/13/05 waste analysis=8.7 lbs. N11000 gal.
Page: 1

Permit: AWC030033 Owner - Facility: Dwayne A Atwood Facility Number : 030033
Inspection Date: 04/26/2005 Inspection Type: Compliance Inspection Reason for Visit: Routine
Regulated Operations Design Capacity Current Population
Cattle
0 Cattle -Milk Cow 288 160
Total Design Capacity: 288
Total SSLW: 403,200
Waste Structures
Type Identifier Closed Date Start Date Designed Freeboard Observed Freeboard
Waste Pond WASTE POND I I 1 1 60.00
Page: 2

•
r�
permit: AWC030033 Owner - Facility: Dwayne A Atwood
Facility Number: 030033
Inspection Date: 0412612005 Inspection Type: Compliance Inspection Reason for Visit: Routine
Q':ic Ps R Stream Imparts YPs 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 DWo) ❑ ■ ❑ ❑
c. Estimated volume reaching surface waters?
d. Does discharge bypass the waste management system? (if yes, notify DWO)
❑
0 ❑
❑
2. Is there evidence of a past discharge from any part of the operation?
❑
■ ❑
❑
3. Were there any adverse impacts or potential adverse impacts to Waters of the State other than from a discharge?
❑
YPs
■ ❑
No NA
❑
NE
Waste Co�twion, Storage &Treatment
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, dry stacks
❑
■ ❑
❑
and/or wet stacks)
9. Does any part of the waste management system other than the waste structures require maintenance or
❑
■ ❑
❑
improvement?
Yes
No NA
NE
Waste Ao_nlicatinn
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 Pending?
❑
Hydraulic Overload?
❑
Frozen Ground?
❑
Heavy metals (Cu, Zn, etc)?
❑
PAN?
❑
Is PAN > 10%110 lbs.?
❑
Total P205?
❑
Failure to incorporate manure/sludge into bare soil?
❑
Outside of acceptable crop window?
❑
Evidence of wind drift?
❑
Application outside of application area?
❑
Crop Type 1
Com
(Silage)
Crop Type 2
Fescue (Hay, Pasture)
Crop Type 3
Small Grain (Wheat,
Barley,
Oats)
Crop Type 4
Crop Type 5
Page: 3

Permit: AWC030033 Owner - Facility: Dwayne A Atwood
Facility Number: 030033
Inspection Date: 04/26/2005 Inspection Type: Compliance Inspection Reason for Visit: Routine
Wastp ApplacalEon
Crop Type 6
Yes
Nn NA
NF
Soil Type 1
Soil Type 2
Soil Type 3
Soil Type 4
Soil Type 5
Soil Type 6
U. Do the receiving crops differ from those designated in the Certified Animal Waste Management Plan(CAWMP)?
❑
■ ❑
❑
15. Does the receiving crop and/or land application site need improvement?
❑
■ ❑
❑
16, Did the facility fail to secure and/or operate per the irrigation design or wettable acre determination?
❑
❑ ■
❑
17. Does the facility lack adequate acreage for land application?
❑
■ ❑
❑
18. Is there a lack of properly operating waste application equipment?
❑
Yes
■ ❑
No NA
❑
NF_
Records and Documents
19. Did the facility fail to have Certificate of Coverage and Permit readily available?
❑
■ ❑
❑
20. Does the facility fail to have all components of the CAWMP readily available?
❑
■ ❑
Cl
It 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: AWC030033 Owner - Facility: Dwayne A Atwood Facility Number: 030033
Inspection Date: 04/26/2005 Inspection Type: Compliance Inspection Reason for Visit: Routine
athprIssues
28. Were any additional problems noted which cause non-compliance of the Permit or CAWMP?
Yon
❑
No NA
0 ❑
NE
❑
29. Did the facility fail to property 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
❑
M ❑
❑
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?
❑
0 ❑
❑
Page: 5

1. 7.
,Fa A�cift.umber
2
1
M-5 51 1
Division of Water Quality .
' Division of Soil and Water C.0serivation
41
O Other Agency
ry
Type of Visit Nitc
mpliance Inspection 0 Operation Review 0 Structure Evaluation 0 Technical Assistance
Reason for VisRoutine 0 Complaint 0 Follow up 0 Referral 0 Emergency 0 Other ❑ Denied Access
Date of Visit: Arrival Time: ® Departure Time: County: 14 [�r1N Region: �h-V
Farm dame: r u Owner Email: r
Owner Name: Phone:
Mailing Address: j � + �`�-' U � . ���r� � 3 � C_
Physical Address: A- i
Facility Contact: _ Il., �'. f I e JxTitle:
Onsite Representative:
Certified Operator:
Le -
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
Integrator:
(T7 e No: 312 o
4PS_ -1— 5
Operator Certification Number: C:�' .5 SIR —
Back -up Certification Number:
Latitude: 1 �� Longitude:
Design Current Design Current
Capacity Population Wet Poultry Capacity Population
❑ La er
❑ Non -Layer _.-
Dry Poultry
❑ Layers
❑ Non -Layers
❑ Pullets
❑ Turke s
❑ Turkey Poults
❑ Other
Discharges & Stream Impacts
1. Is any discharge observed from any part of the operation?
Discharge originated at: ❑ Structure ElApplication Field ElOther
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
o2
Lj 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: 171'
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 XNo ❑ NA FINE
❑ Yes
❑ No
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Yes
❑ No
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Yes
❑ No
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Yes X'No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes �o ❑ NA ❑ NE
12128104 Continued

* Date of Inspection
Facility Number: —3
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
O�,NA
❑ NE
Struc ure 1 Structure 2 Structure 3 Structure 4
Identifier: 5
Structure 5
Structure 6
Spillway?:
Designed Freeboard (in):
Observed Freeboard (in):
5. Are there any immediate threats to the integrity of any of the structures observed?
❑ Yes No
4
ElNA
ElNE
(ie/ large trees, severe erosion, seepage, etc.)
6. Are there structures on -site which are not properly addressed and/or managed
❑ Yes X 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
e.
7. Do any of the structures need maintenance or improvement? Yes r No ' ❑ NA ❑ NE
8. Do any of the stuctures lack adequate markers as required by the permit? ❑ Yes No ❑ NA ❑ NE
(Not applicable to roofed pits, dry stacks and/or wet stacks)
9. Does any part of the waste management system other than the waste structures require ❑ Yes �No ❑ NA ❑ NE
maintenance or improvement?
Waste Application
10. Are there any required buffers, setbacks, or compliance alternatives that need ❑ Yes >,! No ❑ NA ❑ NE
maintenance/improvement?
11. Is there evidence of incorrect application? If yes, check the appropriate box below. ❑ Yes ❑ No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Excessive Ponding ❑ Hydraulic Overload ❑ Frozen Ground ❑ Heavy Metals (Cu, Zn, etc.)
❑ PAN ❑ PAN > 10% or 10 lbs ❑ Total Phosphorus ❑ Failure to Incorporate Manure/Sludge into Bare Soil
❑ Outside of Acceptable Crop Window ❑ Evidence of Wind Drift ❑ Application Outside of Area
12. Crop type(s)
13. Soil type(s)
14. Do the receiving crops differ from those designated in the CAWMP?
❑ Yes o
El NA
El NE
15. Does the receiving crop and/or land application site need improvement?
El Yes
7NO
❑ NA
❑ NE
16. Did the facility fail to secure and/or operate per the irrigation design or wettable acre determination%❑ Yes
❑ No
h1A
❑ NE
17. Does the facility lack adequate acreage for land application?
❑ Yes
No
❑ NA
❑ NE
18. Is there a lack of properly operating waste application equipment?
❑ Yes
No
❑ NA
❑ NE
Comments (refer to question #): Explain any YES answers and/or any recommendations or any other comments.
Use drawings of facility to better explain situations. (use additionat,pages as necessary):,
qo
I d
Reviewer/Inspector Name I A to ro Phone: O
Reviewer/Inspector Signatu Date: a(p
12128104 Continued

Facility Number: 0f Inspection / 1.�
Required Records & Documenis if
19. Did the facility fail to have Certificate of Coverage & Permit readily available? ❑ Yes o ❑ NA ❑ NE
20. Does the facility fail to have all components of the CAWMP readily available? If yes, check ❑ yes No ❑ NA ❑ NE
the appropirate box. ❑ WUP ❑ Checklists ❑ Design El maps ❑ Other
21`Does record keeping need improvement? If yes check the appropriate box below.es ❑ No ❑ NA ❑ NE
] Xly
Waste Acation Weekl Freeboard � Waste Analysis Soil Analysis
=Rainfall% Stocking Crop Yield _ ❑ Monthly an I" Rain InspectionsQ:Wea:t:he:rDCode
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? El
ElYes ❑ No ) NA ❑ NE
24. Did the facility fail to calibrate waste application equipment as required by the permit? 6r ()6 ❑ Yes No ❑l /NA ElNE
25. Did the facility fail to conduct a sludge survey as required by the permit? ❑ Yes ElNo L NA ❑ NE
26.
Did the facility fail to have an actively certified operator in charge?
❑ Yes
*No
❑ NA
❑ NE
27.
Did the facility fail to secure a phosphorus loss assessment (PLAT) certification?
❑ Yes
❑ No
XNA
❑ NE
Other Issues
28.
Were any additional problems noted which cause non-compliance of the permit or CAWMP?
❑ Yes
[--] No
[INA
ElNE
29.
Did the facility fail to properly dispose of dead animals within 24 hours and/or document
El
LNo
❑ NA
ElNE
and report the mortality rates that were higher than normal?
rr
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)
rr
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
XNo
❑ NA
❑ NE
Additional Comments and/or Drawines:
q W/L�� 3 0 dAkf v-
0
0
N
11" A- add. VA 4dAj ( I - (0 16)li c)u-P
&C,
I2128104

hnical Assistance Site Visit Repo
0 Dilbn of Soil and Water ConservatiorW
0 Natbral Resources Conservation Service
Q Soil and Water Conservation District
Q Other...
Facility Number 03 - 33 Date: 10/19/04 Time: 1 11:30 1 Time On Farm: 75 WSRO
Farm Name Atwood Dairy County Alleghany Phone:
336-372-8967
Mailing Address 130 Hwy 221 Sparta NC 28675
Onsite
Representative Farm Worker
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
Design Current
Capacity Population
❑ Wean to Feeder
❑ Feeder to Finish
❑ Farrow to Wean
❑ Farrow to Feeder
❑ Farrow to Finish
❑ Gilts
❑ Boars
Integrator
Purpose Of Visit
QQ Routine
O Response to DWQ/DENR referral
Q Response to DSWC/SWCD referral
O Response to complaint/local referral
O Requested by producer/integrator
Q Follow-up
O Emergency
O Other...
Design Current
Capacity Population
❑ Layer
❑ Non -Layer
® Dairy
❑ Non -Dairy
Integrator
Purpose Of Visit
QQ Routine
O Response to DWQ/DENR referral
Q Response to DSWC/SWCD referral
O Response to complaint/local referral
O Requested by producer/integrator
Q Follow-up
O Emergency
O Other...
Design Current
Capacity Population
❑ Layer
❑ Non -Layer
® Dairy
❑ Non -Dairy
® Dairy
❑ Non -Dairy
288
tao
❑ Other
GENERAL QUESTIONS:
1. is waste discharging from any part of the operation and reaching surface waters or wetlands? ❑ yes ® no
2. Is there evidence of a past waste discharge from any part of the operation that waste reached ❑ yes ® no
surface waters or wetlands?
3. Does any problem pose an immediate threat to the integrity of the waste structure (large trees, ❑ yes _ ® no
seepage, severe erosion, etc.)?
4. Is there evidence of nitrogen over application, hydraulic overloading or excessive ponding ❑ yes ® no
requiring DWQ notification?
5. Is there evidence of improper dead animal disposal that poses a threat to the environment ❑ yes ® no
and/or public health?
6. Is the waste level within the structural freeboard elevation range for any waste structure? ❑ yes ® no
Structurel Structure 2 Structure 3 Structure 4 Structure 5
Identifier WSP
Level (inches) 30
CROP TYPES Corn, Silage Fescue -graze Fescue -hay Rye grass (cover)
SPRAYFIELD
SOIL TYPES CeE
FnC2
TaC
WaC
Wa E
7. What type of technical assistance does the onsite representative feel is needed? (list in comment section)
03/10/03

Facility Number 03 - 33 Date:
10/19/04
PARAMETER
O No assistance provided/requested
❑ 8. Waste spill leaving site
TECHNICAL ASSISTANCE Needed
Provided
❑ 9. Waste spill contained on site
❑ 10. Level in structural freeboard
25. Waste Plan Revision or Amendment
❑
❑
❑ 11. Level in storm storage
26. Waste Plan Conditional Amendment
❑
❑
27. Review or Evaluate Waste Plan w/producer
❑
❑
❑ 12. Waste structure integrity compromised
El13. Waste structure needs maintenance
28. Forms Need (list in comment section)
29. Missing Components (list in comments)
❑
❑
❑ 14. Over application >= 10% & 10 lbs.
30. 21-11.0200
❑
❑
❑ 15. Over application < 10% or < 10 lbs.
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
❑
❑
[119. Late/missing lagoon level records
34. Sludge Evaluation
❑
❑
❑ 20. Late/missing soils analysis
❑ 21. Crop needs improvement
35. Sludge or Closure Plan
❑
❑
❑ 22. Crop inconsistent with waste plan
36. Sludge removallclosure procedures
❑
❑
37. Waste Structure Evaluation
❑
❑
❑ 23. Irrigation maintenance deficiency
❑ 24. Deficient sprayfield conditions
38. Structure Needs Improvement
❑
❑
39. Operation & Maintenance Improvements
❑
❑
40. Marker check/calibration
❑
❑
Regulatory Referrals
41. Site evaluation
❑
❑
❑ Referred to DWQ Date:
42. Irrigation Calibration
❑
❑
[:]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- The waste plan was amended to change crop
47. Evaluate WAD certification/rechecks
❑
❑
48. Crop evaluationtrecommendations
❑
❑
rotations.
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)
❑
❑
5.
56. Operation & maintenance education
❑
❑
57. Record keeping education
❑
❑
6.
58. Croplforage management education
❑
❑
59. Soil and/or waste sampling education
❑
❑
03/10/03

0
Facility Number 03 - 33 Date: 1 10/19/04
COMMENTS:
Waste analysis: 10/11/04 LSD 4.5 Ibs.N11000 gals. B, 5/13/04 LSD 5.0 lbs.N11000 gals. B
Mr. Atwood was not present for today's operation review.
Mr. Atwood has received his new C.O.C. and general permit.
Spring waste application records looked good. No application records for the Fall '04 yet.
* Remember to use the new forms for the Fall '04 waste applications.
* Now required to record rainfall, crop yield per field, monthly cow numbers ( can use DHI records ), an
ou have to calibrate your slurry tank spreader.
28. 1 provided Mr. Atwood with some slurry I and II forms, some freeboard forms and a stocking rate
form.
TECHNICAL SPECIALIST lRocky Durham
SIGNATURE
Date Entered: 10/20/04
Entered By: lRocky Durham
03/10/03

