410009_INSPECTIONS_20171231

Division of Water Resource^
Facility Number - Division of Soil and Water#er`.vation
0 Other Agency
Type of Visit: I" Compliance Inspection 0 Operation Review 0 Structure Evaluation 0 Technical Assistance
Reason for Visit: �& Routine 0 Complaint 0 Follow-up 0 Referral 0 Emergency 0 Other 0 Denied Access
Date of Visit: lu Arrival Time: Departure Time: County: &Mba Region:
Farm Name: 0(*WV-V e/ Owner Email:
Owner Name: Phone:
Mailing Address: �1 S(ya-an y) �row,nS Sucr,tY.t� l�fG �`1a�y _
Physical Address:
Facility Contact: N Title: _ - Phone: — 5
Onsite Representative: J Integrator:
Certified Operator: �� V1�11IyM Qil
Back-up Operator:
Certification Number: LHT-, needed b�
jab o ,2D I B
Certification Number:
N_ hs Fn ?g 1�4` 156 �' g 19'1g' J0.
Location of Farm: G>r-t � � Latitude: Longitude:
yO b6 E +a t�fG 2 ow�p �U . Rfclgei , ® }1
rar�nbvr� M 1 �d 6 I�
l � o,ni-0 6+rc "ioe, -j ed . (1 OVvk b N C, j TO , U Ont° `5pMrrAo n
Swine
Wean to Finish
Wean to Feeder
Feeder to Finish
Farrow to Wean
Farrow to Feeder
Farrow to Finish
Gilts
Boars
Other
Other
Design Current Design Current
Capacity Pop. Wet Poultry Capacity Pop.
Layer
Non -Layer
Design Current
Dry Poultry Canacity POD.
Layers
Non -Layers
Pullets
Turkeys
Turkey Poults
Other
Discharp_es and Stream Impacts
1. Is any discharge observed from any part ofthe 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? (Ifyes, 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 Pup.
Dairy Cow
Dairy Calf
Dairy Heifer
Dry Cow
,Non -Dairy
Beef Stocker
Beef Feeder
Beef Brood Cow
r
❑ Yes [] No ❑ NA ❑ NE
YN
❑,Yes -0 No ❑ NA
[] Yes ❑ No ❑ NA
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes No
❑ Yes No
❑ NE
❑ NE
❑ NA ❑ NE
❑NA ONE
❑NA ❑NE
Page 1 of 3 21412015 Continued

Facility Number: - � Date of Inspection: Ia
Waste Collection & Treatment
4. is storage capacity (structural plus storm storage plus heavy rainfall) less than adequate? ❑ Yes FT No ❑ NA ❑ NE
a. Ifyes, is waste level into the structural freeboard? ❑ Yes ❑ No ❑ NA ❑ NE
Structure 1 Structure 2 Structure 3 Structure 4 Structure 5 Structure 6
Identifier:
Spillway?: A&S
Designed Freeboard (in): �j
Observed Freeboard (in): 1L�� 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. Are there structures on -site which are not properly addressed and/or managed through a ❑ Yes No ❑ NA ❑ NE
waste management or closure plan?
If any of questions 4-6 were answered yes, and the situation poses an immediate public health or environmental threat, notify DWR
7. Do any of the structures need maintenance or improvement? ❑ Yes N No ❑ NA ❑ NE
8. Do any of the structures lack adequate markers as required by the permit? [:]Yes [X 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? 77��
Waste Application
10. Are Ihere any required buffers, setbacks, or compliance alternatives that need ❑ Yes [A No ❑ NA ❑ NE
maintenance or improvement?
11. Is there evidence of incorrect land application`? If yes, check the appropriate box below. ❑ Yes W No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Excessive Ponding ❑ Hydraulic Overload ❑ Frozen Ground ❑ Heavy Metals (Cu, Zn, etc.)
❑ PAN ❑ PAN > 10% or 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)
01.
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 JQNo ❑ NA ❑ NE
16. Did the facility fail to secure and/or operate per the irrigation design or wettable ❑ Yes [p"'I 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
19.
Records & Documents
Did the facility fail to have the Certificate of Coverage & Permit readily available'?
❑ Yes
No
❑ NA
❑ NE
20.
Does the facility fail to have all components of the CAWMP readily available? If yes, check
❑ Yes
No
❑ NA
❑ NE
the appropriate box.
❑ WUP ❑Checklists ❑ Design ❑ Maps ❑ Lease Agreements
❑Other:
21.
Does record keeping need improvement? If yes, check the appropriate box below. ao 1$
❑ Yes
No
❑ NA
❑ NE
Q�Naste Application 514veekly Freeboard 2/waste Analysis _ is
Weather Code
F—Xainfall [ Locking s• rop Yield ❑ E2Monthly and I" Rainfall Inspections
22.
Did the facility fail to install and maintain a rain gauge?
❑ Yes
NA No
❑ NA
❑ NE
23.
If selected, did the facility fail to install and maintain rainbreakers on irrigation equipment?
❑ Yes
❑ No
NA
❑ NE
Page 2 nf'3
21412015 Continued
2

Facilit Number: qj- e]I Date of Inspection: p
24. Did the facility fail to calibrate waste app lon equipment as required by the permit? IF ❑ Yes No
25. Is the facility out of compliance with permit conditions related to sludge? If yes, check ❑ Yes No
the appropriate box(es) below.
❑ Failure to complete annual sludge survey ❑ Failure to develop a POA for sludge levels
❑ Non -compliant sludge levels in any lagoon
List structure(s) and date of first survey indicating non-compliance:
26. Did the facility fail provide documentation of an actively certified operator in charge? D Yes 4 No
27. Did the facility fail to secure a phosphorus loss assessments (PLAT) certification? ❑ Yes ❑ No
Other Issues
28. Did the facility fail to properly dispose of dead animals with 24 hours and/or document
and report mortality rates that were higher than normal?
29. At the time of the inspection did the facility pose an odor or air quality concern?
If yes, contact a regional Air Quality representative immediately.
30. Did the facility fail to notify the Regional Office of emergency situations as required by the
permit? (i.e., discharge, freeboard problems, over -application)
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 Reviewerllnspector fail to discuss review/inspection with an on -site representative?
34. Does the facility require a follow-up visit by the same agency?
❑ NA ❑ NE
V1NA ❑ NE
❑ NA ❑ NE
NA ❑ NE
VN
[] Yes
No
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Yes
)!�LNo
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Yes
�kNo
❑ NA
❑ NE
[] Yes 5& No 0 NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes 10 No ❑ NA ONE
[] Yes Ya No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes M 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).
ChP( 9-rearm I-ts DYa-hon J- erICi nn c rn lat5 5 eaA
I So i t fed- due• ;0 t8 .
H�� WaS �ield 6 addea t) wUP? I\fo, -�-cd �-;nc� 0420V+- aC3(J'fiarac �M0 �
1� mr e 1^Q+-K2 inaeascd ? 7,J0
1r ri Of-,+I.OYl 6 5(-eck(jer 0 a I brocli QT} � �R_C_3
1011 ! 11
Groff
DII/�pCDYdI Cplyyw-G GI U Ch a-VpbCX;H0'h (-VDrd S
'MCV,,jtL1t n �rrn csrl r�Q-{ IcIun beCure, vvt/ - use,
weed - eo=4-- o_(o,> n d r. \.4 5 p r r � LC��r
1(gqI1 11 b.a�P, W-Nj1,6 is �SM.atr
Ha_-!�o ""
Reviewer/Inspector Name: Pe bCC 0 cA ChCkndler- Phone:-i�j(a �16y��QS
Reviewer/Inspector Signature: Date: / o J� /
Page 3 of 3 21412015

12Q Division of Water ResourceFacility Number - 0 Division of Soil and Water AlG rvation
Other Agency 11
I'ype of Visit: Wcompliance Inspection 0 Operation Review 0 Structure Evaluation 0 Technical Assistance
Reason for Visit: (8k Routine 0 Complaint 0 Follow-up 0 Referral 0 Emergency 0 Other 0 Denied Access
Date of Visit: Arrival Time: p Departure Time: County: &VILPim Region: WS90
Farm Name: OAKAk" ' AM Owner Email:
Owner Name: PokIALb A t[LLL:q 906JM M Phone:
,ti7ailingAddress: Oksk SP6ARMq� ?,Do
jl;MN1r1 , mc, P-7P4
Physical Address:
Facility Contact:
Onsite Representative: �E{,(�� ysaL ov
Certified Operator:
Back-up Operator:
Title:
d7Lk6�,
Phone:
Integrator:
Certification Number:
Certification Number:
u
Y �
Location of Farm: Ar t�1;�'l (M F10 Latitude: 36 W 30 Longitude: 716 44r 50
Nc,- ISO oIJ
ti
Swine
Design Current Design Current
Capacity Pop. Wet Poultry Capacity Pop.
Layer
Non -La er
Wean to Finish
Wean to Feeder
Feeder to Finish
Farrow to Wean
Farrow to Feeder
Farrow to Finish
Gilts
Boars
Other
Other
Design Current
Dry Poultry Caaacily POO.
Layers
Non -Layers
Pullets
Turkeys
Turkey POLIhS
Other
Discharges and Stream Impacts
1, is any discharge observed from any part of the operation?
Discharge originated at: ❑ Structure ❑ Application Field ❑ Other:
a. Was the conveyance man-made?
b. Did the discharge reach waters of the State'? (If yes, notify DWR)
c. What is the estimated volume that reached waters of the State (gallons)?
d. Does the discharge bypass the waste management system? (If yes, notify DWR)
2. Is there evidence of a past discharge from any part of the operation?
3. Were there any observable adverse impacts or potential adverse impacts to the waters
of the State other than from a discharge?
Design Current
Cattle Capacity Pop.
Dairy Cow
A0
AO
Dairy Calf
Dair Heifer
e
Dry Cow
Non -Dairy
Beef Stocker
BeefFecder
Beef Brood Cow
❑ Yes )INo ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes ❑ No r NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes ❑ No E[ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes
❑ No
';rj NA
❑ NE
❑ Yes
KNo
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Yes
[KNo
❑ NA
❑ NE
Page 1 of 3 21412015 Continued

Facilit y Number: L- Q Date of Inspection:
Waste Collection & Treatment
4. Is storage capacity (structural plus storm storage plus heavy rainfall) less than adequate'?
❑ Yes
KNo
❑ NA
❑ NE
a. If yes, is waste level into the structural freeboard?
❑ Yes
❑ No
N NA
❑ NE
Structure l Structure 2 Structure 3 Structure 4
Structure 5
Structure 6
identifier: VQP(L. Lsui.
Spillway?:
Designed Freeboard (in):
7—
Observed Freeboard (in): -79
5. Are there any immediate threats to the integrity of any of the structures observed?
❑ Yes
PTNo
❑ 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
[3rNo
❑ NA
'ONE
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
n No
❑ NA
0 NE
8. Do any of the structures lack adequate markers as required by the permit'?
❑ Yes
2-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
?TNo
❑ NA
❑ NE
maintenance or improvement?
Waste Application
10. Are there any required buffers, setbacks, or compliance alternatives that need
❑ Yes
2jNo
❑ NA
❑ NE
maintenance or improvement?
11. Is there evidence of incorrect land application? if yes, check the appropriate box below.
❑ Yes
LKa7jrNo
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Excessive Ponding ❑ Hydraulic Overload ❑ Frozen Ground ❑ Heavy Metals (Cu, Zn, etc.)
❑ PAN ❑ PAN > i 0% or 10 lbs. ❑ Total Phosphorus ❑ Failure to Incorporate
Manure/Sludge
into
Bare Soil
❑ Outside of Acceptable Crop Window ❑ Evidence of Wind Drill ❑ Application Outside of Approved Area
12. Crop Type(s): Gd°�
13. Soil Type(s):
14. Do the receiving crops differ from those designated in the CAWMP? ❑ Yes [04
7"No ❑ NA ❑ NE
15. Does the receiving crop and/or land application site need improvement? ❑ Yes ZrNo ❑ NA ❑ NE
16. Did the facility fail to secure and/or operate per the irrigation design or wettable ❑ Yes Ca"No ❑ NA ❑ NE
acres determination`?
17. Does the facility lack adequate acreage for land application?
❑ Yes
0No
❑ NA
❑ NE
18. Is there a lack of properly operating waste application equipment?
❑ Yes
KrNo
❑ NA
❑ NE
Required Records & Documents
19. Did the facility fail to have the Certificate of Coverage & Permit readily available`?
❑ Yes
WNo
❑ NA
❑ NE
20. Does the facility fail to have all components ofthe CAWMP readily available'? if yes, check
Yes
�No
❑ NA
❑ NE
the appropriate box.
EaW[17' sec is s DPejiV R* ease g ❑Other:
21. Does record keeping need improvement? If yes, check the appropriate box below. Yes ❑ No
DadVr _ i s _
d s _ Toolls
22. Did the facility fail to install and maintain a rain gauge? ❑ Yes No
23. If selected, did the facility fail to install and maintain rainbreakers on irrigation equipment? ❑ Yes No
❑ NA ❑ NE 2
❑ Sludge Survey
❑NA ❑NE
❑ NA ❑ NE
Page 2 of 3 21412015 Continued