-ft
vision of Water Quality
tvsio m.
a � t.
' ' n of Soil and;Water Conservation
O Other Agency _
Type of Visit Compliance Inspection O Operation Review O Lagoon Evaluation
Reason for Visit XRoutine O Complaint O Follow up O Emergency Notification O Other ❑ Denied Access
Date of Visit: S Time:
Facility Number 03 33
0 Not Operational Q Below Threshold
® Permitted ® Certified 0 Conditionally Certified 0 Registered Date Last Operated or Above Threshold: .............
Farm Name: AthQod.Rairy............................................................ ... County: A1199tiany ........................................ !? 5RQ. ........
Owner Name: Din:ayac.................................. ALWO i~i....................................................... Phone No: 3-3-7249G7..D.am►c.............................................
MailingAddress: 1j.Q..RWy..221......................................................... ........................... S.Parka...K............................................................. U.675 .............
Facility Contact: MJU.t1,t1Y.Aod................................................. Title: ........................................................ I ....... Phone No: 33.6 2,2117-HoLne.........
Onsite Representative: Mih9..A►XW.Q0.d....................... Integrator:
Certified Operator:MiM.A................................... Atwood............................................. Operator Certification Number:2,13.8Z ............................
Location of Farm:
iwy 221 south of Sparta. Turn right on SR1347. Atwood Dairy is 112 mile on the left.
❑ Swine ❑ Poultry ® Cattle ❑ Horse Latitude 36 • Longitude 81 • 10 O1
Design Current Design Current Design Current
Swine Capa6ty Population Poultry ..Capacity.Population Cattle Capacity Po ulation
❑ Layer ® Dairy 288 140
❑ Non -Layer 1E] Non -Dairy
❑ Other
Total Design Capacity 288
Total SSLW 403,200
Number of Lagoons 0
❑ Wean to Feeder
❑ Feeder to Finish
❑ Farrow to Wean
❑ Farrow to Feeder
[:]Farrow to Finish
❑ Gilts
❑ Boars
Discharges & Stream Impacts
1. Is any discharge observed from any part of the operation? ❑ Yes ® No
Discharge originated at: ❑ Lagoon ❑ Spray Field ❑ Other
a. if discharge is observed, was the conveyance man-made? ❑ Yes ❑ No
b. If discharge is observed, did it reach Water of the State? (If yes, notify DWQ) El Yes ❑ Na
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: .... _Wasie.Poad................................................................................................................ ............................ q71_Gr/
Freeboard (inches): 72
12112103 Continued
h�\

Facility Number: 03-33 Date of Inspection Walo
5. Are there any immediate threats to the integrity of any of the structures observed? (ie/ trams, 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 Annlication
10. Are there any buffers that need maintenance/improvement? ® Yes ❑ No
IL . 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) Rye Timothy, Orchard, & Rye Pasture
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 a4id/6r any -recommendations or any other commerits
Use drawings of facility to better explain, situations. (use additional pages as necessary): ®Field Copy ❑Final Notes
9. As suggested during the last operational review, you may want to have the maximum liquid level re -checked. Since waste has been
A,
pumped recently, this would be a good time to have marker checked.
10. and 11. Need to stay back from field entrances before beginning actual waste application. Heavy traffic in theses areas on a couple
of fields has caused ponding.
3. Operator is hauling waste at this time. Spring `04 records have not been transferred to SLUR-2 forms yet. Check next visit. Fall `03
records looked real good.
3. Operator has been keeping weekly freeboard.
**29, T-610 F-2 (9.1 acres) needs to be changed from "hay" to "rye" and "corn." T-610 F-4 Needs to be changed from "hay" to
"pasture" and "rye" and "corn."
Since operator has already applied waste to the above fields the WUP needs to be changed as soon as possible so that the crops
that received waste match the crops stated in the WUP. Failure to abide by the WUP is a violation. This was mentioned during
both the 2003 Operational Review and 2003 DWQ Inspection. Operator stated that he had contacted technical specialist for
assistance.
p Meli Rosebrock -
Reviewer/Ins ector Name
Reviewer/Inspector Signature:'IL Date: 5 ( a d
12112103 1 v Continued

Facility Number: 03-33 of Inspection S Z
Required Records & Documents
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)
31. If selected, did the facility fail to install and maintain rainbreakers on irrigation equipment?
32. Did the facility fail to install and maintain a rain gauge?
33. Did the facility fail to conduct an annual sludge survey?
34. Did the facility fail to calibrate waste application equipment?
35. Does record keeping for NPDES required forms need improvement? If yes, check the appropriate box below
❑ Stocking Form ❑ Crop Yield Form ❑ Rainfall ❑ Inspection After I" Rain
❑ 120 Minute Inspections ❑ Annual Certification Form
❑ Yes N No
❑ Yes N No
❑ Yes N No
❑ Yes N No
❑ Yes N No
❑ Yes N No
❑ Yes N No
❑ Yes N No
N Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes N No
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes ❑ No
12112103

Division of Water. Quality
ivision of Soil und* Water- Conservation
Other Agency.
Type of Visit 'k Compliance Inspection O Operation Review O Lagoon Evaluation
Reason for Visit koutine Q Complaint O Follow up O Emergency Notification O Other 0 Denied Access
Facility Number Date of Visit: Time:
O Not Operational O Below Threshold
*Permitted 0 Certified 13 Conditionally Certified 0 Registered Date Last Operated or Above Threshold: ................_... _..
Farm Name: ... A+Lu.o3...... Q4i.r............................................................. County:... .1 .. .....
a �•l l 5��• qq //_
Owner Name:... C c......d.'. .. ....... Phone No:.. .. 11...! t�......f
Mailing Address:...---` --------- .-4 .......... �................. --• 5.• +3L--J.•N-C.------. 216.lb...... ..........................
Facility Contact:.....�.�.�....A .......... Tale Phone No. �..J..,....
1'
OnsiteRepresentative:_ �l Integrator :............ ........ ...........................................I............................................................................
< <Le a 1 3 $ �.
Certified Operator:....!.. '. ........................I............................ Operator Certification Number:........................................
Location of Farm:
as I 5o L`+ll Pro rv, OO-r+at . o n 6 s A 13 q 7
❑ Swine ❑ Poultry IxCattle ❑ Horse Latitude ' 4 ®64 Longitude • 4 44
Design Current:.
Swine s,Ca aci , To--ulation
❑ 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.
Ca aci _-Pa ulation
❑ Layer Dairy
❑ Non -Layer I Non -Dairy
❑ Other b,
Total Design Capacity ; a
Total SSLW b3 �
- �-.
Discharges & Stream Impacts
1. Is any discharge observed from any part of the operation? ❑ Yes �No �V/N
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 gallmin-?
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 JNo
3. Were there any adverse impacts or potential adverse impacts to the Waters of the State other than from a discharge? []Yes XNo
Waste Collection & Treatment
4. Is storage capacity (freeboard plus storm storage) less than adequate? X(Spiliway )Ves)kNo
,AS uctur, 1 tructure 2 Structure , Structure 4 Structure 5 Structure
Identifier M�,1{�r l 41
...... .... . ............................................................................................................................................................................
Freeboard (inches):
12/12103 Continued

Facility Number: — Date of Inspection
5. Are there any immediate threats to the in egrity 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 o
closure plan?
(If any of questions 4-6 was answered yes, and the situation poses an
immediate public health or environmental threat, notify DWQ)
7. Do any of the structures need maintenance/improvement? ❑ Yes No
8. Does any part of the waste management system other than waste structures require maintenancelimprovement? ❑ Yes No
9. Do any stuctures lack adequate, gauged markers with required maximum and minimum liquid level ❑ Yes No
elevation markings?
Waste Application
10. Are there any buffers that need maintenance/improvement? Yes
11. is there evidence of over application? If yes, check the appropriate box below. Yes
XExcessive Ponding ❑ P ❑ H draulic Overpid ❑ Frozen Ground ❑ Copper and/or Zinc
12. Crop type�. l' ►
13. Do the receiving crops differ with those designated in thelCertified Animal Waste
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?
Plan (CAWMP)? ❑ Yes
Odor Issues
17. Does the discharge pipe from the confinement building to the storage pond or lagoon fail to discharge at/or below
liquid level of lagoon or storage pond with no agitation?
18. Are there any dead animals not disposed of properly within 24 hours?
19. Is there any evidence of wind drift during land application? (i.e. residue on neighboring vegetation, asphalt,
roads, building structure, and/or public property)
20. At the time of the inspection did the facility pose an odor or air quality concern? If yes, contact a regional
Air Quality representative immediately.
❑ No
❑ No
❑ Yes L No
❑ Yes No
❑ Yes No
❑ Yes >Qo
❑ Yes XNo
❑ Yes No
ElYes o
❑ Yes �to
Comments ( efer'to question #) Explain any YES"answeis and/or any recomr'nendations'o .other comments.
Use drawings of facility to better explain sttuat,oas. (use additional pages as necessary} field Copy ElFinal Notes
'p-
t6J
W
• T
Reviewer/Inspector Name w a._ r w
Reviewer/Inspector Signature: Date: Jr
1 c,ia�i v.l �.vrrrr•rascu

Facility Number: — _3 3 e of Inspection
Re uired Records & Documents XNO
21. Fail to have Certificate of Coverage & General Permit or other Permit readily available? ❑ Yes
22. Does the facility fail to have all components of the Certified Animal Waste Management Plan readily available?
(ie/ WUP, checklists, design, maps, etc.) ❑ Yes No
23. Does record keeping need improvement? If yes, check the appropriate box below. ❑ Yes No
❑ Waste Application ❑ Freeboard ❑ Waste Analysis ❑ Soil Sampling
24. Is facility not in compliance with any applicable setback criteria in effect at the time of design? ❑ Yes 4(
25. Did the facility fail to have a actively certified operator in charge? ❑ Yes No
26. Fail to notify regional DWQ of emergency situations as required by General Permit? (ie/ discharge, freeboard problems, over application) ❑ Yes o
27. Did Reviewer/Inspector fail to discuss reviewfinspection with on -site representative? ❑ Yes K
No
28. Does facility require a follow-up visit by same agency? ❑ Yeso
29. Were any additional problems noted which cause noncompliance of the Certified AWMP? Yes ❑ No
N`PDES Permitted Facilities �/
30. Is the facility covered under a NPDES Permit? (If no, skip questions 31-35) ❑ Yes lL�l No
31. If selected, did the facility fail to install and maintain rainbreakers on irrigation equipment? El Yes (❑ No
32. Did the facility fail to install and maintain a rain gauge? ❑ Yes ❑ No
33. Did the facility fail to conduct an annual sludge survey? ❑ Yes ❑ No
34. Did the facility fail to calibrate waste application equipment? ❑ Yes ❑ No
35. Does record keeping for NPDES required forms need improvement? If yes, check the appropriate box below. ❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ Stocking Form ❑ Crop Yield Form ❑ Rainfall ❑ Inspection After 1 " Rain
❑ 120 Minute Inspections ❑ Annual Certification Form
No violations or deficiencies were noted during this visit. You will receive no further correspondence about this visit.
Additional'Com-meats arid/ci Drawing's: -
:a.. sf.
23. W ?
0
---� C4 O-t
Lin) Mxeea-N.,Ee c.R44LIJ-�
F- � 4UPk___j Ma��
ddt,4j ASO,
12112103

�� s
��i�+r..._ �-- .:.'x.'� ...� � :..,,.__ _ �. _.:. �. �.a ,�'a. a�:,.RF.t3'�.`h`]'rstSH""u�"�k�,Ai`�+la�+i`".4/`�h!4,ta_re.�'�.fA r�4j1'C..i��;s:��- t✓- _ , . �i,i,`' , ,,, _ ;•.,
_ �G r -

hnical Assistance Site Visit Report_
• Qj�!!Mn of Soil and Water ConservatiorW
O Natural Resources Conservation Service
O Soil and Water Conservation District
O Other...
Facility Number
03 -
33
Date: 10/14/03
Time: 1 13:40 1
Time On farm: 80 WSRO
Farm Name
Atwood Dairy
_
County Alleghany
Phone: [phone]
Mailing Address 130 Hwy 221 Sparta NC 28675
Onsite
Representative Mike and Dwayne Atwood Integrator
Type Of Visit
on
❑ Compliance Inspection (pilot only)
❑ Technical Assistance
❑ Confirmation for Removal
❑ No Animals -Date Last Operated:
❑ Operating below threshold
❑ Swine ❑ Poultry ® Cattle ❑ Horse
Purpose Of Visit
OQ 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
El Layer
❑ Non -Layer
El
Wean to Feeder
❑ Feeder to Finish
❑ Farrow to Wean
❑ Farrow to Feeder
❑ Farrow to Finish
❑ Gilts
❑ Boars
® Dairy
❑ Non -Dairy
® Dairy
❑ Non -Dairy
288
160
❑ 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 5
Identifier WSP
Level (Inches) 18
CROP TYPES Corn, Silage Rye grass (cover) Fescue -graze Fescue -hay
SPRAYFIELD
SOIL TYPES CeE FnC2 TaC Wac WaE
7. What type of technical assistance does the onsite representative feel is needed? (list in comment section)
03/10/03

it
n
Facility Number 03 - 33 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
❑ 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
❑ 13. Waste structure needs maintenance
28. Forms Need (list in comment section)
El
❑
29. Missing Components (list in comments)
❑
❑
❑ 14. Over application >= 10% & 10 lbs.
❑
❑
❑ 15. Over application < 10% or < 10 lbs.
30.21-1.0200 re -certification
[116. 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. Organizelcomputerization of records
❑
❑
❑ 19. Late/missing lagoon level records
34. Sludge Evaluation
❑
❑
❑ 20. Late/missing soils analysis
❑ 21. Crop needs improvement
35. Sludge or Closure Plan
❑
❑
❑ 22. Crop inconsistent with waste plan
36. Sludge removal/closure procedures
❑
❑
37. Waste Structure Evaluation
❑
❑
❑ 23. Irrigation maintenance deficiency
[124. Deficient sprayfield conditions
38. Structure Needs Improvement
❑
❑
39. Operation & Maintenance Improvements
❑
❑
40. Marker check/calibration
®
❑
Regulatory Referrals
41. Site evaluation
❑
❑
❑ Referred to DWQ Date:
42. Irrigation Calibration
❑
❑
❑ Referred to NCDA Date:
43. Irrigation design/installation
El
❑
El Other...
system
Date:
44. Secure irrigation information (reaps, etc.)
❑
❑
LIST IMPROVEMENTS
45. Operating improvements (pull signs, etc.)
❑
❑
MADE BY OPERATION
46. Wettable Acre Determination
❑
❑
1
47. Evaluate WAD certificationlrechecks
❑
❑
48. Crop oval uationlrecommendations
❑
❑
The small waste storage pond was closed out.
2- The creeks have been fenced out and cattle
49. Drainage work/evaluation
❑
❑
water boxes installed.
50. Land shaping, subsoiling, aeration, etc.
51. Runoff control, stonnwater diversion, etc.
❑
El
❑
❑
3' There were two stock trails put in and grass was
planted on some critical areas.
52. Buffer improvements
53. Field measurements(GPS, surveying, etc.)
❑
❑
El
❑
4.
54. Mortality BMPs
❑5.
❑
55. Waste operator education (NPDES)
❑
❑
56. Operation & maintenance education
❑
❑
57. Record keeping education
❑
❑
6
58. Croplforage management education
❑
❑
59. Soil and/or waste sampling education
❑
❑
03/10/03

•
IFacility Number 03 - 33 Date: 1 10/14/03 '
OMMENTS:
Waste analysis: 8-15-03 LSD 6.7 Ibs.N/1000 gals. B, 3-19-03 ALD 6.7 Ibs.N/1000 gals. B
The waste plan lists T1588 field # 2 as 9.0 acres in crop rotation and 24.8 acres in grass. Records
eed to match the waste plan.
Still need to have some fields added to the waste plan that were applied on in the Spring.
The weekly freeboard readings need to be brought current.
The waste storage pond is at the maximum liquid marker.
Mr. Atwood will be applying waste to small grain as soon as possible. There is evidence of an overflow
f waste on the back side of the waste pond. The waste didn't appear to have reached surface water.
,ccording to the General Permit the Division of Water Quality is to be notified when the waste level
;aches the maximum liquid level.
The maximum liquid level marker may need to be checked. It appears to be less than 18" from the top o
7e dam.
TECHNICAL SPECIALIST lRocky Durham
SIGNATURE
Date Entered: 10/15/03
Entered By: lRocky Durham
3 03/10/03