Facilit y Number: - Date of Ins ection:
24. Did the facility fail to calibrate waste appliclon equipment as required by the permit? ❑ Yes 2!�No
25. is the facility out of compliance with permit conditions related to sludge? If yes, check ❑ Yes [E�`No
the appropriate box(es) below.
❑ Failure to complete annual sludge survey ❑ Failure to develop a POA for sludge levels
❑ Non -compliant sludge levels in any lagoon
List structure(s) and date of first survey indicating non-compliance:
26. Did the facility fail provide documentation of an actively certified operator in charge? ❑ Yes FTIo
27. Did the facility fail to secure a phosphorus loss assessments (QLAT) certification? ❑ Yes NNo
Other Issues
28. Did the facility fail to properly dispose of dead animals with 24 hours and/or document
and report mortality rates that were higher than normal?
29. At the time of the inspection did the facility pose an odor or air quality concern?
If yes, contact a regional Air Quality representative immediately.
30. Did the facility fail to notify the Regional Office of emergency situations as required by the
permit? (i.e., discharge, freeboard problems, over -application)
31. Do subsurface tile drains exist at the facility? if yes, check the appropriate box below.
❑ Application Field ❑ Lagoon/Storage Pond ❑ Other:
32. Were any additional problems noted which cause non-compliance of the permit or CAWMP?
33. Did the Reviewer/Inspector fail to discuss review/inspection with an on -site representative?
34. Does the facility require a follow-up visit by the same agency?
❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ NA ❑ NE
❑NA ❑NE
❑NA ONE
❑ Yes NrNo ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes n No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes uci ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes ,K No ❑ NA ❑ NE
El Yes
� No
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Yes
Z No
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Yes
T� 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).
Pik) -k S "J5%= CamU Eak- 0l,3 V*'g- ac kc
3� CN�E'•K I@I COO �s�E � TT B � U & :et a►.]"�
,1jC6 `CCK SPCCIAO:: 1.6au'i AOOIME- CtC LO '� `70 L\J.v .Q,
— �A-1� �� M[C1-lE ��+-►.�C.�� �$d�`i t��F r r E CA07cr i y
Reviewer/Inspector Name:
Reviewer/Inspector Signatui
Page 3 of 3
I
Phone: 336- ` 66-- 9q5
Date: 010-6
21412015

Division of Water Resources
Facility Number ©- d 0 Division of Soil and Water Ca. rvation I : 3
O Other Agency
Type of Visit: Compliance Inspection 0 Operation Review Q Structure Evaluation 0 Technical Assistance
Reason for Visit: LRoutine O Complaint () Follow-up O Referral O Emergency 0 Other O Denied Access
Date of Visit: JZT%T,2O Arrival Time: Departure Time: County: 6U 1 f 6rd Region: w5? a
Farm Name: 100iM,a_A_0_� rQ rny _ Owner Email:
Owner Name: Donald +- ke-,II 73oujmaP3 Phone:
Mailing Address: SI See. atr-marl 12-d - , row ryrSu w nit i H- . A1C F-7131
Physical Address:
H 65-(p 7Vsz--
Facility Contact: Title: Phone:
Onsite Representative:Integrator:
Certified Operator:Certification Number:
Back-up Operator:
Location of Farm:
= "
Bus
Certification Number:
D � A4- �; �'+rY�n q'� ` Latitude: 3l� I .1 7 it
Longitude: 7
fo w % $ lj. P1245a�-n-�- I2 rc>
O Yl h U 2 Z b N r L� 5 � 5 aw ber u
1L—%5p1MrMD ign` Current
Swine Capacity Pop.
Wean to Finish
Wean to Feeder
Feeder to Finish
Farrow to Wean
Farrow to Feeder
Farrow to Finish
Gilts
Boars
Other
Other
Design Current
Wet Poultry Capacity Pop.
La er
Non -La er
Design Current
Dry Poultry canacity Pon.
Layers
Non -Layers
Pullets
Turkeys
Turkey Poults
Other
Discharees 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?
Cattle
Design Current
Capacity Pop.
Dairy Cow
Z
Dairy Calf
Dairy Heifer
Dry Cow
Non -Dairy
Beef Stocker
Beef Feeder
Beef Brood Cow
❑ Yes OdNo ❑ NA ❑ NE
[]Yes [] No [] NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes ❑ No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes OfNo
❑ Yes MfNo
❑NA ❑NE
❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ NA ❑ NE
Page 1 of 3
21412014 Continued

Facility Number: -Oct• Date of Inspection: ;2 Q
Waste Collection & Treatment
4. Is storage capacity (structural plus storm storage plus heavy rainfall) less than adequate? ❑ Yes [Ko ❑ NA ❑ NE
a. If yes, is waste level into the structural freeboard?
t '}' Structure 1 Structure 2 Structure 3 Structure 4
Identifier: up P0 ,{��� LOW ed—
Spillway?: �
Designed Freeboard (in): 7
Observed Freeboard (in): ++�.
5. Are there any immediate threats to the integrity of any of the structures observed?
(i.e., large trees, severe erosion, seepage, etc.)
6. Are there structures on -site which are not properly addressed and/or managed through a
waste management or closure plan?
❑Yes ❑No ❑NA ❑NE
Structure 5 Structure 6
❑ Yes 2�No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes P<No ❑ NA ❑ NE
If any of questions 4-6 were answered yes, and the situation poses an immediate public health or environmental threat, notify DWR
7. Do any of the structures need maintenance or improvement? ❑ Yes gNo ❑ NA ❑ NE
8. Do any of the structures lack adequate markers as required by the permit? ❑ Yes 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 or improvement?
11. Is there evidence of incorrect land application? If yes, check the appropriate box below. ❑ Yes b6o
❑ 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 ❑ Evidenceof Wind Drift
❑ Application Outside of Approved Area
12. Crop Type(s):`�
13. Soil Type(s):
14. Do the receiving crops differ from those designated in the CAWMP?
❑ Yes KNo
❑ NA
❑ NE
15. Does the receiving crop and/or land application site need improvement?
❑ Yes IX 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?
TT
17. Does the facility lack adequate acreage for land application?
18. Is there a lack of properly operating waste application equipment?
Required Records & Documents
19. Did the facility fail to have the Certificate of Coverage & Permit readily available?
20. Does the facility fail to have all components of the CAWMP readily available? If yes, check
the appropriate box.
❑ Yes 4, 1_ o
❑ Yes JZ�No
❑ Yes d No
❑ Yes 19 No
❑NA ❑NE
DNA ❑NE
❑ NA ❑ NE
0 NA ❑ NE
❑ WUP ❑Checklists ❑ Design [:)maps ❑ Lease Agreements ❑Other:
21 Does record keeping need i provement? Yes No ❑ NA ❑ NE
aste Applic on eekly Freeboar WWaste Analysis Soi! Analysis ❑ Weather Code
Rainfall Stockin Crop Yield 120 Minute Inspections Monthly and V Rainfall Inspections
pN.
22. Did the facility fail to install and maintain a rain gauge'. ❑Yes 0 No ❑ NA ❑ NE
23. if selected, did the facility fail to install and maintain rainbreakers on irrigation equipment? ❑ Yes ❑ No FNU�R ❑ NE
Page 2 of 3 21412014 Continued

Facility Number: 7- Date of Inspection: ,z Z(p
O/
24. Did the facility fail to calibrate waste applicaTon equipment as required by the permit?
❑ Yes
j�o ❑ NA ❑ NE
.1� " '
25. Is the facility out of compliance with permit conditions related to sludge? If yes, check
❑ Yes
❑ No 54.+tA ❑ 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
JDR-No ❑ NA ❑ NE
Other Issues
28. Did the facility fail to properly dispose of dead animals with 24 hours and/or document
❑ Yes
�KNo ❑ 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
�6o ❑ 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:
32. Were any additional problems noted which cause non-compliance of the permit or CAWMP? ❑ Yes /25 No ❑ NA ❑ NE
33. Did the Reviewer/Inspector fail to discuss review/inspection with an on -site representative? ❑ Yes P'IGo ❑ NA ❑ NE
34. Does the facility require a follow-up visit by the same agency? ❑ Yes 5�No ❑ NA ❑ NE
Comments (refer to question #): Explain any YES answers and/or any additional recommendations or any other comments.
Usg.dr,awings of facility to better explain situations (use additional pages as necessary).
�r rl j AJ-1*10 n 4- -5 rer.16 ear bra o r, ? v7 0
7
, 4��
`I -- F- 3 C&tA,) o��c�ed �-o w u
q CA tv f +i) re- 2-rp 5 1 o n ? 5 +r' � � r`e�5 �{-o Y- o n. ? Sh
Nv �- d� l�Q ►s5 �z. ��.+o r� �cre
i �blRo I
Reviewer/Inspector Name:
Reviewer/Inspector Signature:
Page 3 of 3
Phone: — 4 t'p !
Date: a''2&1 '-w 5-
21412014
91

ilat
& Division of Water Quality
Facility Number -CC 0 Division of Soil and Watei404servation
0 Other Agency
Type of Visit: &Co7liance Inspection 0 Operation Review 0 Structure Evaluation 0 Technical Assistance
Reason for Visit: C Routine 0 Complaint 0 Follow-up 0 Referral 0 Emergency 0 Other 0 Denied Access
Date of Visit: 2 ti l 4 Arrival Time: b Q Departure Time: County: a, i tj Region: W s2 O
Farm Name: Kw4 wc- fiw✓`^ Owner Email:
Owner Name: 1 ���� IV Phone:
Mailing Address: �� Sl ��Q�-+rvy11►M_ .�1 _ .v:� S��a.v� r��- - A C 2
Physical Address:
j j co"Z t S. Z i
Facility Contact: I(e'i 12S0L-imC1yt, Title: Phone: 41 V . 74 S Z.
Onsite Representative:
Certified Operator: It
Back-up Operator:
Location of Farm:
Swine
Integrator:
Certification Number:
Certification Number:
Latitude:
Design Current Design Current
Capacity Pop. Wet Poultry Capacity Pop.
Layer
Non -La er
Wean to Finish
Wean to Feeder
Feeder to Finish
Farrow to Wean
Farrow to Feeder
Farrow to Finish
is
Boars
Other
Other
Design Current
Dry Poultry Canacitv Poo.
Layers
Non -Layers
Pullets
Turkeys
Turkey Poults
Other
Discharees 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?
Longitude:
Design Current
Cattle Capacity Pop.
Dairy Cow
7_ 4 a
Dairy Calf
Dairy Heifer
Dry Cow
i
Non -Dairy
Beef Stocker
Beef Feeder
Beef Brood Cow
❑Yes tNo ❑NA ONE
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes 9No
Yes No
❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ NA ❑ NE
❑NA ❑NE
❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ NA ❑ NE
Page 1 of 3 21412011 Continued

Facility Number: - Date of inspection: i
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? NL� dYes
Structure II Structure 2 Structure 3 Structure 4 Structure 5
Identifier: Uct�Q _
Spillway?: 01) _
Designed Freeboard (in): —e,►
Observed Freeboard (in): , 1 1.1 r ►1 —
5. Are there any immediate threats to the integrity of any of the structures observed?
(i.e., large trees, severe erosion, seepage, etc.)
❑ No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑No ❑NA ❑NE
Structure 6
❑ Yes [�No ❑ NA ❑ NE
6. Are there structures on -site which are not properly addressed and/or managed through a
❑ Yes
dNo
❑ 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
0 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 Q No ❑ NA MNE
❑ 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). S �^' '� Ci ►'la n.
13. Soil Type(s): 'v G
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 dNo ❑ NA ❑ NE
16. Did the facility fail to secure and/or operate per the irrigation design or wettable ❑ Yes dNo ❑ NA ❑ NE
acres determination?
17. Does the facility lack adequate acreage for land application`?
18. Is there a lack of properly operating waste application equipment?
❑ Yes
dNo
❑ NA
❑ NE
[:]Yes
dNo
❑ NA
❑ NE
Required Records & Documents
19. Did the facility fail to have the Certificate of Coverage & Permit readily available? ❑ Yes [jNo ❑ NA ❑ NE
20. Does the facility fail to have all components of the CAWMP readily available? If yes, check ❑ Yes E4No ❑ 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 0 No
❑ Waste Application ❑ Weekly Freeboard ❑ Waste Analysis ❑ Soil Analysis ❑ Waste Transfers
❑ Rainfall ❑ Stocking ❑ Crop Yield ❑ 120 Minute Inspections ❑ Monthly and I" Rainfall Inspections
22. Did the facility fail to install and maintain a rain gauge? ❑ Yes EyNo
23. If selected, did the facility fail to install and maintain rainbreakers on irrigation equipment? ❑ Yes d No
❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Weather Code
❑ Sludge Survey
❑NA ❑NE
❑NA ❑NE
Page 2 of 3 21412011 Continued