1' 1
1
r.7J4�"t,`+�"Ytymtidf':iun 11€9W41TIff rniftlilmleW Yr'9nK: wsUrlr+ xs,i•t; yr •r-�tiK� €re^ a+Tai�l4�f�lf�in lwq g4rt Iv•ik! v^,�,aa,el•�Yr..vjr,j,4gAju lr vj^%YirpHE'n'1rir�nvtat I'll 111 A0i ,i i,
v>Isron,of Waterjeiiklity t t
vision, of Soil and Water Gonservatron. .
4Other Agency
+ � ,;
ypa of Visit OO Compliance Inspection O Operation Review O Lagoon Evaluation
eason for Visit a Routine O Complaint Q Follow up O Emergency Notification Q Other ❑ Denied Access
r�
Rb�dlmltM 03 33 D-'� of V 6iL 07/15/2003 Tura: loco
o �o
lWermitted lWertified aConditionally Certified aRegistered
Inc AlwoodRairx...................................................................... .. M=ftw Reghau....--•--•-----•--•--.......... WS&Q......
tea,rlr�R�r�i•�'�v�ne----------------- AsYe4fld--------------------------- �.33��'I2.894?------------------------------
1 ................................................................................... Svana..N.G.............................................................. M675 ..............
ihrdilk C.mlimidt Mikt; Atwood ..................................... Hilt ........................... .......... INhundimm
terrier_ Alil��At�Qvd---- --------------------- --- - - --=- = ------------------------------------
(rwdffwd OpersOnz.11 kc.A................................... Atwood ............................................. .............................
04ax*WWa6F�
wy 221 south of Sparta. Turn right on SR1347. Atwood Dairy is 1/2 mile on the left. +
❑ �,., ❑ 1 : ® �>- ❑ MM , `i"' ! > ' 31 55 `� H 10 O1
1. Is any discharge observed from any part of the operation? ayes Wo
Discharge originated at: Magoon MprayField (1Other
a. If discharge is observed, was the conveyance man-made? ayes Mo
b. If discharge is observed, did it reach Water of the State? (If yes, notify DWQ) ayes a)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) ayes arlo
2. Is there evidence of past discharge from any part of the operation? Wes Mo
3. Were there any adverse impacts or potential adverse impacts to the Waters of the State other than from a discharge? ayes Wo
Wasft Cnlbectkm & IrrezWoent
4. Is storage capacity (freeboard plus storm storage) less than adequate? jWpillway ayes Rio
Structure I Structure Z Strtctum 3 Saucturue 4 Structure 5 Struchm b
Identifier: ._._ W-aste.PD.od.-------•--•--------•------- -----
Freeboard (inches): 24
05103101 Continued
#JvyiI

Facility Number: 03-33 Daft atInspec1irm; 07/15/2003
0
5. Are there any immediate threats to the integrity of any of the structures observed? (ie/ tree seevere erosion, Czyes Wo
seepage, etc.)
6. Are there structures on -site which are not properly addressed and/or managed through a waste management or
closure plan? aYes EgNo
(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 ONO
8. Does any part of the waste management system other than waste structures require maintenance/improvement? 01Yes WO
9. Do any stuctures lack adequate, gauged markers with required maximum and minimum liquid level
elevation markings? Yes Rio
WastaAiwm
10. Are there any buffers that need maintenance/improvement? ayes MO
11. Is there evidence of over application? ❑ Excessive Ponding ❑ PAN ❑ Hydraulic Overload Yes Flo
12. Crop type Corn (Silage & Grain) Rye cover Fescue (Hay) Fescue (Graze)
13. Do the receiving crops differ with those designated in the Certified Animal Waste Management Plan (CAWMP)? Elyes [lo
14. a) Does the facility lack adequate acreage for land application? Eyes �o
b) Does the facility need a wettable acre determination? [ Yes Qio
c) This facility is pended for a wettable acre determination? [QYes �o
15. Does the receiving crop need improvement? [{$Yes BN0
t6. Is there a lack of adequate waste application equipment?
1&..
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?
;6 4,U®M
[:[Yes FNo .
['es Mo
Yes RNo
Yes ENo
Yes Elo
mes MO
[MYes ONO
[Yes &lo
.Wes Mo
IIZ 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): Mield Copy �inal Notes
and 22. Need to call DWQ(336.771.4600) anytime the waste level is greater than the maximum liquid mark.
and 8. Buffers, lot, and creek look good. May need to add some gravel along the edge of the new stock trail since it has already
tarted to wash.
Small, wooden, WSP near parlor has been closed.
8. and 25. Months of application needs to be in WUP. Could not locate.
9. 2003 soils analysis ok.
9. and 25. Operator has records showing that waste was applied for others (Kemp and Gambill). Need to add agreements, maps,
crea es cro s etc. to WUP as soon as possible.
Reviewer/Inspector Name Melis osebrock
Reviewer/InspectorSignature: Date:
05103101 v +1 1 " r dontinued

Facility Number: 03-33 �t�rQ Qropectiew 07/15/2003
@%M BMMW
26. Does the discharge pipe from the confinement building to the storage pond or lagoon fail to discharge at/or below
liquid level of lagoon or storage pond with no agitation?
27. Are there any dead animals not disposed of properly within 24 hours?
28. Is there any evidence of wind drift during land application? (i.e. residue on neighboring vegetation, asphalt,
roads, building structure, and/or public property)
29. Is the land application spray system intake not located near the liquid surface of the lagoon?
30. Were any major maintenance problems with the ventilation fan(s) noted? (i.e. broken fan belts, missing or
or broken fan blade(s), inoperable shutters, etc.)
31. Do the animals feed storage bins fail to have appropriate cover?
32. Do the flush tanks lack a submerged fill pipe or a permanent/temporary cover?
r1Ces Flo
MYes OVo
[ yes EVO
Yes Mo
AdditionRITomments.and/or Drawings:
NOW
MMLVM�
5. Need to add "rye" to T-1588 F-2 cl since waste was applied herein fall onto rye. WUP only lists hay.
rite analyses'
117/02 Old pit = 5.8 lbs. N11000 gal. and Larger WSP = 10.4 lbs. N/1000 gal.
/19/03 Larger WSP (ALD) = 6.7 lbs. NI1000 gal.
3M
05103101

Divii ion of Water Quality
Division of Soil and Water Conservation
_ 0 Other Agency
Type of Visit /19 Compliance Inspection 0 Operation Review 0 Lagoon Evaluation
Reason for Visit Routine 0 Complaint 0 Follow up 0 Emergency Notification 0 Other © Denied Access
Facility Number 1 07
Date of V isit: Time:
itNot O erationa! 0 Below Threshold
Permitted 0 Certified O Conditionally Certified 0 Registered Date Last Operated r Above Threshold:
arm Name: Q1 County all lrs.,i r% k A
Q
Owner Name: Phone No: r—
Mailing Address: � ) b � Q L't
.....b Ai I
Facility Contact:
Onsite Representative:
Certified Operator:
Location of F2rm•
Title:
Integrator:
Phone No:
C-17 J: Y1 Operator Certification Number: 2 13 31;�
FMM 5P • 0n S 13 7 LGOW Cburse-
pl��.
❑ Swine ❑ Poultry Cattle ❑ Horse Latitude �' C ®� Longitude
Design Current Design Current
Design Current
Swine Capacity Population Poultry Capacity Population Cattle
Capacity Population
_
❑ Wean to Feeder - 10 Layer Dairy
❑ Feeder to Finish ❑ Non -Laver Non-Dairy
❑ Farrow to Wean
❑ Farrow to Feeder ❑Other
❑ Farrow to Finish Total .Design Capacity
❑ Gilts
❑ Boats Total SSLW
Number of Lagoons I ❑ Subsurface Drains Present ❑ Lagoon Area 10 5 rav Field Area '
Holding Ponds / Solid Traps 10 No Liquid Waste Management System
; e
Discharges & Stream Impacts
L Is any discharge observed from any part of the operation?
❑ Yes
Discharge originated at: ❑ Lagoon [ISpray Field ElOther*,No
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 ves, 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 ves, notify DWQ)
❑ Yes ❑ No
2. Is there evidence of past discharge from any part of the operation?
N4 Ycs ❑ 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? KSpillway
❑ Yes No
Stru re 1 Structure 2 Structure 3 Structure 4 Structure
5 Structure 6
Identifier:
Freeboard (inches):42 a
05103101
Continued
r.

0
Facility Dumber: --
Date of Inspection
S.
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?
NVaste,Application
10. Are there any buffers that need maintenance/improvement?
11. is there evidence o£over application? ❑ Excessive Poi
12. Crop type
13. Do the receiving crops differ with those signated in the Gerd
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 or other Permit readily available?
18. Does the facility fail to have all components of the Certified Animal Waste Management Plan readily available?
WLU (ie/ P. checklists, design, maps, etc.) N"d mm* v/
19. Does record keeping need improvement? (ie/ irrigation, free oard, waste analysis & soil sample reports)
20. is facility not in compliance with any applicable setback criteria in effect at the time of design?
21. Did the facility fail to have a actively certified operator in charge?
22. Fail to notify regional DWQ of emergency situations as required by General Permit?
(iel discharge, freeboard problems, over application)
23. Did Reviewer/Inspector fail to discuss review/inspection with on -site representative?
24. Does facility require a follow-up visit by same agency?
25. Were any additional problems noted which cause noncompliance of the Certified AWMP?
❑ Yes �o
❑ Yes k-<10
❑ Yes ,K No
❑ Yes ko
❑ Yes NNo
❑ Yes VNo
i
❑ Yes [pj No
❑ Yes T%No
❑ Yes X�(
❑ Yes A No
❑ Yes t No
XYes l 30
❑ Yes XNo
❑ Yes ZO
0
Yes
[K Yes El No
/❑_ Yes A�No
❑ Yes P<o
Yes ❑ No
10 No violations or deficiencies were noted during this visit. You will receive no further correspondence about this visit.
Comments (refer to question #): Explain any YES answers and/or, any recommendations or any other comments.
:Use drawings of facility to better explain situations. (use additional pages as. necessary): Field Conv ❑ Final Notes
c' dt I I)�Q WSP_0 L330 - -7? I.46� c , m�- A�
[VaS+e
0
i � 1 1 � c rea�-_o — °�,a I Q)C1 -Mum 11 � u
! oZOt�3 C►� i
�.�,��o�-- C. P,�- 5.$ IoN L P1 10*4 1st
Reviewer/Inspector Name
Reviewer/Inspector Signature: Date:
05103101 y� l
a
Continued

Facility Number: — of Inspection
Odor Issues
26. Does the discharge pipe from the confinement building to the storage pond or lagoon fail to discharge atlor below
liquid level of lagoon or storage pond with no agitation?
li
27. Are there any dead animals not disposed of properly within 24 hours? ❑ Yes Xlo
28_ Is there any evidence of wind drift during land application? (i.e. residue on neighboring vegetation, asphalt, ❑ Yes ANO
roads, building structure, and/or public property)
29. Is the land application spray system intake not located near the liquid surface of the lagoon? El Yes- ^ X--
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? a N
32. Do the flush tanks lack a submerged fill pipe or a permanent/temporary cover? r, `es- ^ *'--
Additional i Afor Drawings:
i
/
1
�� '�� ,l �' t i•I i j11
1• I
�
� 4
5/00
A

�ivtstowofi. at Quality ,196 '
D viston'of Soil a d Wsier Conservat►on
Q Other
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
Ih,tr ul' �`i.it: 10�7/2002 Tim,•: 13:30
Facility Number 03 33
FO Not -Operational O Below Threshold
® Permitted ® Certified 13 Conditionally Certified © Registered Date Last Operated or Above Threshold:
Farm Name: Aftood.Aaixy............................................. ........................... County }'.: AReghm------------------------------. SM) ----•
Phone No: 331�-72:$9GI-- ----- ------------ -=----
MailingAddress: JjQ.Hwy,Z21.......................................................................................... 5P.ar.M..NC .............................................................. Z867.5..............
Facility Contact: ...........................................................Title: ............................................... Phone No
Onsite Representative: IDiy �_AL�3dt4Sk------.-----.--_._._._------------- IntetGrator:--------------------------------------._._..
Certified Operator: M.iU.A.................................. AWD.W............................................. Operator Certification Number: ;a,302.............................
Location of Farm:
Hwy 221 south of Sparta. Turn right on SR1347. Atwood Dairy is 112 mile on the left.
❑ Swine ❑ Poultry ® Cattle ❑ Horse Latitude Longitude 81 • 10 01
Design Current
Swine CanaeitV Population
❑ Wean to Feeder
❑ Feeder to Finish
❑ Farrow to Wean
❑ Farrow to Feeder
❑ Farrow to Finish
❑ Gilts
❑ Boars
Design Current Design Current
Poultry Capacity Population Cattle Capacity Population
❑ Layer ®-Dairy 288 2t30
❑ Non -Layer ❑ Non -Dairy
❑'Other
Total Design Capacity 288
Total SSLW 403,200
Number of Lagoons I I ❑Subsurface Drains Present ❑ Lagoon Area JE1 Spray Field Area
Holding Ponds / Solid Traps 1 10 No Liquid Waste Management System
Discharges & Stream Impacts
I. Is any discharge observed from any part of the operation?
Discharge originated ar. ❑ Lagoon ❑ Spray Field ❑ Other
a. If discharge is observed, was the conveyance man-made?
b. If discharge is observed, dirt it reach Water of the State? (If yes, notify DWQ)
c. If discharge is observed. what is the estimated flow in galhnin?
d, Does dischanie bypass a lagoon system? (Yves. 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 X Treatment
4. Is storage capacity (freeboard plus storm storage) less than adequate? ❑ Spillway
Structure I Structure 2 Structure 3 Structure 4 Structure 5
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes ® No
Structure b
Identifier: --------•--•-----•--------- ----------------•---
Freeboard (inches): 48
05103101
Continued

Facility Number. 03-33 Date of I nspection 10/7/2002
16
5. Are there any immediate threats to the integrity of any of the structures observed? (ie/ trees, severe erosion, El 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 maintenancelimprovement? ® 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
13. Do the receiving crops differ with those designated in the Certified Animal Waste Management Plan (CAWMP)? ❑ Yes ❑ No
14. a) Does the facility lack adequate acreage for land application? ❑ Yes ❑ No
b) Does the facility need a wettable acre determination? ❑ Yes ❑ No
c) This facility is pended for a wettable acre determination? ❑ Yes ❑ No
15. Does the receiving crop need improvement?
16. Is there a lack of adequate waste application equipment?
Reauired Records R Documents
17. Fail to have Certificate of Coverage & General Permit 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
113 No violations or deficiencies were noted during this visit. You will receive no further correspondence about this visit.
Comments (refer to question #): Explain any YES answers and/or any recommendations or any other comments.
Use drawings of facility to better explain situations. (use additional pages as necessary): ❑Field Copy ®Final Notes
7. Recommend spraying the weeds on the waste pond embankment.
The old wooden & earth waste structure has been closed out and filled in.
17, 18. The cattle have not been fenced out of the creek, as of today, that was mention by the DWQ inspector.
e certified operator was not on site for the review and the WUP, Permit and records were not available for review. Records need to be
checked on the next inspection.
Questions left blank pertain to the waste records or the waste plan.
y
Reviewer/Inspector Name Rocky Durham
Reviewer/Inspector Signature: Date:
05103101 Continued

Facility Number: U3-33 0° ni' 1 nspection 10/7/2002 0
Odor Issues
26. Does the discharge pipe from the confinement building to the storage pond or lagoon fail to discharge atlor below
liquid level of lagoon or storage pond with no agitation?
27. Are there any dead animals not disposed of properly within 24 hours?
28. Is there any evidence of wind drift during land application? (i.e. residue on neighboring vegetation, asphalt,
roads, building structure, and/or public property)
29. Is the land application spray system intake not located near the liquid surface of the lagoon?
30. Were any major maintenance problems with the ventilation fan(s) noted? (i.e. broken fan belts, missing or
or broken fan blade(s), inoperable shutters, etc.)
31. Do the animals feed storage bins fail to have appropriate cover?
32. Do the flush tanks lack a submerged fill pipe or a permanenthemporary cover?
analysis: 9-16-02 LSD 5.8 lbs.N11000 gals. B, LSD 10.4 lbs.N/1000 gals. B
5-28-02 LSD 9.5 " "
❑ Yes ❑ No
® Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes ❑ No
27. There was a dead cow found in the stream below the waste storage pond. The workers on site were notified as well as Mrs.
A,I
05103101
J

Postage
Certified Fee
Return Receipt Fee
(Endorsement Required)
Restricted Delivery Fee
(Endorsement Required)
Postmark
"ere
Total Pc
!Name (Plr
Mr Dwayne Atwood
Sneei; AF
739 Elk Creek Church Road
c;ry, srati
Sparta NC 228675