Facility Number: i4 i - 01 Date of Inspection: Z y
24. Did the facility fail to calibrate waste application equipment as required by the permit? + ❑ Yes 1� No ❑ NA ❑ NE
25. Is the facility out of compliance with permit conditions related to sludge? If yes, check ❑ Yes [a 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 [fNo ❑ 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
t 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:
32. Were any additional problems noted which cause non-compliance of the permit or CAWMP? ❑ Yes E3�`No ❑ NA ❑ NE
33. Did the Reviewer/Inspector fail to discuss review/inspection with an on -site representative? ❑ Yes 0 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).
,a ' 1 ✓
2010
3� . j - S�� F` 3 — Cor✓� �a� I`M 4Nt1,� — Fjtkx � ,,jj � S�IIJGi �JL'f . 614, 7t�i Lj
��fL Lc. iG' ��
tA� . A.,, ; s � ((e- v>>vif s ek—
A rk l~N wi- 4e, ,`� i U.,I — & { l �r s Cd.,mr- • VIt O�- CX M (A-0-r a - S ,ti.: ll� . �) 2
.c>H�rO�Y�r�L SE O,t��.C,t1a — ��IHj.{ htihri cl,fZ�lyV✓aSr�n GPlt�'��'>SS��L'4.y
Ur/-, p�.�J f•s
+NG.� �,�.-�— � r- Ns ✓ i j
Reviewer/Inspector Name: �1P.tti �3�' f Phone:y�
Reviewer/Inspector Signature: Date: i r 1'4
Page 3 of 3 21412011

1 2 Division of Water Quality 1W
Facility Number - O Division of Soil and Water Conservation
O Other Agency
Type of Visit: A
Compliance Inspection 0
Operation Review Q 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: Arrival Time: Q Departure Time: County: 6L4114(J Region: WS K 0
Farm Name: 00 K M 2fe Son Owner Email:
Owner Name: DOAOL + )Cei IV 6 0W MCLM Phone:
Mailing Address:
Physical Address:
Facility Contact: �,l y Eyommm Title:
Onsite Representative:
Certified Operator:
Back-up Operator:
Location of Farm:
Swine
�A s�� �� 4 n) C 2-72
t": tits =Y2-g3
Phone: (14) (-SL- -7V5
Integrator:
Certification Number:
Certification Number:
Latitude: -36" 3o Longitude: '79 'VY " 5-0
Design Current Design Current
Capacity Pop. Wet Poultry Capacity Pop.
Layer
Non -La er
Wean to Finish
Wean to Feeder
Feeder to Finish
Farrow to Wean
Farrow to Feeder
Farrow to Finish
Gilts
Boars
Other
Other
Design Current
Dry Poultry Capacity Poo.
Layers
Non -Layers
Pullets
Turkeys
Turkey Poults
Other
Design Current
Cattle Capacity Pop.
Dairy Cow
Zjf 0
d
Dairy Calf
Dairy Heifer
Dry Cow
Non -Dairy
Beef Stocker
Beef Feeder
Beef Brood Cow
Discharges and Stream Impacts
1. Is any discharge observed from any part of the operation?
❑ Yes
�o
❑ 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)
0 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
KNo
❑ NA
❑ NE
3. Were there any observable adverse impacts or potential adverse impacts to the waters
❑ Yes
A No
❑ NA
❑ NE
of the State other than from a discharge?
Page I of 3 21412011 Continued

Facilit Number: Date of Ins ection: 61114=
Waste Collection & Treatment
4. Is storage capacity (structural plus storm storage plus heavy rainfall) less than adequate? ❑ Yes gNo
a. If yes, is waste level into the structural freeboard? ❑ Yes [] No
Structure 1 Structure 2 Structure 3
Identifier: U)mw Lo wey-
Spillway?: U
Designed Freeboard (in):
❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ NA ❑ NE
Structure 4 Structure 5 Structure 6
Observed Freeboard (in): -- _ 7�
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 gNo
❑ Yes �No
❑ NA ONE
❑ NA ❑ NE
If any of questions 4-6 were answered yes, and the situation poses an immediate public health or environmental threat, notify DWQ
7. Do any of the structures need maintenance or improvement? ❑ Yes X
No ❑ NA ❑ NE
8. Do any of the structures lack adequate markers as required by the permit'? ❑ Yes Wo ❑ NA ❑ NE
(not applicable to roofed pits, dry stacks, and/or wet stacks)
9. Does any part of the waste management system other than the waste structures require ❑ Yes `�%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 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): f �'1 A! 1 GAr���� (�t/�
/
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
❑ 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 o
0 NA
❑ NE
18. Is there a lack of properly operating waste application equipment?
❑ Yes
❑ NA
❑ NE
Required Records & Documents
VqNo
19. Did the facility fail to have the Certificate of Coverage & Permit readily available?
❑ Yes No
❑ NA
❑ NE
20. Does the facility fail to have all components of the CAWMP readily available? If yes, check
❑ Yes No
❑ NA
❑ NE
the appropriate box.
❑WUP ❑Checklists ❑ Design ❑ Maps ❑ Lease Agreements
❑Other:
21. Does record keeping need improvement? If yes, check the appropriate box below.
Yes ❑ No
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Waste Application ❑ Weekly Freeboard ❑Waste Analysis Soil Analysis
Waste Transfers
0 Weather Code
❑ Rainfall ❑ Stocking ❑ Crop Yield ❑ 120 Minute Inspections X Monthly and 1" Rainfall Inspections
-;Itidge�ey
22. Did the facility fail to install and maintain a rain gauge?❑
Yes A No
❑ NA
❑ NE
23. If selected, did the facility fail to install and maintain rainbreakers on irrigation equipment?
❑ Yes ❑ No
NA
❑ NE
Page 2 of 3
21412011 Continued