Certified MProvides:
ClA mailing r Or -
v A unique i� r for your mailpiece
o A signature upon delivery
v A record of delivery kept by the Postal Service for two years
important Reminders:
17 Certified Mail may ONLY Ye combined with First -Class Mail or Priority Mail.
o Certified Mail is not available for any class of international mail.
o NO INSURANCE' COVERAGE IS PROVIDED with Certified Mail. For
valuables, please consider Insured or Registered Mail.
o For an additional fee, a Return Receipt may be requested to provide proof of
delivery. To obtain Return Receipt service, please complete and attach a Return
Receipt (PS Form 381 i� to the article and add applicable postage to cover the
fee. Endorse mailpiece 'Return Receipt Requested". To receive'a fee waiver for
a duplicate return receipt, a USPS postmark on your Certified Mail receipt is
required.
n For an additional fee, delivery may be restricted to the addressee or
addressee's authorized agent. Advise the clerk or mark the mailpiece with the
endorsement "Restricted Delivery".
t] If a postmark on the Certified Mail receipt is desired, please present the arti-
cle at the post office for postmarking. if a postmark on the Certified Mail
receipt is not needed, detach and affix label with postage and mail.
IMPORTANT. Save this receipt and present it when making an inquiry.
PS Form 3800, July 1999 (Reverse) 102595-99-M-2087

IN,'
rFgCG.
C r
C�
CERTIFIED MAIL 7099 3400 000h 9313 7359
RETURN RECEIPT REQUESTED
Mr. Dwayne Atwood
739 Elk Creek Church Road
Sparta, NC 28675
SUBJECT: Notice of Violation
Compliance Inspection
Atwood Dairy, #03-33
Alleghany County
Dear Mr. Atwood:
Michael F. Easley, Governor
William G. Ross Jr., Secretary
North Carolina Department of Environment and Natural Resources
Gregory J. Thorpe, Ph.D.
Acting Director
Division of Water Quality
May 8, 2002
This Notice is to summarize the animal waste management concerns and violations observed during
your annual Division of Water Quality (DWQ) compliance inspection of April 16, 2002. Please find, attached, a
"Final Notes" copy of the completed inspection form for your review. Additionally, the following items should
be addressed in your response to our office:
1. The condition of the upper stage (milk parlor) waste storage pond has greatly deteriorated since
last year. Specifically, half of the wooden dam wall is bowed outward and large gaps now exist
between the boards. The backfill behind the wooden retaining wall has severely eroded away
and, in fact, is completely absent from the downhill corner nearest the creek. Our records also
indicate that you were previously warned of these concerns during 2000 and 2001 operational
reviews and compliance inspections (see also, 2000 and 2001 DWQ Notices of Violation).
Failure to properly maintain a storage facility is a continued violation of your Cattle Waste
Permit (Section II, #1.). Per discussions with DWQ staff during the inspection, you stated that
the wooden retaining wall is to be repaired or closed -out by August 1. 2002. Please specify your
intentions in your written response.
2. There appears to be a continued impact from sediment and animal waste run-off into the creek,
especially during rain events. As noted during your 2000 DWQ Compliance Inspection, the
pasture between the upper waste storage pond and creek is still void of sufficient vegetation.
Streambankistreambed erosion due to cattle traffic was also observed during the most recent
compliance inspection. It is our understanding that the cattle are to be fenced out of the creek by
November 1, 2002. Please confirm your plans in your response to our office.
D. Animal waste management records were not adequate. Specifically, no freeboard records were
available for the final stage (freestall) waste storage pond. Again, this was mentioned during your
operational reviews and compliance inspections in both 2000 and 2001. Failure to record
weekiv waste storage levels is a continued violation of your Cattle Waste Permit (Section
VPW III, #2.)
NMEN€i
Customer Service Division of Water Quality / Water Quality Section
1 800 858-0368 585 Wauchtown Street Winston-Salem, NC 27107 �aT
Phone: [phone] Fax: [phone] Internet: http://wq.ehnr.state.nc.us

Atwood Dairy
May 8, 2002
Page 2
Be advised that North Carolina General Statutes provide for penalties of up to $25,000 per day per
violation as well as criminal penalties for violations of state environmental laws and regulations. A written
response must be submitted to this office within 10 days of receipt of this Notice indicating the actions taken to
correct the problems outlined in this Notice. Your written response should 'include a specific explanation of
when and how the problems are to be corrected. Please direct your response to the attention of Ms. Rosebrock at
the address shown on the letterhead.
The Winston-Salem Regional Office appreciates your cooperation in these matters. If you have any
questions concerning this Notice, please contact Melissa Rosebrock or me at [phone].
Sincerely,
Steve Mauney
Acting Regional Water Quality Supervisor
cc: DWQ Non -Discharge Compliance and Enforcement Unit
Alleghany County Natural Resources Conservation Service/Soil and Water Conservation District
Mike Atwood — Certified Operator for Atwood Dairy
Marlene Salyer — DSWCD WSRO
Rocky Durham — DSWC MRO
CWSl2( _D_WQ.F'acihty-File
Central piles
.,_ ,

I .;'- Division of Water Quality_-
.,�., Division of Sotl and Wafer, Conserva49
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
t Date of Visit: 4116/?002 Time: 1000
Facility Number 03 33
' =Not O Below Threshold
® Permitted ® Certified ❑ Conditionally Certified 0 Registered Date Last Operated or Above Threshold: ............
Farm Name: A.t1Y.Apd..A.ai7CJ :.......................... ........ .............. Count'•: Alle.ohPlu......................................... WSRQ
O..•ner Name: i)aya3IaQ.................................. AOY.Qod......
>>-1 :tiling .address: 7„�9..�1�;.��ee1i..�h�i �ht.� ci .............
Facility Contact:NUU..ATm:.Q.Qd........................
PhoneNo: aa.ti-w.1_.B.9.6.7.......................................................
SPat:l.a.. N'C............................................................ ............1.
Title: ................................................................ Phone No: ...................................................
Onsite Representative:>1)til:e.?a.[�YeG.d................................•----..................----.........--........ Integrator: .................................................................. ....................
Certified Operator: l'1Uw. A...................................At1Y.Q-Q.d ............................................. Operator Certification Number:K.138'............-.-........ .....
Location of Farm:
wA, 221 South turn right of SR1347. Atwood Dairy is on the left.
❑ Swine ❑ Poultry ® Cattle ❑ Horse Latitude 36 31 SS Longitude 81 10 O1
Design Current
Swine Canacity Population
❑ Wean to Feeder
❑ Feeder to Finish
❑ Farrow to Wean
❑ Farrow to Feeder
❑ Farrow to Fuu'sh
❑ Gilts
❑ Boars
Desi-n Current Design Current
Poultry Capacity Population Cattle Capacity Population
❑ Laver I 1 ® Dair, 288 165
❑ Non -Laver I I ID ?von -Dairy 1
❑ Other
Total Design Capacity 28$
Total SSL`NI 403,200
Number of Lagoons 0 JEI Subsurface Drains Present ❑ ).-goon area ID Spray Field Area
Holding Ponds ! SoIid Traps 2 ❑ No Liquid Waste Management System
Discharges &- Stream Impacts
1. Is anv discharge observed from any part of the operation?
DischaT2e originated at: ❑ Lagoon ❑ Spray Field ❑ Other
a. if discharge is observed. ,vas the couvevance than -made?
h. I; discharge is observed. did it reach Rater of the State? (If yes- notify D'WQ)
c. If discharge. is observed. «-hat is the estimated floe: in eal?min?
d. Does discharge bvnass a 1,22oon system? (ifvLs- notift• D%\,Q)
2, is there evidence of past discharge from any pan of the operation"
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑Yes ❑No
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes 9 No
3. Were there any adverse impacts or potential adverse impacts to the Waters of the State other than from a dischar *e? Z Yes ❑ No
Wasie Collection ,i Trcntmeni
A. Is starage capacity (freeboard plus storm storage) less than adequate'.) ® Spillway ❑ Yes ® No
Sin:cturc l Structure 2 Structure . Structure = structure ` Snuctur:: 6
Identifier 1 pwe,.LniL>;?..... Losuer.ftreesiall�...............
_choard finches): S?
05103101 Continued

-. Are there anv immediate threats to Ategrity of any of the structures observed? (ie.- ,: es. ,e:ere erasion,
seepage, etc.)
6. -Are there structures on -site which are not properly addressed and/or managed through a waste management or
closure plan?
(If any of questions 4-6 was answered yes, and the situation poses an
immediate public health or environmental threat, notify DWQ)
7. Do any of the structures need maintenance/improvement?
S. Does any part of the waste management system other than waste structures require maintenance/improvement?
9. Do any stuctures lack adequate, gauged markers with required maximum and minimum Iiquid level
elevation markings?
I.Vaste Application
10, Are there any buffers that need maintenance/improvement?
-4 - - a
ED Yes ❑ `n
❑ Yes ® No
® Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes vo
1 1. Is there evidence of over application? ❑ Excessive Ponding ❑ PAN ❑ Hydraulic Overload ❑Yes ®No
12, Crop rype Small Grain Overseed Corn (Silage c4: Grain
13. Do the receiving crops differ with those designated in the Certified Animal Waste Management Plan (CAW'.\4P).) ❑ Yes ® No
I4. 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 pernded for a .vetrable acre determination? ❑ Yes IZ'NO
15. Does the receiving crop need improvement?
16. Is there a lack of adequate waste application equipment?
Re(tuired Records & L)oeuments
17. Fail to have Certificate of Coverage &-- General Permit or other Permit readily available?
I S. Does the facility fail to have all components of the Certified Animal Waste Management Plan readily available"
(ic/ WUP, checklists, design. maps. etc.)
19. Does record keeping need improvement? (le/ irrigation, freeboard, %taste analysis & soil sample reports)
20. Is facility not in compliance frith 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 xvith on -site representative?
24. Does facility require a folloxy-up visit by same agency?
❑ Yes No
i�Yes Xo
❑Yes ®\o
❑ Yas ®No
X�-es i*N'o
❑ Yes Z No
❑ Yes ® No
❑Yes ®No
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes ® No
`'�;. Were anv additional problems noted which cause noncompliance of the Certified AW_,MP? ❑ Yes ® No
10 No violations or deficiencies were noted during this visit. You will receive no further correspondence about this visit.
Comments (refer to question -): Explain any 1-ES ansivers and/or any recommendations or any other comments.
Use drawings of facility to better explain situations. (use additional pages as necessary): El Field Cop}®Final Notes
Getting impact of sediment and waste into creek. Need to fence cattle o�'t of creek. Per mvner, this is to he completed by `ov- 11 2002.
�. and 7. Wooden. do%vnhill wall of the tipper nvaste storage pond needy to be repairea inamccliately. This was mentioned by both D`tiVQ
and DS1t,C in 2001 and DWQ in 2000 Per ontrer, repairs are to be made by _•dug,. 1, 2002. To be Notice of Intent to Enforce next time.
19. No freeboard records were available.
19. Fall records loot: good. Remember to deduct PAN applied in the Fall to rvc from allowable corn PAN- in the Spring. Also, don't
forget to record comrr,__rcial nitrogen applied :!nd waste that is diver. away (amount. date, who, where).
Reviewer/inspector flame 1•Ielissa Rosebrock
Reviewer/Inspector Signature. I& _
Date:
O5103101 1 . r-�... ;...•-..r

Facility Number: 03-33 Date of Inspection 4/I6/20a2
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/or Drawings:
19. Began hauling waste again in April for the Spring. Records are to be caught up after waste applications are completed.
111/20/01 waste analysis =7.8 lbs. N11000 gal.
J
05103101

I
M,l s�ot2'of Watc.rQuality
C
/ Qa sion of Soil and Rater onser-vation
r1 ;Q Other Agency
Type of Visit O Compliance Inspection O Operation Review O Lagoon Evaluation
Reason for Visit O Routine O Complaint O Follow up O Emergency Notification O Other ❑ Denied Access
Date of Visit: A/1b/2042 Time: 1004
Facility lumber 03 33
Q Not O erational 0 Below Threshold
® Permitted ® Certified [3 Conditionally Certified 0 Registered Date Last Operated or Above Threshold:
Farm Name: Atm'.QQ.d.D.Ak):................................................................................................ County: A11991m y........................................ MR0........
OwnerName: D.1yayjac.................................. Atwud ....................................................... Phone No: 33.6.47.2-8.967............................................................
MailingAddress: t............................................................ SRaxrta_.NC..... ................................................... I.... MAU ..............
FacilityContact: ha 4.A0YQQd................................................. Title:................................................................ Phone No:...................................................
Onsite Representative: Mjke.A.(wQod................ . Integrator:........:....
Certified Operator:Mk9.A.................................. A.ttv:Q9d............................................. Operator Certification Number-.2.13.82 .............................
Location of Farm:
iwy 221 South turn right of SR1347. Atwood Dairy is on the left. +
❑ Swine ❑ Poultry ® Cattle ❑ Horse Latitude 36 • 31 55 a Longitude F 81 •DEJ O1 CG
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 10 Dairy 288 165
❑ Non -Layer I I JE1 Non -Dairy
❑ Other
Total Design Capacity 288
Total SSLW 403.200
Number of Lagoons 0 JE3 Subsurface Drains Present 110 Lagoon Area JE1 Spray Field Area
Holding Ponds 1 Solid Traps 2 ❑ No Liquid Waste Management System
Discharges & 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? ❑ 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
NN'aste Collection & Treatment
4. Is storage capacity (freeboard plus storm storage) less than adequate? ® Spillway ❑ Yes ® No
Structure 1 Structure 2 Structure 3 Structure 4 Structure 5 Structure 6
Identifier: .....Upper.(nailk)......Low.cr..(freestall)....................................._........... ...................... ...................................._................................
Freeboard (inches): 8 42
05103101 / Continfled

Facility Number: 03-33 Date of Inspection 4/16/2002
- - olduorlaf a.,ipnuagJvr /.�ltunmoddo 1 uV
5. Are there any immediate
dq�lriyt�m3 aRyu®i it©sgRt e� el �d e/. ® r si auogd
LOTLZ Eu?IosuD til.10%4 =uraIrS-uolsur_» ',laaj1S uvdiqcFjgW# c)gc
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 Iack adequate, gauged markers with required maximum and minimum liquid level
elevation markings?
Waste Application - - - -
10. Are there any buffers that'need maintenance/improvement?
11. Is there evidence of over application? ❑ Excessive Ponding ❑ PAN ❑ Hydraulic Overload
12. Crop type Small Grain Overseed Corn (Silage & Grain)
® Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes N No
® Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes N No
❑ Yes N No
❑ Yes N No
❑ Yes N No
13. Do the receiving crops differ with those designated in the Certified Animal Waste Management Plan (CAWMP)? ❑ Yes N No
14. a) Does the facility lack adequate acreage for land application? ❑ Yes N No
b) Does the facility need a wettable acre determination? ❑ Yes N No
c) This facility is pended for a wettable acre determination? ❑ Yes N No
15. Does the receiving crop need improvement?
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?
❑ Yes N No
❑ Yes N No
❑ Yes N No
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes N No
❑ Yes N No
❑ Yes N No
❑ Yes N No
❑ Yes N No
❑ Yes N No
25. Were any additional problems noted which cause noncompliance of the Certified AWMP? ❑ Yes N No
© No violations or deficiencies were noted during this visit. You will receive no further correspondence about this visit.
Comments (refer to question #): Explain any YES answers and/or any recommendations or any other comments.
Use drawings of facility to better explain situations. (use additional pages as necessary): Field Copy -N Final Notes
3. Getting impact of sediment and waste into creek. Need to fence cattle out of creek. Per owner, this is to be completed by Nov. 1, 2002.
5. and 7. Wooden, downhill wall of the upper waste storage pond needs to be repaired inunediately. This was mentioned by both DWQ
and DSWC in 2001 and DWQ in 2000. Per owner, repairs are to be made by Aug. 1, 2002. To be Notice of Intent to Enforce next time.
19. No freeboard records were available.
19. Fall records look good. Remember to deduct PAN applied in the Fall to rye from allowable corn PAN in the/,
forget to rec�'c�r�%�iiti�i�) waste that is given away (amount, date
sx}d '.9.J `iaupuJ .H s;TErp
*dN3 a :) N Slu;alaas `ssog .9 mstpiAk
Rosebrock
Revi
Date:
05103101 Continued