Facili Number: - Date of Inspection: oil
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
❑ Ye ❑ No
XNA ❑ 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 gNo
❑ 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 XNo
❑ 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:
T`
32. Were any additional problems noted which cause non-compliance of the permit or CAWMP?
❑ Yes )S�No
❑ NA ❑ NE
33. Did the Reviewer/Inspector fail to discuss review/inspection with an on -site representative?
❑ Yes o
❑ NA ❑ NE
34. Does the facility require a follow-up visit by the same agency?
❑ Yes 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).
_yt4q, Le__ 4-dL 6A
Z1, �}l-Z- JaAf)e1 r" ror.,_df W J-64- ,'V, , G� l� AUk
Z �. �g�v�tn �Y 4 e64,ttCk fir �t` c 1 N &V'&T' I/L�l!'�l ! 0v1 riM1t
Z� 7hwv 3r �N+�c ICJ Cr��!l r�. I d , CiJLSc OC404 ZD I y"
r I 6 irblGftc �)C (k'#j
Z_
Jjj\
�c i,V'� �lL � L1l,I�t C� � � � �L S� 1 � j � 1
y �
3-42. k�d
ylz-*I-i'l0��
11%f2-'& 9.VX/1©,11b4
Reviewer/Inspector Name: R`� �Gk M; 4-,7—L t4 Phone: (33 M —5ZX5'_
Reviewer/Inspector Signature: Date: ol1j�Zo 13
Page 3 of 3 21412011

Division of Water Quality
Facility Number - d D Division of Soil and Water Conservation
Q Other Agency
Type of Visit: Compliance Inspection 0 Operation Review 0 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: Arrival Time: Departure Time: County: ��U 1 I -�jrd Region:
Farm Name: "0o,.y-hne-r,e- Fa-Tm Owner Email:
Owner Name: t2L� o`. ��et OW1Y1t3.Y� Phone: �"� iv ,iLp 't)eke- -e.Ou
Mailing Address: j s _ ,�QQr _ Q �} - f pw n s U M M l j 027 ;L
Physical Address:
Facility Contact: V .e LI U 5 O W rA Qln Title:
Onsite Representative:
Certified Operator:
Back-up Operator:
Location of Farm:
Design Current
Swine Capacity Pop.
Wean to Finish
Wean to Feeder
Feeder to Finish
Farrow to Wean
Farrow to Feeder
Farrow to Finish
Gilts
Boars
Other
Other
Phon IV ,5-40 --7 �S Y
rd
Integrator:
Certification Number: p p J 4-
Certification Number:
.Q ter3rlI _
Latitude: 3614 30
Design Current
Wet Poultry Capacity Pop.
La er
Non -Layer
Design Current
Dry Poultry Capacity POD.
Layers
Non -Layers
Pullets
Turkeys
Turkey Poults
Other
Longitude: -� 9 14 `f Sa
Design Current
Cattle Capacity Pop.
Dai Cow
0
Dairy Calf
Dairy Heifer
Dry Cow
Non -Dairy
Beef Stocker
Beef Feeder
Beef Brood Cow
Discharges and Stream Impacts
I. 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
'
❑ NA
❑ NE
3. Were there any observable adverse impacts or potential adverse impacts to the waters
❑ Yes
No
o
❑ NA
❑ NE
of the State other than from a discharge?
y
r�
Page I of 3 21412011 Continued

Facili Number: - 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 Frec�oard (in): 36 3 (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. Are there structures on -site which are not properly addressed and/or managed through a ❑ Yes �No ❑ NA ❑ NE
waste management or closure plan?
If any of questions 4-6 were answered yes, and the situation poses an immediate public Health or environmental threat, notify DWQ
7. Do any of the structures need maintenance or improvement? ❑ Yes [�(No ❑ NA ❑ NE
8. Do any of the structures lack adequate markers as required by the permit? ❑ Yes �No ❑ NA ❑ NE
(not applicable to roofed pits, dry stacks, and/or wet stacks) ONo
9. Does any part of the waste management system other than the waste structures require ❑ Yes ❑ NA ❑ NE
maintenance or improvement?
Waste Application XNo
10. Are there any required buffers, setbacks, or compliance alternatives that need ❑ Yes ❑ NA ❑ NE
maintenance or improvement?
11. Is there evidence of incorrect land application? If yes, check the appropriate box below. ❑ Yes I 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 0 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
7No
❑ NA
❑ NE
15. Does the receiving crop and/or land application site need improvement?
❑ Yes
rS KN o
❑ NA
❑ NE
16. Did the facility fail to secure and/or operate per the irrigation design or wettable
❑ Yes
CXNo
❑ NA
❑ NE
acres determination?
17. Does the facility lack adequate acreage for land application?
❑ Yes
X No
❑ NA
❑ NE
18. Is there a lack of properly operating waste application equipment?
❑ Yes
j No
❑ NA
❑ NE
Required Records & Documents
19. Did the facility fail to have the Certificate of Coverage & Permit readily available? Yes eNNo ❑ NA ❑ NE
20. Does the facility fail to have all components of the CAWMP readily available? If yes, check ❑ Yes �rNo ❑ NA ❑ NE
the appropriate box.
❑Wl1P ❑Checklists ❑ Design ❑ Maps ❑ Lease Agreements ❑Other:
�/Waester,&
secord keeping need im rovement?1fe , ❑ Yes oNA. ❑ NE
pplic Lion kly Freeb9120
Waste Analysis Soil Analysis �aste Transfers��eather Code
2"Rainf, 2toc in rop Yield Minute Inspections onthly and 1" Rainfall Inspections
f 22. Did the facility ail 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 09 NA ❑ NE
Page 2 of 3 21412011 Continued

Facili Number: jDate of Inspection: 10AW
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 C5ZNA ❑ NE
the appropriate box(es) below. 77
❑ 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 0<'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.
❑ Yes
[] NA
O(No
❑ 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
o ❑ NA
❑ NE
Comments (refer to question #): Explain any YES answers and/or any additional recommendations or a
of er comments.
Use drawings of facility to better explain situations (use additional panes as necessarv).
!QCo_11'brA0r\ ]! +rUck-s) dU'e- 01 ai n L n mot a .
e_-)
p
Wu p
�{ PP
v C011(0 �ot1 ex-=
�
3a Ne,.A �z rkAA "Cor-n 11
s 3 1= -3
Reviewer/Inspector Name:
Reviewer/Inspector Signature:
Page 3 of 3
o0o qetb
.
Phone: --
Date: p1-7
21412011

r Division of Water.Quality®
Facility Number Division of Soil and Water Conservation 4 j r A`�
O Other Agency 1 i+
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: i ' f Arrival Time: r o Departure Time: � County: dUlOtr Region:
Farm Name:�P Lay - Owner Email:
Owner Name: f �dt1a 1 �r �s? ��V an Phone:
Mailing Address: j � 50earm an �� rw n 5 U 1ArU%
Physical Address: S e�m t✓
Facility Contact: K I�'� u o i.t) Title: Phone No:
Onsite Representative: �7P 0LJIntegrator:
Certified Operator: h Nnto m OL n Operator Certification Number: ;a4�
Back-up Operator:
Location of Farm:
INC. iwy !So 6,654.
Back-up Certification Number:
Latitude:
® o
LP- F Okifo SpPay-man
Longitude:
Design Current Design Current Design . Current?
Swine Capacity Population Wet Poultry Capacity Population Cattle Capacity.'. opuhitioh;
Wean to Finish
Wean to Feeder
Feeder to Finish
Farrow to Wean
Farrow to feeder
Farrow to Finish
Gilts
Boars
Other
❑ Other—
❑ La er
❑ Non -Layer
Dry Poultry
❑ La ers
❑ 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)
XDairy Cow
1 20
El
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 ' I III
d. Does discharge bypass the waste management system'? (If yes, notify DWQ)
2. Is there evidence of a past discharge from any part of the operation'?
3. Were there any adverse impacts or potential adverse impacts to the Waters of the State
other than from a discharge'?
Page 1 of 3
❑ Yes No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes ❑ No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes ❑ No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes No
❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes No
s
❑ NA ❑ NE
12128104
Continued

Facility Number: Date of Inspection A
Waste Collection & Treatment ko
4. Is storage capacity (structural plus storm storage plus heavy rainfall) less than adequate? ElYes ElNA ElNE
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: L n U ex —
Spillway?:
Designed Freeboard (in):
Observed Freeboard (in):
5. Are there any immediate threats to the integrity of any of the structures observed'? ❑ Yes
'VNo ❑ NA ❑ NE
(ie/ large trees, severe erosion, seepage, etc.)
6. Are there structures on -site which arc not properly addressed and/or managed ❑ Yes
y
No ElNA ElNE
through a waste management or closure plan?
If any of questions 4-6 were answered yes, and the situation poses an immediate public health or environmental
threat, notify DWQ
7. Do any of the structures need maintenance or improvement'? ❑ Yes
No ❑ NA ❑ NE
8. Do any of the stuctures lack adequate markers as required by the permit? ❑ Yes
No ❑ NA ❑ NE
(Not applicable to roofed pits, dry stacks and/or wet stacks)
9. Does any part of the waste management system other than the waste structures require ❑ Yes
No ❑ NA ❑ NE
maintenance or improvement?
Waste Application
10. Are there any required buffers, setbacks, or compliance alternatives that need ❑ Yes
[ No ElNA El NE
maintenance/improvement?
11, Is there evidence of incorrect application? If yes, check the appropriate box below. ❑ Yes
NoElNA ElNE
X
ElExcessive Ponding ElHydraulic Overload ElFrozen Ground ElHeavy Metals (Cu, Zn, etc.)
❑ PAN ❑ PAN > 10% or 10 lbs ❑ Total Phosphorus ❑ Failure to Incorporate Manure/Sludge into Bare Soil
❑ Outside of Acceptable Crop Window ❑ Evidence of Wind Drift ❑ Application Outside of Area
12. Crop type(s) -�M d li 1 e (—Aa.
13. Soil type(s)
14. Do the receiving crops differ from those designated in the CAWMP?
❑ Yes
No
❑ NA
❑ NE
15. Does the receiving crop and/or land application site need improvement?
❑ Yes
No
❑ NA
❑ NE
16. Did the facility fail to secure and/or operate per the irrigation design or wettable acre determination ?
❑ yes
No
❑ NA
❑ NE
17. Does the facility lack adequate acreage for land application?
❑ Yes
t56o
❑ NA
❑ NE
18. Is there a lack of properly operating waste application equipment?
❑ Yes
19No
❑ NA
❑ NE
Comments (refer to question #): Explain any YES answers and/or any recommendations or any other comments.
Use drawings of facility to better explain situations. (use additional pages as necessary):
Ski11 u�IIn� 6n
bc0&ACast 61pliCCLAIov)6�
Reviewerllnspector Name
Phone: 2
Reviewerllnspector Signature.
Date:
Page 2 of 3 12128104 Continued

Facility Number: — o *of Inspection
Required Records & Documents
19. Did the facility fail to have Certificate of Coverage & Permit readily available? ❑ Yes M No ❑ NA ❑ NE
20. Does the facility fail to have all components of the CAWMP readily available? If yes, check ❑ Yes 2 No ❑ NA ❑ NE
the appropriate box. ❑ WUP ❑ Checklists ❑ Design El Maps El Other
21. Does record keeping nee;;1e
rovement? ❑ Yes ANo ❑ NA ❑ NE
L�f Waste Application L� Waste Analysis ER/Soil Analysis to Trsrrsfera-
r
'LJ' Rainfall Stocking Yield 120 Minute Inspections L' Monthly and 1" Rain Inspectionseather 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
tS 15A
❑ 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
CR<A
❑ NE
26.
Did the facility fail to have an actively certified operator in charge?
❑ Yes
�No
❑ NA .
❑ NE
27.
Did the facility fail to secure a phosphorus loss assessment'(PLAT) certification?
❑ Yes
�Ko
❑ 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 i'..c facility fail to properly dispose of dead animals within 24 hours and/or document
❑ Yes
l o
❑ NA
❑ NE
and report the mortality rates that were higher than normal?
r
30.
At the time of the inspection did the facility pose an odor or air quality concern?
❑ Yes
� No
❑ NA
❑ NE
If yes, contact a regional Air Quality representative immediately
31.
Did the facility fail to notify the regional office of emergency situations as required by
❑ Yes
No
❑ NA
❑ NE
General Permit? (ie/ discharge, freeboard problems, over application)
32.
Did Reviewer/Inspector fail to discuss review/inspection with an on -site representative?
❑ Yes
[ No
/ �.
El NA
El NE
33. Does facility require a follow-up visit by same agency? ❑ Yes o ❑ NA ❑ NE
Additional Comments and/or Drawings:
I jA4ioA Used
d I ao 10 Sf res u
Page 3 of 3 12128104