Facility Number: 03-33 Date of Inspection 4/16/2002
5. Are there any immediate threats to the inoty of any of the structures observed? (ie/ treeoere 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?
(If any of questions 4-6 was answered yes, and the situation poses an
Yes
®No
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 Small Grain Overseed Com (Silage R Grain)
13. Do the receiving crops differ with those designated in the Certified Animal Waste Management Plan (CAWMP)?
❑ Yes
® No
14. a) Does the facility lack adequate acreage for land application?
❑ Yes
® No
b) Does the facility need a wettable acre determination?
❑ Yes
® No
c) This facility is pended for a wettable acre determination?
❑ Yes
® No
15. Does the receiving crop need improvement?
❑ Yes
® No
16.
Is there a lack of adequate waste application equipment?
❑ Yes
® No
Required
Records & Documents
17.
Fail to have Certificate of Coverage K 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 Nvith 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
®\To
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 A«'MP?
❑ Yes
® No
❑ No violations or deficiencies were noted during this visit. You will receive no further correspondence about this visit.
Comments (refer to question #): Explain any YES answers and/or any recommendations or any other comments.
Use drawings of facility to better explain situations. (use additional pages as necessary): El Field Copy ®Final Notes
3. Getting impact of sediment and waste into creek. deed to fence cattle out of creek. Per owner, this is to be completed by Nov. 1, 2002.
+
5. and 7. Wooden, downhill wall of the upper waste storage pond needs to be repaired immediately. This was mentioned by both DWQ
and DSWC in 2001 and DWQ in 2000. Per owner, repairs are to be made by Aug. 1, 2002. To be Notice of Intent to Enforce next time.
19. No freeboard records were available.
19. Fall records look good. Remember to deduct PAN applied in the Fall to rye from allowable corn PAN in the Spring. Also, don't
forget to record commercial nitrogen applied and waste that is given away (amount, date, who, where).
T
Reviewer/Inspector Name iVlelissa Roseb rock
141
Reviewer/Inspector Signature. Date:
05103101 Continued

FaWity Number: 03-33 Dab 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.)
31. Do the animals feed storage bins fail to have appropriate cover?
32. Do the flush tanks lack a submerged fill pipe or a permanent/temporary cover?
(:]Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes ❑ No
Additional Comments and/or Drawings:
19. Began hauling waste again in April for the Spring. Records are to be caught up after waste applications are completed.
111/20/01 waste analysis =7.8 lbs. N11000 gal.
J
O5103101

North Carolina
Department of Environment and Naturals • �
Michael F. Easley, Governor f
William G. Ross, Secretary- NCDENR
Chaves H. Gardner, P.G., P.E., Director WINSTON-SALEM REGIONAL OFFICE
And State Geologist
585 Waughtown Street, Winston-Salem, North Carolina 27107
Phone [phone] as 336 771-4631 DEm
NR Custoer Servi 877-623-6748
An Opportunity) Affirmative Action Emplo.w
.. Sri

I
s }�
'A kVv
kiAon of Water
a
Division of Soi! and Water "CoxwrvattOn_ x
Agency 0 Other � �
IType of Visit compliance Inspection O Operation Review O Lagoon Evaluation
for Visit WRoutine O Complaint O Follow up O Emergency Notification O Other 1 ❑ Denied Access
Facility Number Date of Visit: I=Time: 1 1060_
NNot O rational C Below Threshold
Permitted 9Certified 0 Conditionally Certified 0 Registered Date Last Operated or Above Threshold: .........................
FarmName:...CJ,.....s.................................................................. County: ... �I.1�....... .........................----•--------•-•-...
n� moo 4 fro n* �� (o • . �'96
Owner Name:.... �. ........... �./.].�................ ~�
.{1�,1. qq rr q�T . II............,,.jj.................................... Phone No:........... I....�..(............•.........
Facility Contact: ...1...1.....:..Gr.�...1`---... C.r'...C%:..l4�ltl�:.R�Jt[!....-i••`•••- Phone No: .!�........
n ry� �f '% 7
Mailing Address: K ....!.a......................................................... ..........1.'. i,r.3'' e.....'...-.�J.....3.�.!.....3 7..-2...:...a..±... � J
vo
Onsite Representative.-...fa..1...•1..................................................................................... Integrator:.....................
Certified Operator: �,..A. Operator Certification Number: � `�
p p..................3g...................
Location of Farm:
ar� spa e t a.t y a • Tu rn rig" 00 S 13 . -
t Latitude ®* 4, �& Longitude ®0 �4 ®64
❑ Swine ❑Poultry Cattle ❑Horse g'
Design - Current
0WHIC - Uapacity Fo ulation
❑ Wean to Feeder
❑ Feeder to Finish
❑ Farrow to Wean
❑ Farrow to Feeder
❑ Farrow to Finish
❑ Boars
Number of Lagoons
Holding Ponds / Solid Traps
Design Current
Poultry Capacity Population Cattle
❑ Layer ❑ Dairy
❑ Non -Layer ❑Non -Dail
❑ Other j
Total Design Capacity
Total SSLW
Subsurface Drains Present 110 Lagoon Area
No Liquid Waste M
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)
Design Curreinf _'.'
'apacity. Po ulatlon:=
r�
etai
7375-11]
❑ Spray Field Area
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
❑ Yes ( No
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes
❑ No
❑ Yes
X No
Yes
[]-No
4. Is storage capacity (freeboard plus storm storage) less than adequate? pillway ❑ Yes pQ No
�ll Structure I Structure 2 Structu1� 3 Structure 4 Structure 5 Structure 6 7�
Identifier; ) %W)...... .E� -'luc 1�.......................................................................................................................
Freeboard (inches); LA 5100 Continued on back

�: �
•
' 1
,� � ;
� • • r
Y
L \ � r
' �. ... _.
. -• .._ ... � k � � .
f
t ,'

4
Facility Number: -- . Date of inspection '�*
5. Are there any immediate threats to the integrity of any of the structures observed? (ie/ trees, severe erosion,
seepage, etc.)
6. Are there structures on -site which are not properly addressed and/or managed through a waste management or
closure plan?
(If any of questions 4-6 was answered yes, and the situation poses an
immediate public health or environmental threat, notify DWQ)
7. Do any of the structures need maintenance/improvement?
S. 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?
I I- Is there evidence
12. Crop type
application? 1 ❑
❑ PAN ❑ Hydraulic Overload
*Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes �No
Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes �No
❑ Yes 1!�&0
❑ Yes No
❑ Yes o
13. Do the receiving crophiffer 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?
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, freAbard, 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?
1Q . iol;a>r hS'oi•• dtfcie " ' •vt�ere it- d i3titr;ift #his:visit; • Y;oir will •teoiye Ott turthgr ;
...correspondeitce. abaut this visit.
❑ Yes �Na
❑ Yes No
❑ Yeso
❑ Yes *No
❑ Yes �No
❑ Yes No
❑ Yes o
❑ Yes No
El Yes No
❑ Yes _)kno
❑ Yes ``�To
❑ Yes kNo
❑ Yes �No
Comments (refer twquestion #): Explain any YES answers and/or any recommendations or any other comments.
Use drawings of facility to better explain situations. (use additional pages as necessary):
N/ �DOa
Reviewer/Inspector Name i
Reviewer/Inspector Signature. Date: 2— 5100

Facility Number: 0— of Inspection •
Odor Issues
26. Does the discharge pipe from the confinement building to the storage pond or lagoon fail to discharge at/or below
liquid level of lagoon or storage pond with no agitation?
27. Are there any dead animals not disposed of properly within 24 hours? ° ❑ Yes 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
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.) Cl Yes �No
31. Do the animals feed storage bins fail to have appropriate cover? ❑ Yes A No
32. Do the flush tanks lack a submerged fill pipe or a permanent/temporary cover?
Additional i i!o1
f
r
1 r �

.I-

s vision of Water Quality
ision of Soil and Water Conservation
& Other Agency
(Type of Visit O Compliance Inspection O Operation Review O Lagoon Evaluation
Reason for Visit O Routine O Complaint O Follow up O Emergency Notification O Other ❑ Denied Access
FFacility Number 03 33 Date of Visit: 8/23/2001 Time:
0 Not O erational Q Below Threshold
® Permitted M Certified © Conditionally Certified 0 Registered Date Last Operated or Above Threshold: .........................
Farm Name: Mm'.R.O.d.Raira:........................ ... County: AU9911any ........................................ NY.S.RA........
.....................................................................
OwnerName: AfY.aa:Alii.................................. &W..Q.0d ....................................................... Phone No: .G-.7.Z:$967...........................................................
MailingAddress: ail. El�x3:.ZZI.......................... .. SilCka..11............................ Z$.�.7.5............................................................................ ...............................
FacilityContact: ........ Title: ...................................................................................................................................... Phone o.................................................... o
Onsite Representative: i.!' ikP.A.M.00A.............................................................................. Integrator:... ............... .....
Certified Operator:Mjji g........................................ A(w.QOd............................................. Operator Certification Number:Z.3.3.S�.............................
Location of Farm:
-1wy 221 South turn right of SR1347. Atwood Dairy is on the left. +
❑ Swine ❑ Poultry M Cattle ❑ Horse Latitude 36 • 31 SS Longitude 81 • 10 4 01
Design Current
Swine Canacitv Ponulation
❑ Wean to Feeder
❑ Feeder to Finish
❑ Farrow to Wean
❑ Farrow to Feeder
❑ Farrow to Finish
❑ Gilts
❑ Boars
Design Current " Design Current
Poultry Capacity Population Cattle Capacity Population
❑ Layer ® Dairy 288 170
❑ Non -Layer I JE1 Non -Dairy
❑ Other
Total Design Capacity 288
Total SSLW 403,200
Number of Lagoons I I ❑ Subsurface Drains Present ❑ Lagoon Area 10 Spray Field Area
Holding Ponds / Solid Traps 1 2 10 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 "a]/min?
d. Does discharge bypass a lagoon system? (If yes, notify DWQ)
2. Is there evidence of past discharge from any part of the operation?
❑ Yes M No
❑ Yes [:]No
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes ❑ No
M Yes ❑ No
3. Were there any adverse impacts or potential adverse impacts to the Waters of the State other than from a discharge? ❑ Yes M No
Waste Collection & Treatment
4. Is storage capacity (freeboard plus storm storage) less than adequate? M Spillway ❑ Yes M No
Structure 1 Structure 2 Structure 3 Structure 4 Structure 5 Structure 6
Identifier: .....Uppex..W..SP...........Lawex..W.SP.................... .....
Freeboard (inches): 14 36
05103101 Continued

Facility'Number: 03-33 Date of Inspection 8/23/2001
- '
5. Are there any immediate threats to the intt ity of any of the structures observed? (ie/ treelo' cre 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) Timothy, Orchard, & Rye
I3. 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
No violations or deficiencies were noted during this visit. You will receive no further correspondence about this visit.
Comments (refer to question #): Explain any YES answers and/or any recommendations or any other comments.
Use drawings of facility to better explain situations. (use additional pages as necessary): ( ---.__ --__ - -_. --_--
❑ Field Copy ® Final Notes
# 2. Evidence of a small amount of discharge from a crack in the curbing ( separated from the fence post ). Need to seal cracks around
+
posts to prevent seepage.
# 7. Contact local soil & water / NRCS office for assistance in repairing the wooden section of the upper waste pond. The overflow pipe
on the upper WSP is below the holes in the wooden structure, but the structure needs to be stabilized. ( To prevent a rupture)
Mr. 4Avood is planning on removing this WSP and building a new free -stall barn and waste storage pond.
Overall facility is doing a good job.
Reviewer/Inspector Name Rocky Durham
Reviewer/Inspector Signature: Date:
05103101 Continued

,Facility Number: 03-33 D ^ of Inspeetion 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
liquid level of lagoon or storage pond with no agitation?
27. Are there any dead animals not disposed of properly within 24 hours?
28. Is there any evidence of wind drift during land application? (i.e. residue on neighboring vegetation, asphalt,
roads, building structure, and/or public property)
29. Is the land application spray system intake not located near the liquid surface of the lagoon?
30. Were any major maintenance problems with the ventilation fan(s) noted? (i.e. broken fan belts, missing or
or broken fan blade(s), inoperable shutters, etc.)
31. Do the animals feed storage bins fail to have appropriate cover.?
32. Do the flush tanks lack a submerged fill pipe or a permanent/temporary cover?
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes . ❑ No
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes ❑ No
A itional Comments -and/orDrawings:
Waste analysis: 5-11-01 LSD 6.9 lbs. N/1000 gals. B +
J
05103101

ivision of Water Quality
'vision of Soil and Water Conservation
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 33 Date of Visit: 5/23/20t11 Time: 1U00 Printed on: 5/25/2001
0 Not O erational Q Below Threshold
® Permitted ® Certified [3 Conditionally Certified (3 Registered Date Last Operated or Above Threshold: .........................
Farm Name: St.w.RAd..Aairy ........................... .. County: A►ftghautY......................................... WSRO........
...................................................................
Owner Name: AYY 3[x�.................................. Atwwd ....................................................... Phone No: 33,h-3.7.2.-$967.
................................. .... ......................
MailingAddress: 1Q.. ......................................................... S.1at.u.. N.Q............................................................. 2$h.?...............
Facility Contact: lY.[, c.A W.9.Qd.................. ...Title: .. .. . Phone No: 336„372,2717
OnsiteRepresentative: MiJkP.A1W..Qo..d.............................................................................. Integrator:......................................................................................
Certified Operator:Mike....................................... A►tW:Q.d............................................ Operator Certification Number:21,3.82 .............................
Location of Farm:
Hwy 221 South turn right of SR1347. Atwood Dairy is on the left.
w
❑ Swine ❑ Poultry ® Cattle ❑ Horse Latitude 36 • 31 ' S5 " Longitude S1 • 104 F-0—FT,
Design Current
Swine Capacity 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 119 Dairy 288 190
❑ Non -Layer IONon-Dairy
❑ Other
Total Design Capacity z88
Total SSLW 1 403,200
Number of Lagoons 0 ❑ Subsurface Drains Present 110 Lagoon Area 10 Spray Field Area
Holding Ponds / Solid Traps 2 ❑ No Liquid Waste Management System
Discharges &r Stream Impacts
1. Is any discharge observed from any part of the operation?
Discharge originated at: ❑ Lagoon ❑ Spray Field ❑ Other
a. If discharge is observed, was the conveyance man-made?
b. If discharge is observed, did it reach Water of the State? (If yes, notify DWQ)
c. If discharge is observed, what is the estimated flow in gal/min?
d. Does discharge bypass a lagoon system'? (if yes, notify DWQ)
2. Is there evidence of past discharge from any part of the operation?
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes ® No
3. Were there any adverse impacts or potential adverse impacts to the Waters of the State other than from a discharge? ❑ Yes ® No
Waste Collection & Treatment
4. Is storage capacity (freeboard plus storm storage) less than adequate? ® Spillway ❑ Yes ® No
Structure I Structure 2 Structure 3 Structure 4 Structure 5 Structure 6
Identifier: Milk BaGn.-upper. ..Freestall-. ower...............................................................................................................................................
Freeboard (inches): 13 132 1.
05103101 Continued

Facility Number: 03-33 Date of Inspection 1 5/23/20 11 Printed on: 5/25/2001 .
5. Are there any immediate threats to the intr ty of any of the structures observed? (ie/ trees3evere 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
1 L Is there evidence of over application? ❑ Excessive Ponding ❑ PAN ❑ Hydraulic Overload ❑ Yes ® No
12. Crop type Corn (Silage & Grain) Fescue (Hay) Rye
13. Do the receiving crops differ with those designated in the Certified Animal Waste Management Plan (CAWMP)? ❑ Yes ® No
14. a) Does the facility lack adequate acreage for land application? ❑ Yes ® No
b) Does the facility need a wettable acre determination? ❑ Yes ® No
c) This facility is pended for a wettable acre determination? ❑ Yes ® No
15. Does the receiving crop need improvement?
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 IN No
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes ® No
[] No violations or deficiencies were noted during this visit. You will receive no further correspondence about this visit.
Comments (refer to question #): Explain any YES answers and/or any recommendations or any other comments.
Use drawings of facility to better explain situations. -It iiiseadditional pages as necessary): ❑ Field Copy ® Final Notes
4. Upper WSP flows by gravity into lower WSP.
Jk
7. The wooden wall of the upper pond needs to be repaired. Is not allowing waste to leak out yet, though.
Need to put horizontal bar/pipe on marker for maximum level (required) and spillway (suggested).
17. I will send copy of COC and permit to Mike.
19. Need to record freeboard per permit. Pasture application fields need to be added to WUP prior to application of waste. If rye is not
removed, then the nitrogen applied needs to be carried over to the spring "com" records. 2001 soil test results are back and look ok.
Waste analysis dated 5/14/01: N=6.9 lbs./1000 gal.
Reviewer/Inspector Name !M i, a Rosebrock
Reviewer/Inspector Signatu % R, Date: O
05103101 ✓ t Continued

�acility Number: 03-33 1) to of Inspection 5/23/2001 • Printed rnt: 5�25/2001
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?
2$. Is there any evidence of wind drift during land application? (i.e. residue on neighboring vegetation, asphalt,
roads, building structure, and/or public property)
29. Is the land application spray system intake not located near the liquid surface of the lagoon?
30. Were any major maintenance problems with the ventilation fan(s) noted? (i.e. broken fan belts, missing or
or broken fan blade(s), inoperable shutters, etc.)
31. Do the animals feed storage bins fail to have appropriate cover?
32. Do the flush tanks lack a submerged fill pipe or a permanent/temporary cover?
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes ❑ No
Additional Comments and/or Drawings.
Operator has begun adding water boxes to dry cow pasture and plans to fence animals out of creek and build stock trail. is
working with Alleghany NRCS on these projects and for cost share.
r
05103101

Type of Visit 0 Compliance Inspection O Operation Review O Lagoon Evaluation
Reason for Visit 0 Routine O Complaint O Follow up O Emergency Notification O Other ❑ Denied Access
Facility Number Date of Visit: 0 b Time: I 1b 00
Q Nat O erational Q Below Threshold
Permitted VCertified 0 Conditionally Certified 0 Registered Date Last Operated or Above Threshold:
Farm Name: ..A..1.10QQ .......
.)a �.lr .....- County:.A.1. -e. [ I any ................................ .........
Owner Name:... � .�i.. ......& co .................................................. Phone No:...� �•1 rJ� 7-a-..- 9.. D.7...........--..-.-.......-.--.
Facility Contact: 1.1.1� e ../. —.f.t000j.. ...... Title. .. .................... Phon k o: .. :. .. . �.�..�
Mailing Address: ....�. t.+.
.-•. „--�•., .l
:.... ...-, .... . .... a
36 7C
'.......................- .......
Integrator:....................................Onsite Representativ, .--...-
........................
Certified Operator: ..... t-L.i.l... e.......... A......... A.. L.wS..?M .............................. Operator Certification Number:. ,oll............
Location'of Farm:
wq Z I So�� �vrn r,� h+ o W �cd C3 4�� � Y �s o+� i2 2Z
❑ Swine ❑ Poultry jM Cattle ❑ Horse Latitude ® • �.4 Longitude ®• / 6 ©«
Design Current
Swine Capacity Population
❑ Wean to Feeder
❑ Feeder to Finish
❑ Farrow to Wean
❑ Farrow to Feeder
❑ Farrow to Finish
❑ Gilts
❑ Boars
'Design Current
Poultry Capacity Population
❑ Layer
❑ Non -Layer
❑ Other
Design Current
Cattle Capacity Population
Dairy
Non -Dairy
Total Design Capacity
g0jacOrotal SSLW
Number of Lagoons JE1 Subsurface Drains Present ❑ Lagoon Area ❑ Spray Field Area
-71
Holding Ponds / Solid Traps JE3 No Liquid Waste Management System
Discharges & Stream Impacts
1. Is any discharge observed from any part of the operation'? El Yes No
DiscliarLtc originated at ❑ Lagoon ❑ Spray Field ❑ Other
a. Ii'dischargc is observed, was the convevance than -made'? ❑ Yes ❑ No
b. If disclian e is observed, did it reach Witter of the State'? (if yes, notify D`VQ) ❑Yes ❑ No
c. if dischar�_,c is observed. what is the C;tltnatCd 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 �.A No
3. Were there any adverse impacts or potential adverse impacts to the Waters of the State other than from a discharge? ElYes XNo
Waste Collection & Treatment
4. Is storage capacity (freeboard plus storm storage) less than adequate? VSpillway ❑ Yes 0No
jj ,,Structure I StructurC 2 Str ctu=re 3 Structnre 4 Structure 5 Structure 6
Identifier: ...V.� . _c;. � r �> GC.I.i...��i�i� ......................... .................... ....................... I............ ................ ....................
a4Freeboard (inches): ` m 12
5100 1 Continued on back
i,

Facility Number: n — Date of Inspection Printed on:
5. Are there any immediate threats to th ity of any of the structures observed? (ie/ *sever
ge,t erosion,
etc.)
6. Are there structures on -site which are not properly addressed and/or managed through a waste management of
closure plan?
(if any of questions 4-6 was answered yes, and the situation poses an
immediate public health or environmental threat, notify DWQ)
1 /9/2001
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
l 1 1.- 1
12. Crop type
13- Do the receiving crops differ wit those designated in the Certified Animal Waste(kanagement 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'? (ic/ irrigationAf,,,boar�dwaste analysis & soil sample reports)
20, Is facility not in compliance with any applicable setback criteria in effect at the time of design?
21. Did the facility fail to have a actively certified operator in charge?
22. Fail to notify regional DWQ of emergency situations as required by General Permit?
(ie/ discharge, freeboard problems, over application)
23. Did Reviewer/Inspector fail to discuss review/inspection with on -site representative?
24. Does facility require a follow-up visit by same agency?
25. Were any additional problems noted which cause noncompliance of the Certified AWMP?
; 10 yi9latigris;or defcie cies mere potea during titis;visit; Voti wwitl receive Rio; fufth& ;
... .. ... ..
correspondence. abaut: this .visit_ :.. .
❑ Yes] No
❑ Yes No
Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes ANo
9yes ❑ No
❑ Yes No
❑ Yes No
❑ Yes No
ElYeslNo
No
El YesNo
❑ Yes
❑ Yes ]I No
❑ Yes LV,No
Ik Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes X No
Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes [ No
❑ Yes No
❑ Yes No
❑ Yes No
❑ Yes VNo
❑ Yes )(No
Comments (refer to questron #} -Explain any YES answers and/or any recommendations or any atlier cotnmenLq. �_
Use drawings -of facility to better explairi situatrdns. (use addtaoiial pages as necessary}
r? . LjP
Q�1bwt n9 U-)0Sfe 4-o leGLY-- o�_* �e -,,�Hjo
q - Need ,
P Flo r +'�orr p t� o n ILo
ryIQ�C � e�1 (rr r 4 Sp I t cs u �
Reviewer/InspectorName
Reviewer/Inspector Signatur %�� Date: p�; _ 5100

Fycility Number: Date of Inspection Printed on: 1 /9/2001
Odor Issues
26. Does the discharge pipe from the conOment building to the storage pond or lagoon 00 discharge at/or below ❑ Yes A No
liquid level of lagoon or storage pond with no agitation? 4
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 A
No
32. Do the flush tanks lack a submerged fill pipe or a permanent/temporary cover?
AdcUtional Uomments ana/or Drawings:
rJD .
�� 2 �r e Ile- � (Fal
f� L 5p rl n
L)'DO-6+e- -0--a4vies LA---Ytr1 60 dcdl-4
en uotQd PXSfu r-e- 7 Lo.
ePaw�N
C(A) CMAJ
C67" t4
sioo n ` � � VW jz� df

I
�*g
of Water Quality
of. Soil,and,Water Conservation
d�Otency
Type of Visit O Compliance Inspection Q Operation Review O Lagoon Evaluation
Reason for Visit OO Routine O Complaint O Follow up O Emergency Notification O Other ❑ Denied Access
Facility Number
Ihue of Visit: 11I9/2000 'I'inw: 14:50 Printed jai: 4/10/2001
03 33
t'J Not O erational Q Below Threshold
® Permitted ® Certified 13 Conditionally Certified ❑ Registered Date Last Operated or Above Threshold: ................
Farm Name: A.M.O.Q..d.J abrY ......................................................... ....................................... County: AllIgglimy ........................................ WS.RO........
OwnerName: A.yyayIXC.................................. A1W.Qsttd....................................................... Phone No:1G7............................................................
FacilityContact: .............................................................................. Title:................................................................ Phone No:...................................................
MailingAddress: d3Q.l3w..y..221......................................................................................... Sputa ... NC............................................................. MAU .............
Onsite Representative: Pryaytae.A.twood ...............
Certified Operator:Ming.......................
Location of Farm:
................. ]Integrator:..............
3wy 221 South turn right of SR1347. Atwood Dairy is on the left.
...... Operator Certification Number:2d3$2.............................
❑ Swine ❑ Poultry ® Cattle ❑ Horse Latitude ®• 31 1 55 CL Longitude 81 • 10 & Ol
Design Current
Swine Canacitv Population
❑ Wean to Feeder
❑ Feeder to Finish
❑ Farrow to Wean
❑ Farrow to Feeder
❑ Farrow to Finish
❑ Gilts
❑ Boars
Design Current Design Current
Poultry Capacity Population Cattle Capacity Population
❑ Layer ® Dairy 288 19a
❑ Non -Layer JE1 Non -Dairy
❑ Other
Total Design Capacity 288
Total SSLW 403,200
Discharges K Stream Impacts
1. is any discharge observed from any part of the operation?
Discharge originated ar. ❑ 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 obscrvcd, 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
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes ® No
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: ........ LEI.ilk.barn........ ......... Freestall......... ................................... .................................... .................................... ............ ........................
Freeboard (inches): 18 36
5100 Continued on back

Facility Number: 03-33 Date of Insper.tion 1U9/2000 � Printed mi: 4/10/2001 LL
5. Are there any immediate threats to the91grity of any of the structures observed? (ie/ tr evere erosion, []Yes ®No
seepage, etc.)
6. Are there structures on -site which are not properly addressed and/or managed through a waste management or .
closure plan? []Yes ® No
(If any of questions 4-6 was answered yes, and the situation poses an
immediate public health or environmental threat, notify DWQ)
7. Do any of the structures need maintenance/improvement? ® Yes ❑ No
8. Does any part of the waste management system other than waste structures require maintenance/improvement? ❑ Yes ® No
9. Do any stuctures lack adequate, gauged markers with required maximum and minimum liquid level
elevation markings? ❑ Yes ® No
Waste Application
10. Are there any buffers that need maintenance/improvement? ❑ Yes ® No
11. Is there evidence of over application? ❑ Excessive Ponding ❑ PAN ❑ Hydraulic Overload ❑ Yes ® No
12. Crop type Rye 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 & 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 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?
. . . . yi. . . . . . .:deficiencies rvere;noted:during this visit::You:will irece ve no ftirthei•
correspondence aboe't this .visit.
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes ® No
® Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes ® No
® Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes ® No
7. Continue efforts to get rid of groundhogs and backfill holes.
9. Recommend a graduated marker ( every 6 inches ) to record weekly waste pond levels to approx. 4-5 ft. below the max. liquid
ve I.
17. Need to keep a copy of the certificate of coverage with the WUP and other records.
19. On the rye cover crop. The crop cycle would be from Fall to Spring ( i.e. 10/99 to 3/00 ) and application records would show both
:ars on the same crop. Also, if the rye is not removed from the field the nitrogen applied to the rye ( 70 INS.) would have to be
:ducted from the corn crop following. Need to start keeping weekly levels on the waste pond per the general permit requirements.
Reviewer/Inspector Name !Rocky Durham
Reviewer/Inspector Signature: Date: 5100

Facility Number: 03-33 1)f loispection 11/9/2000 Printed on: 4/10/2001
Odor Issues ..
26. Does the discharge pipe from the confinement building to the storage pond or lagoon fail to discharge allor 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
[.' ►ttoria �otniiieritslari _or1 rsiwm_1, 7
Waste analysis: 6/15/00 LSD 10.4 lbs. N11000 gals. B
1 1/03/00 LSD 8.5 lbs. N/1000 gals. B
5100

ision of Water Quality •
ision of Soil and Water Conservation
0 Other Agency
Type of Visit O Compliance Inspection O Operation Review O Lagoon Evaluation
Reason for Visit O Routine O Complaint O Follow up O Emergency Notification O Other ❑ Denied Access
?:ate 11f ��isil: ti/13l260o I';n,e: t325 Printed ,m: 6/23/2000
Facility Number 03 33
0 Not Operational 0 Below Threshold
© Permitted ® Certified [3 Conditionally Certified [3 Registered pate Last Operated or Above Threshold: ................
Farm Name: M..W.RIDSRaia..............................................
Owner Name: Qw.a at .................................. At.Y.►:ood.....
County: Allgghau........................................ WSRQ........
.................... Phone No: ttaom'sA3.J6-37Zn$9.(t7.............................
Facility Contact: I!1,ili~ Atn:post.................................................Title:................................................................ Phone No: Mik's.#..33.6.37.2,Z717.....
MailingAddress: t i?.. T!.y..221......................................................................................... SR;ArtEa... N.C............................................................. MAN ..............
Onsite Representative; M%it..QAtWRod.............................................................................. Integrator:................................................................................
Certified Operator: MjJk..PA,..................................A.t.:o9d............................. ................ Operator Certification Number:; 13& .............................
Location of Farm:
❑ Swine ❑ Poultry 0 Cattle ❑ Horse Latitude 36 ' 31 55 Longitude S1 • 14F Ol
Design Current
Swine C'anacity Panulatinn
❑ 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 145 I45
❑ Non -Layer ❑Non -Dairy
❑ Other
Total Design Capacity 145
Total SSLW 203,000
Number of Lagoons 0 ❑ Subsurface Drains Present ❑ Lagoon Area ❑ sprav Field Arc.
Holding Ponds / Solid Traps 1 2 1 ❑ 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 R Treatment
® Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes ® No
Not measurable
❑ Yes ® No
® Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes ® No
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: ..Sm..waste.pond.....F.rerstali.pond.............................................................................................................. ........ __.................
.......
Freeboard (inches): 18 102 `
ti
Continued on back
P?YL—

Facility Number: 03-33 Date of Inspection 6/13/2000 Printed on: 6/23/2000 -
5. Are there any immediate threats to theq1negrity of any of the structures observed? (ie/ tr 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 0 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
It. 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?
lb. 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: N6.violations:or'deficiencies-were:n6ted;during-this: visit... N u;will "rece ve•n6•further•
.. corres oridence abouE this .visit.
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes ®No
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes ® No
® Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes ® No
Comments (refer to question#): Explain any YES answers and/or any recommendations or any other comments.
Use drawings of facility to better explain situations. (use additional pages as necessary):
q1. and #7. Waste pond #I (small one) has waste seeping out from the wooden wall and needs to be repaired. Solids are being AL
:ontained by concrete berms.
�7. Groundhog hole on north side of waste pond #2 needs to be repaired.
M. Pasture is very denuded. Need to establish vegetation on pasture. Getting sediment run-off.
U9. No record of waste samples being taken within 60 days of Feb. and Mar_ application dates. Other waste records recorded on paper
but not on SLUR 1 and 2.
125. Waste plan dated 12/99 was rewritten for approx. 288 by NRCS per Mike.
Reviewer/Inspector Name 'Meli a Rosebrock
Reviewer/Inspector Signature. hAo "f_j� Date: 4 /jd

>;acility Number: 03-33 1) 1' Inspection 6/13/2000 Printed on: 6/23/2000
Odor Issues
26. Does the discharge pipe from the confinement building to the storage pond or lagoon fail to discharge at/or below ❑ Yes ❑ No
liquid level of lagoon or storage pond with no agitation?
27. Are there any dead animals not disposed of properly within 24 hours? ❑ Yes ® No
28,
Is there any evidence of wind drift during land application? (i.e. residue on neighboring vegetation, asphalt.
❑ Yes
® No
roads, building structure, and/or public property)
29.
Is the land application spray system intake not located near the liquid surface of the lagoon?
❑ Yes
® No
30.
Were any major maintenance problems with the ventilation fan(s) noted? (i.e. broken fan belts, missing or
or broken fan blade(s). inoperable shutters, etc.)
❑ Yes
® No
31.
Do the animals feed storage bins fail to have appropriate cover?
❑ Yes
® No
32.
Do the flush tanks lack a submerged fill pipe or a permanent/temporary cover'?
❑ Yes
❑ No
�tlona ` omments'•an .or` rawuigsc

1 0o PI1
0 Division o and Water Conservation - Operation -Re
i . C1 Division o and Water Conservation - Compliance ction
19Division of Water Quality -.Compliance Inspection ,
0ther Agency - Operation Review ,
L0 Routine 0 Complaint 0 Follow-ue of DWQ inspection 0 Follow-up of DSWC review 0 Other
Facility Number Date of Inspection Q
ltime of Inspection 24 hr. (hh:mm)
© Permitted Wcertified Q Conditionally Certified © Registered [3 Not O erational Date Last Operated:
Farm Name: ... ..T..I,R.21�o �Ai.n County: ..PlAnC.C7RAN...................................
11-
Owner Name: .l ��Fi. Iv .............�..." ...`'��................................................. Phone No: �.3.�..�....5...4 ..7....M �
Facility Contact: .....ly!..... �I.T 7 1 hone I o:
ii.. ............. .......................... Title:.............................................................
Mailing Address: I W.....a-1.........1....... s.PA T ....�. N ..G........... .a. ..7...................... ... 1".." ................
.................................... ........... ..........
Onsite Representative:.......�..L............. Inte-rator: ..................................................................................
Certified Operator:.... PA-LIK .....�.�..r�Q0.0 .. Operator Certification Number:.�. .�.
..... ................. .........
Location of Farm-
........................_:.Ty...rY1...... :..r ..... ....................:.......... ..! ..7.....�.-.., ��.[`l�j..... ri....�e ..�.......................... �
Latitude f 3 •1 91 1 Longitude l• )O ©f 11
Design Current
Swine Capacity Population
❑ Wean to Feeder
❑ Feeder to Finish
❑ Farrow to Wean
❑ Farrow to Feeder
❑ Farrow to Finish
❑ Gilts,
❑ Boars
Design Current
Poultry Capacity Population
❑ Layer
[] Non -Layer
❑ Other
Total Design Capacity 1
Total SSLW =
Design Current
Cattle Capacity Population
Dairy
❑ Non -Dairy
. I
Number of Lagoons J❑ Subsurface Drains Present ❑ Lagoon Area JEI Spray Field Area
Holding Ponds /Solid Traps ❑ No Liquid Waste Management System
Discharges & Stream Impacts
Is any discharge observed from any part of the operation?
Discharge originated at: ❑ Lagoon ❑ Spray Field ❑ Other
a. If discharge is observed, was the convevance than -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? (Il-yes, notify DWQ)
Kyes ❑ No
❑ Yes No
El Yes No
NO+ W,,As 11 re 6fe.
❑ Yes o
2. Is there evidence of past discharge from any part of the operation? x Yes ❑ No
3. Were there any adverse impacts or potential adverse impacts to the Waters of the State other than from a discharge? ❑ Yes KNo
Waste Collection & Treatment
4. Is storage capacity (freeboard plus storm storage) less than adequate? Spillway ❑ Yes fVNo
Structure, Structure; Structure 3 Structure 4 Structure 5 Structure b
Identifier:
Freeboard (inches): 1. r ..................
.................................... ............................................................................................ ....... .......................
.....
5. Are there any immediate threats to the integrity of any of the structures observed? (ie/ trees, severe erosion, ❑ Yes 0 No
seepage, etc.)
3/23/99 Continued on back

7)

yti
Facility Dumber: of Inspection
6. Are there structures on -site which are n0properly addressed and/or Q'r1ag_ed through a waste management or
closure plan? W ❑ 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 /''C' No
11. Is there evidence of over application? ❑ Excessive Ponding ❑ PAN ❑ Yes XNO
12. Crop type M- ,,5,1`a ak
13.
Do the receiving crops differ wi i 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?
ElYes
No
15.
Does the receiving crop need improvement?
❑ Yes
XNo
16.
Is there a lack of adequate waste application equipment?
❑ Yes
�No
Required
Records & Documents ���
Fail to have Certificate of Coverage & General Permit readily available?
17.
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
XNO
Does record keeping need improvement? (ie/ irrigation, freeboard, waste analysis & soil sample reports)
''19. Yes0
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?
(le/ discharge, freeboard problems, over application)
El 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
3�rNo
25.
Were any additional problems noted which cause noncompliance of the Certified AWMP?
❑ Yes
XNo
0:'io-yiolafigris:or• diefieienues Were h6fed during 4his; visit ; Y:oix will.i-&6ye iio furthee.
corres orideitce: abauln this :visit.::: :: :::... : :.... . .. . .
z
Comments ("refer. to.question:#):-Explai€t any YES answers and/or: any recommendations or"any other comments:"
Use,drawin ,4 of facilit to:betterlain situ ex ations use additional€pages as necessary)
g Y P
Ila . Wa y, Pena �� �Sd'�as w6oA wal( k s SET i n
13 , 5o d,_-)a V e— C.bn�a I fee- Cr'O -Fe_
One'_��-tOVIA Ne) f4ori+ 6A& 0� O�S+e' POVj
c �o� r o
Plan le, bei h°t re u.)r OF6 6
3/23/99

f
i\�
:�
.-
�.
,•.
t�
.
.��
�i
�i
��.
�t

Facility dumber: 03 %33 0 of Inspection
Odor IssuLs
26. Does the discharge pipe from the confinement building to the storage pond or lagoon fail to discharge atlor below ^ 9 No
liquid level of lagoon or storage pond with no agitation? a m IT aoco
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? r El Yes No
32. Do the flush tanks lack a submerged fill pipe or a permanenthemporary cover? �m l ! a WO
v ox �A d ev\uAe A. �) eed `s t'e
Soil S eS
Cl
9, 49ev7 �'6
b0a,sl� re, e ords we r-ie- r-oeordJ
ark
ALP e.+-I hoc04 e4fZX- .
keord,5 np-A d onii t -Z 0e- /
ALI

Facility Number 03 33 Date of Inspection 11-9-99
Time of Inspection 10:00 24 hr. (hh:mm)
❑ Permitted ® Certified [3 Conditionally Certified [3 Registered10 Not Operational I Date Last Operated: p ..........................
FarmName: At.W..RAd..!?WrY................................................................................................ County: AlleghaRY ........................................ WSRQ........
OwnerName: Dmay:11C.................................. AUA-.Q.Qd ....................................................... Phone No: 910-3.7.2.:UA7............................................................
Facility Contact: N111tc.A0A.,Q.Qsl.................................................Title:................................................................ Phone No:...................................................
MailingAddress: 13.UjiWy,z21 .......................................................................................... SRArW... K.............................................................. MAU ..............
OnsiteRepresentative:.. ................. .............................................................................. Integrator:......................................................................................
Certified Operator: ll'like.A,.................................. M.W.O.O.sl............................................. Operator Certification Number:ZI3.82 .............................
Location of Farm:
Latitude 36 • 2l 4 54 Longitude $1 • 10 4 ®«
Design Current
Swine CanaeitV 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 ulation
❑ Layer 10 Dairy 145 180
❑ Non -Layer ❑ Non -Dairy
❑ Other
Total Design Capacity F 145
Total SSLW 1 203,000
Number of Lagoons I JE1 Subsurface Drains Present ❑ Lagoon Area ❑ Spray Field Arca
Holding Ponds / Solid Traps 1 2 ❑ No Liquid Waste Management System
Discharges 1Cc Stream Impacts
1. Is any discharge observed from any part of the operation? []Yes ® No
Discharge originated at: ❑ Lagoon [I 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) [--]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: Milk Barn Free Stall
Freeboard(inches): ................ ZQ...........................4.................._............_............................................................................................... .......
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

Facility Number: 03-33 D#f Inspection
6. Are there structures on -site which are nooperly addressed and/or managed through a w 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?
t 1. Is there evidence of over application? ❑ Excessive Ponding ❑ PAN
t2. Crop type Corn (Silage & Grain) Timothy, Orchard, & Rye
11-9-99
❑ Yes
® No
❑ Yes
® No
❑ Yes
® No
❑ Yes
® No
❑ Yes
® No
❑ Yes
® No
B. 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 ReviewerlInspector fail to discuss review/inspection with on -site representative?
24. Does facility require a follow-up visit by same agency?
25. Were any additional problems noted which cause noncompliance of the Certified AWMP?
®;No.violati6ns:of-deficiencies•were:notedduring-this;'Vkh.-:You: will receive-ito•further-: ;
:: corresu"dence abouk 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
Reviewer/Inspector Signature: U PAV -A-4 kn AL ( Date: t (- 9'-
Printed on 11t9_9

Division of SoiI _`NW ter Conservation - Operation Review -
D.Divisk . of Soil Water Conservation' -,Compliance Inspec
0 Division of Water Quality - Compliance Inspection
0 Other Agency - Operation.Review
14D Routine O Complaint O Follow-up of DWQ inspection Q Follow-up of DSWC review Q Other
Facility Number 03 33 Date of Inspection F 618199
Time of Inspection 14:30 24 hr. (hh:mm)
[j Permitted ® Certified 13 Conditionally Certified [3 Registered 113 Not O erational Date Last Operated:
Farm Name:MwaodDaitry.................................................................................... .. County: AtllrgbaQ......................................... W- SRQ........
Owner Name: ])n:aya�.................................. A>yxoQid....................................................... Phone No: 91i1-3.I.2.:$.947.........
............................. ......................
Facility Contact: ............. ................ ................................................. Title:.......................... Phone No:
MailingAddress: 13.9jiwy..221.......................................................................................... S Ag:W...NG............................................................. N.67.5 ..............
Onsite Representative: 11'I g.Alwai l.............................................................................. Integrator:......................................................................................
Certified Operator:},!'1ike,.A................................. A<. mRod............................................. Operator Certification Number: Z13.82,.............................
Location of Farm:
Latitude 0 4 46 Longitude • C 66
Design
Current
Design Current
Design Current
Swine Capacity
Population Poultry
Capacity Population Cattle
Capacity Pol2ulation
❑ Wean to Feeder
❑ Layer
I
® Dairy
1 145
136
❑ Feeder to Finish
10 Non -Layer
I
I
❑ Non -Dairy
❑ Farrow to Wean
❑ Farrow to Feeder
❑ Other
❑ Farrow to Finish
Total Design Capacity
145
❑ Gilts
Total SSLW
203,400
❑ Boars
Number of Lagoons ❑ Subsurface Drains Present ❑ Lagoon Area ❑ Spray Field Area
Holding Ponds 1 Solid Traps 2 ❑ No Liquid Waste Management System
Discharges 8: 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)
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes ❑ No
2. Is there evidence of past discharge from any part of the operation? ❑ Yes ® No
3. Were there any adverse impacts or potential adverse impacts to the Waters of the State other than from a discharge? ❑ Yes ® No
Waste Collection & Treatment
4. Is storage capacity (freeboard plus storm storage) less than adequate? ® Spillway ❑ Yes ® No
Structure 1 Structure 2 Structure 3 Structure 4 Structure 5 Structure 6
Identifier: Milk barn Freestali
Freeboard(inches): 24 ........................ ................................... .................................... .................................... ....................................
5. Are there any immediate threats to the integrity of any of the structures observed? (iel trees, severe erosion, ❑ Yes ® No
seepage, etc.)
3/23/99 Continued on back
Printed on 11/8199

Facility Number: 03-33 Date of Inspection 6/8/99
6. Are there structures on -site which are not *Irly addressed and/or managed through a was 4nagement 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 ❑ Yes ® No
12. Crop type Corn (Silage & Grain) Fescue, Tim., Orchard (hay)
13. Do the receiving crops differ with those designated in the Certified Animal Waste Management Plan (CAWMP)? ❑ Yes ® No
14. a) Does the facility lack adequate acreage for land application? ❑ Yes ® No
b) Does the facility need a wettable acre determination? ❑ Yes ® No
c) This facility is pended for a wettable acre determination? ❑ Yes ® No
15.
Does the receiving crop need improvement?
❑ Yes ® No
16.
Is there a lack of adequate waste application equipment?
❑ Yes ® No
Required Recgrds R Documents
17.
Fail to have Certificate of Coverage & General Permit readily available?
❑ Yes ❑ No
18.
Does the facility fail to have all components of the Certified Animal Waste Management Plan readily available?
(ie/ WUP, checklists, design, maps, etc.)
❑ Yes ® No
19.
Does record keeping need improvement? (ie/ irrigation, freeboard, waste analysis & soil sample reports)
❑ Yes ® No
20.
is facility not in compliance with any applicable setback criteria in effect at the time of design?
❑ Yes ®No
21.
Did the facility fail to have a actively certified operator in charge?
❑ Yes ®No
22.
Fail to notify regional DWQ of emergency situations as required by General Permit?
(ie/ discharge, freeboard problems, over application)
❑ Yes ® No
23.
Did Reviewer/Inspector fail to discuss review/inspection with on -site representative?
❑ Yes IN 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
�;
No viol;atioris;or dimde—n-ces-Were pbted 46ring•th:is: visit.:Yo0 Will Te0ive-n6-further. ;
correspondence: abouf this .visit. -
Comm_ents (refer to'�quest�on-#) Explain any YES answers andor anyyrecommendations or any other comments.
Us drawtHO.7 facility to better exp rn tuatioiis. (use additionaS I pages as necessary)
7 Need to mow around WSP for easy visual inspection ( 18" or less).
#9 WSP# I is staged to WSP#2.
Overall operation looks good.
Plans need site schematic, insect, odor, and mortality checklist.
Owner had used wrong waste analysis. Still didn't look like there would be over application
Reviewer/Inspector Name Rocky Durham
Reviewer/Inspector Signature: Date:
on 11/a/99

1 s�s O Division of Soil an r Conservation m Operation Review
" 12 Division of Soitau,AWe.r Conservation = Compliance lnspectio4F
E Division of Water Quality- Compliance Inspection
C1 Other Agency -Operation Review
19 Routine 0 C.,oniplaint 0 hollow -up of Inspection 0 Ht
Facility Nundwr
o Registered 0 Certified o Applied for Permit p Permitted
Farm Name: Atwaod.Dairy. ...............................
ow -up Ot review a lJlncr I
D-me of Inspection
Time of 11141rectiort 24 hr. (hh:mm)
0 Not Operational I I}:ue Last Operated:
Colony: Alleghany WSRO
0vner• N:inie: Dw.aynp.................................. Alwoetd............ _.............. .......................... Phone No: 91IIc372-.8Q6.7...........................................................
Facililv Contact: ............ .................................. hitic:............................................................... Phone Nu:.........,..........................................
..........
Mailing Address: 13R.H y.22.1.......................................................................................... Sµar1a:..11IC.............................................................. 2805 ..............
QnsiteRepresentative: .......................................................................................................... Intehrator:.......................................................................................
Certified (operatorAblicA.................................. At ahod............................................. Operator Certification rNoinher:21-M.............................
Local ion of harm:
ty�:.... -::....i rao .a:<ry,ls,otal.t e.le t.............................................................................................................................. . .
Latitude ®�©; ®•• Longitude ®• ®- 1 � E•-
esign urren
Swine Capacity Population
❑ Wean to Feeder
❑ Feeder to tnis
❑ Farrow to Wean
❑ Farrow to Feeder
❑ Farrow to Finish
❑ Gilts
❑ Boars
Poultry Capacity Population Cattle Capacity Population
❑ ayer ® airy 5 140
p Non -Layer I I I I[] Non -Miry
p Other
Total Design Capacity 14
Total SSLW 2U3,U
Number of Lagoons / Holding Ponds 2 JE3 Subsurface Drains resent ❑ ngoonArea ❑ pray Field Area
❑ No Liquid Waste Management System
General
1. Are there any buffers that need maintenance/improvement?
2. Is any discharge observed from any part of the operation?
Discharge ori-'inated at: ❑ Lagoon ❑ Spray Field ❑ Other
a. ll'discharue is observed. was the conveyance man-made?
h. li'dischanue is observed, did it reach Surface Water? (If ves, notil"v DWQ)
c. If discharge is observed, what is the estimated flow in ual/min?
d. Dues discharge hypass a 1.woon system'? (II'ves. notify DWQ)
3. Is there evidence of past discharge from any part of the operation?
4. Were there any adverse impacts to the waters of the State other than from a discharge?
5. Does any part of the waste management system (other than lagoons/holding ponds) require
maintenance/improvement?
6, Is facility not in compliance with any applicable setback criteria in effect at the time of design?
7. Did the facility fail to have a certified operator in responsible charge?
7/25/97
❑ Yes ®No
p Yes ®No
p Yes ❑ No
p Yes p No
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes ®No
❑ Yes ®No
❑ Yes ®No
❑ Yes ®No
p Yes ®No
General
1. Are there any buffers that need maintenance/improvement?
2. Is any discharge observed from any part of the operation?
Discharge ori-'inated at: ❑ Lagoon ❑ Spray Field ❑ Other
a. ll'discharue is observed. was the conveyance man-made?
h. li'dischanue is observed, did it reach Surface Water? (If ves, notil"v DWQ)
c. If discharge is observed, what is the estimated flow in ual/min?
d. Dues discharge hypass a 1.woon system'? (II'ves. notify DWQ)
3. Is there evidence of past discharge from any part of the operation?
4. Were there any adverse impacts to the waters of the State other than from a discharge?
5. Does any part of the waste management system (other than lagoons/holding ponds) require
maintenance/improvement?
6, Is facility not in compliance with any applicable setback criteria in effect at the time of design?
7. Did the facility fail to have a certified operator in responsible charge?
7/25/97
❑ Yes ®No
p Yes ®No
p Yes ❑ No
p Yes p No
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes ®No
❑ Yes ®No
❑ Yes ®No
❑ Yes ®No
p Yes ®No

acll-;;v Number: 03-33 D,Ite )vction
8. Are there lagoons or storage ponds on site which need to be properly closed?
Siructures Ponds. Flush Pils. etc.
9. Is storage capacity (freeboard plus storm storage) less than adequate?
S1111CMI-C I Structure 2 Structure 3 Structure 4
Idcntlller: l 2
I recboard (11 ):.............. 2..ft.............. .............. >;.fz.............. ........
............................ .............................
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?
W.jste Application
14. Is there physical evidence of over application?
(if in excess of WMP, or runoff entering waters ofthe State, notify DWQ)
•
struclure 3
p Yes ® No
p Yes ® No
Slrticture 6
p Yes ® No
p Yes ® No
p Yes ® No
p Yes N No
p Yes M No
15. Crop type ....... C.orn..(Sila,e..&.Crain)....... ...Ti uathy..Qxdaard..&.Rye..............................................................................................................
Gra s
16, Do the receiving crops differ with those designated in the Asnimal Waste Management Plan (A WMP)? p Yes ® No
17. Does the facility have a lack of adequate acreage for land application?
18, Does the receiving crop need improvement?
19. Is there a lack of available waste application equipment?
20. Does facility require a follow-up visit by same agency?
21. Did Reviewer/inspector fail to discuss review/inspection with on -site representative?
22. Does record keeping need improvement?
For Certified or Ile rmilIed Facilides Oil IN,
23. Does the facility fail to have a copy of the Animal Waste Management Plan readily available?
24. Were any additional problems noted which cause noncompliance of the Certified AWMP?
25. Were any additional problems noted which cause noncompliance of the Permit?
W . . o:vio ttons.or lcrencies.were.note . unng this visit. , nu. will .receive no.further. . .
, oeS�io'n�ienetr abut ttiis visit:. •. •.. . .. . ... ....... .. . . . ..: ' :
p Yes ® No
p Yes ® No
p Yes ®No
p Yes ®No
p Yes ®No
p Yes ®No
p Yes ® No
[]Yes ® No
p Yes ® No
Comments (refer to question #):..Explain any YES answers and/or any. recommendations or any other comments. .
.Use drawings_of facility to better explain situations. (use additional pages as necessary):..
..A
Reviewer/Inspector Name Jenny Rankin
Reviewer/inspector Signature: `��� Date:

r
p Division of Soil Water Conservation p Other Ag,
Division of Wat uality
10 Routine p Complaint p o ow -up of DWQ inspection 0 Follow-up o review p Other
Date of Inspection
Facility Number
Time of Inspection 24 hr. (hh:mm)
® Registered 13 Certified p Applied for Permit p Permitted 113 of ZIperational 1Date-Last Operated:
FarmDame: Atwaod.Dairy........................................................................
Owner Name: Dwayna................................. Afwoad ...............................
County: Alleghany
WSRO
Phone No: 9111-272-896.7...........................................................
Facility Contact: Mike`Ahv tetd..................................................Title:.................................................:............. Phone No: 9.1l1-372-.271.7........................
Mailing Address: X.31l.Htvy.22.1.......................................................................................... Spia:rta...NC............................................................... 28f7._i..............
OnsiteRepresentative: .......................................................................................................... Integrator:.......................................................................................
Certified Operator:Mike.Atwood...................... .............................................................. Operator Certification ]dumber:............................
Location of Farm:
Latitude ®0©' ®" Longitude ®•
4^
Swine; Capacity ;Popu
x
p can to ee er
Feeder to Finish
p Farrow to can
p Farrow to Feeder
p Farrow to Finish
p Gilts
p Boars
uesign- canrrenr:.-f- ; . liesig11 k- renI
.Foultry ? Capacity Populatjon Cattle Capacity, Population
1 Layer III airy lio
j' [3 Non -Layer : p Non -Dairy
r: _
Total Design-Capacity110
Total:-SSL-W154,000
General
1. Are there any buffers that need maintenance/improvement?
2. Is any discharge observed from any part of the operation?
Discharge originated at: p Lagoon p Spray Field p Other
a. If discharge is observed, was the conveyance man-made?
b. If discharge is observed, did it reach Surface Water? (Yves, notify DWQ)
c. If discharge is observed, what is the estimated flow in gal/min?
d. Does discharge bypass a lagoon system? (If yes, notifv DWQ)
3. Is there evidence of past discharge from any part of the operation?
4. Were there any adverse impacts to the waters of the State other than from a discharge?
5. Does any part of the waste management system (other than lagoons/holding ponds) require
maintenance/improvement?
6. Is facility not in compliance with any applicable setback criteria in effect at the time of design?
7. Did the facility fail to have a certified operator in responsible charge?
7/25/97
® Yes p No
p Yes ® No
p Yes p No
p Yes p No
p Yes p No
p Yes ® No
Yes ® No
p Yes ® No
p Yes ® No
p Yes ® No

,ic. i y 'N i. umber: 3_33
8. Are there lagoons or storage ponds on s0hich need to be property closed?
Structures (Lag6ons,Holding Ponds, Flush Pits. etc.
9. Is storage capacity (freeboard plus storm storage) less than adequate?
Structure 1 Structure 2 Structure 3
Identifier: 1
Freeboard (ft): ........... .2.ket............ ...................................
10. Is seepage observed from any of the structures?
Stnicture 4
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)
I3. Do any of the structures lack adequate minimum or maximum liquid level markers?
Waste Application
14. Is there physical evidence of over application?
Of in excess of WMP, or runoff entering waters of the State, notify DWQ)
•
❑ Yes ® No
p Yes ® No
Structure 5 Structure 6
p Yes
® No
❑ Yes
® No
❑ Yes
N No
❑ Yes
® No
p Yes
® No
15. Crop type .......Com.4Silage..&.GLrain.) ....... ._.Tizno1hy,S]xc}aard,.&.Rye........................... Ff-scuz ......................
Grass
16. Do the receiving crops differ with those designated in the Animal Waste Management Plan (AWMP)?
17. Does the facility have a lack of adequate acreage for land application?
18. Does the receiving crop need improvement?
19. Is there a lack of available waste application equipment?
20. Does facility require a follow-up visit by same agency?
21. Did Reviewer/Inspector fail to discuss review/inspection with on -site representative?
22. Does record keeping need improvement?
For Certified or Permitted Facilities Oniv
23. Does the facility fail to have a copy of the Animal Waste Management Plan readily available?
24. Were any additional problems noted which cause noncompliance of the Certified AWMP?
25. Were any additional problems noted which cause noncompliance of the Permit?
R . . o.vio tions. or at rencies-were.nnte ur•Yng t is visit: - oar. will.receive no' urt er
• oi��ene�ab�u.t�iis-vise:' . : . ::�:•:•:•:•:•:�:•:•:�.••• • ..•'•.•:•:
[]Yes p No
❑ Yes ®No
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes ®No
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes ❑ No
[]Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes ❑ No
Reviewer/Inspector Name
Reviewer/Inspector Signature:
Date:

11-03-1997 4:27PM FROM SPARTA FIELD OFFICE 1 910 372 4GAS
w Ii
P. 2
_r ..•..�z.'e9,?5�... � ...i�3:$.: a :ic e..,wa ...x. - .,,...'6•o-.-i'- vi t+z�,ani..,. - a ...... "�'., :. :s 4C µ, , �.. .
❑ DSWC Animal Feedlot Operation Review
[] DWQ Animal Feedlot Operation Site Inspection
14BRoutine O Complaint O Follow-up of DWO inspection 0 Follow-up of I)SWC review Q Other f
Facility Number
Farm Status: [0 Registered ❑ Applied for Permit
[] Certified [j Permitted
Date of Inspectiion
Time of;nspection ',p 24 hr. (hh.mm)
Total Time fin fraction of flours
(ts:1.25 for I hr 15 main)) Spent can Review . O
or frt.4pection (includes ti avel and processing)
QNot O aerationai '�'Irate Last Operated ........................ _. ..... .-.................................. ................. .................................. ...- .................
Farm Name:... (.f..Y1�`...... .f".waad......... ..................... C;nunty;.. �[.�.Cell.r. ..........................1.v. ._..
r ��_ 3
Owner Name:+k{ 1y� f'htan4 ho' `��c �
Facility Contact: .i } �.} . - _ 41K4�..C�................ Title: - -+�.L .�i .l`fi ,f.7 ......................... Phone No:
Mailing Address. .l..p.......�.Y..............'...'.......................................... ��.�Cc.�. ..............
Omite Representative:_ 11-(, .Gc.+? Integrator'
Certified Operator:....!_!.,..`.. ............ ........... J_411WD'6.. ....... ..-................... Operator Certification lurnber:... ...............
Location of Farm:
........,�.I..�._ ......................................................................................................................................................................:...............................................I.............
, ?............................................................................................................................................ .........,....................
Latitude �� �t � � i t l:L Longitude
Type of Operation Desifin Current Design Current
Swine Capacity Population Poulfry Capacity Population
❑ wean to Feeder
❑ Feeder to Finish
❑ Farrow to Wean
❑ Farrow to feeder
❑ Farrow to Finish
❑ Other
❑ Layer
❑ lion -Laver
Total Design Capacitv
Total SSLW
Design .• Current.'- .
Cattle :'..:Ca'a"city Pooufatioii ....
® Dairy v
❑ Non -Dairy
110
.Number Of.I agtrons''/ �ioldin PUuds 4, ❑ Subsurface Drains Present ❑ Lagoon area ❑Spray Field area
Cent ral
1. Are them any buffers that need maintenance/improvement? X Vec ❑ No
2. Is any discharge observed from any .part of the operation? ❑ Yes .N No
Dischartie originated ar. ❑ Lagoon ❑ Spray Field ❑ Other
a. If discharge is obs: rued, was tha conveyance Evan•made? El Yes ❑ No
b.. If clkchr lrge is ob�crtied, clad ii reach Surfacc Water? (If yes, notify DWQ) ❑ Yes ❑ No
c. If discharge i; observed. what is the estirt:lt�Ai tiow in gal/min?
d. I�<ies Ji�charhe hyl�as> a lagoon! ayctertt'? ([f yr;. rn lily l3WQ) © Ye., ❑ No
3. 4 there evidence of an discharge from any part of the operation's ❑ Yes 0 No
4. Wet- lhcrc any adverse irnpacrs to the waters of the State other than from a dischan, e 0 Yes No
5, Does any parr of the waste management system (other than lagoons/holding ponds) require 0 Yes EN No

11'03-1997 4:27PM FROOARTA FIELD OFFICE 1 910 372#5
[Facility Number:0 —
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 which need to be properly closed?
Structurres (Lagoons and/or Holding Ponds)
9. Is storage capacity (freeboard plus storm storage) less than adequate?
freeboard (ft): Structure l Structure 2 Stnucture 3 Structure 4
........-......................................•---........................................................ ------.................................
10. Is seepage observed from any of the structures?
11. Is erosion. or any other threats to the integrity of ary of the structures observed?
12. Do any of the structures need mainrenance/improvement?
(If any of questions 9-12 was answered yes, and the situation poses
an immediate public health or environmental threat, notify DWQ)
P- 3
❑-Yes
No
❑ Yes
D§ No
M Yes
No
El Yes
No
Structure S
Structure 6
0 Yes
09 No
13 Yes
r${ No
Q Yes
No
13. Do any of the structures lack adequate minimum or maximum Iiquid level markers'. ❑ Yes X1 No
M. 5te Applicatiog
14. Is there physical evidence of over application? ❑ Yes IN No
(If in excess of WMP, or runoff entering waters of the State, notify DWQ)
15. Crop h'Pe t.
16. Do the receiving crops differ Y/irh those designated in the Animal Waste Management Plan (AWNIP)? ❑ Yes M No
17.
Does the facility have a lack of adequate acreage for land application?
(] Yes
F&No
IS,
Does the receiving crop need improvement?
❑ Yes
® No
19,
Is there a Iack of available waste application equipment?
❑ Yes
No
20.
Does facility require a follow-up visit by same agency?
❑ Yes
' No
21,
Did ReviewerlInspector fail to discuss reviewlinspection with on -site representative?
❑ Yes
No
For Certified Fb�ilitieOnly
22.
Does the facility Fail to have a copy of the Animal Waste Management Plan readily available?
© Yes
❑ No
23.
Were any additional problems noted which cause noncompliance of the Certified AW T?
❑ Yes
❑ No
24.
Does record keeping need improvement?
© Yes
❑ No
f L �
� � D }t�c.�,,.,, c�.�c,c�-� �•. �,-F - � �. ,ems (�/� �
1'a , UCL--x - ,
J
Reviewer/Inspector Nagle
Reviewer/inspector Signatur
Date: . - - 2-

State of North Carol
Department of Environment,
Health and Natural Resources •
Division of Water Quality
iEft
James B. Hunt, Jr„ Governor
Jonathan B. Howes, Secretary
A. Preston Howard, Jr., P.E., Director,,
April 3, 1997
Dwayne Atwood APR 0 7 1997
Atwood Dairy
130 Hwy 221 Winston-Sai8h
Sparta NC 28675 Regional Office
SUBJECT: Notice of Violation
Designation of Operator in Charge
Atwood Dairy
Facility Number 03--33
Alleghany County
Dear Mr. Atwood:
You were notified by letter dated December 5, 1996, that you were required to designate a certified animal waste
management system operator as Operator in Charge for the subject facility by January 1, 1997. Enclosed with that
letter was an Operator in Charge Designation Form specifically for your facility, Instructions for Completing
Application for Temporary Certification as an Animal Waste Management System Operator, and an Application for
Temporary Certification as an Animal Waste Management System Operator. Our records indicate that these
completed Forms have not yet been returned to our office.
As was explained in the previous letter, a training and certification program is not yet available for animal waste
management systems involving cattle, horses, sheep, or poultry (with a liquid waste system). Therefore owners of
these systems were allowed to request that they be issued temporary certifications until December 31, 1997. All that
was required to receive this temporary certification was the completion of the Application Form.
For you convenience, we are sending you additional copies of the Operator in Charge Designation Form specifically
for your facility, Instructions for Completing Application for Temporary Certification as an Animal Waste
Management System Operator, and an Application for Temporary Certification as an Animal Waste Management
System Operator. Please return this completed Form to this office as soon as possible but in no case later than April
25, 1997. This office maintains a list of certified operators in your area if you need assistance in locating a certified
operator.
Please note that failure to designate an Operator in Charge of your animal waste management system, is a violation
of N.C.G.S. 90A-47.2 and you will be assessed a civil penalty unless an appropriately certified operator is designated.
Please be advised that nothing'in this letter should be taken as absolving you of the responsibility and liability for
any past or future violations for your failure to designate an appropriate Operator in Charge by January 1, 1997.
If you have questions concerning this matter, please contact our Technical Assistance and Certification Group at
[phone].
Sincerely,
)(1*1 -7) 'X`41_
for
Steve W. Tedder, Chief
Water Quality Section
cc: Winston-Salem Regional Office
Facility File
Enclosures N��y.
P.O. Sox 29535, FAX [phone]
Raleigh, North Carolina 27626-0535 �� An Equal Opportunity/Affirmative Action Employer
Telephone [phone]% recycles/10% post -consumer paper