VNqArp�a
Incident Report
7
-°
Report Number: 201001663 fJOV . 9010 r e �
Incident Type: Non -Compliance Reporting On -Site Contact:
Category: APS - Animal
First/Mid/Last Name:
Incident Started: 02/05/2010
Company Name:
County: Guilford
Phone:
City: Browns Summit
PagerlMobile Phone: 1
Farm #: 041-0009
Responsible Party:
Reported By:
Owner:
First/Mid/Last Name:
Permit: AWC410009
Company Name:
Facility: Oakmere Farms
Address:
First Name: Kelly
Middle Name: V
City/State/Zip:
Last Name: Bowman
Phone:
Address 8158 Spearman Rd
Pager/Mobile Phone: 1
City/State/Zip: Browns Summit NC 2721496
Phone:
Material Category: Estimated Qty: UOM Chemical Name Reportable Qty. lbs. Reportable Qty. kgs.
DD:MM:SS Decimal Position Method:
Latitude: Position Accuracy:
Longitude: Position Datum:
Location Of Incident: Spearman Road
Address:
CitylStatelZip
Report Created 05/14/10 01:13 PM Page t

0 . 0
8` k
Cause/Observation: Directions:
Action Taken: Comments:
Incident Questions:
Did the Material reach the Surface Water? Unknown Conveyance:
Surface Water Name?
Did the Spill result in a Fish Kill? Unknown Estimated Number of fish?
If the Spill was from a storage tank indicate type. (Above Ground or Under Ground)
Containment? Unknown
Cleanup Complete? Unknown
Water Supply Wells within 1500ft : Unknown
Access to Farm
Structure Questions
Animal Population
Groundwater Impacted : Unknown
Spray Availability
Report Created 05/14110 0113 PM Page 2

0
Access to Farm
Farm accessible from the main road?
Animal Population
Confined?
Depop?
Feed Available?
Mortality?
Spray Availability
Pumping equipment?
Available Fields?
Structure Questions
Breached?
Inundated?
Overtopped?
Water on outside wall?
Poor dike conditions?
Waste Structure Type Waste Structure Identi inches
Waste Pond UPPER 18.00
❑ Yes ❑ No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes
❑ No
❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes
❑ No
❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes
❑ No
❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes
❑ No
❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes ❑ No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes ❑ No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes ❑ No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes ❑ No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes ❑ No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes ❑ No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes ❑ No ❑ NA ❑ NE
Plan Due Date Plan Receeved Date Level OK Date
Event Type Event Date Due Date Comment
Incident closed
Requested Additional Information
Report Received
Referred to Regional Office - Primary Contact
Report Entered 2010-05-11 01:53:01
Incident Start 2010-02-05 08:00:00
Report Created 05/14/10 01:13 PM Page 3

•
1 %,
Standard Agencies Notified:
Agency Name Phone
Other Agencies Notified:
Agency Name Phone
DWQ Information:
First Name M.I. Last Name Contact Date
First Name M.I. Last Name Contact Date
Report Taken By: Report Entered By: Regional Contact:
Melissa Rosebrock
Phone:
Date/Time: 2010-05-11 01:53:01 PM
Referred Via:
Did DWQ request an additional written report?
If yes, What additional information is needed?
Report Created 05114l10 01:13 PM Page 4

Facility Number M=
V,0 Division of Water Quality a
Division of Soil and Water Conservation
0 Other Agency
Type of Visit q Compliance Inspection 0 Operation Review 0 Structure Evaluation 0 Technic
Reason for Visit Routine 0 Complaint 0 Follow up 0 Referral 0 Emergency 0 Other
Date of Visit: Arrival "Time: Departure Time: .� County:
f
Farm Name: V I bOU _ Q.Y11 nQ = Owner Email:
Owner Name: � —"_ITI Phone: & 5-6' 3S 2-6. _
Mailing Address: q1 JpeAr a �q-
Physical Address:
sa.mc,
Facility Contact: `'NC UXA U)LJL)W1Q-r\ Title:
Onsite Representative: V_JalL l u b 0UDMan
Certified Operator:
Back-up Operator:
Location of Farm:
N C, i
Swine
Wean to Finish
Wean to Feeder
Feeder to Finish
Farrow to Wean
Farrow to Feeder
Farrow to Finish
Gilts
Boars
Other
❑ Other
Integrator:
iAssistarice
w
�D,Pied Access
Region: W 0
Phone No:
Operator Certification Number:
t(I
Back-up Certification Number:
Latitude: U c Oy i [M 1, Longitude:
on+6 SPecLrM0-n p .
Design Current Design Current
Capacity Population Wet Poultry Capacity Population
❑ Layer
I❑ Non -Layer + I
Dry Poultry
❑ Layers
❑ Non -Layers
❑ Pullets
❑ Turkeys
❑ Turkey Poults
❑ Other
Discharges & Stream Impacts
I. Is any discharge observed from any part of the operation?
Discharge originated at: ❑ Structure ❑ Application Field ❑ Other
a. Was the conveyance man-made?
o © i FS0 u
Design Current
Cattle Capacity Population
Q%Dairy Cow
El Dairy Calf
❑ Dairy Heifer
❑ Dry Cow
❑ Non -Dairy
❑ Beef Stocket
❑ Beef Feeder
❑ Beef Brood Cow
Number of Structures:
b. Did the discharge reach waters of the State? (If yes, notify DWQ)
c. What is the estimated volume that reached waters of the State (gallons)?
d. Does discharge bypass the waste management system? (If yes, notify DWQ)
2. Is there evidence of a past discharge from any part of the operation`?
3. Were there any adverse impacts or potential adverse impacts to the Waters of the State
other than from a discharge?
❑ Yes XNo ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes
❑ No
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Yes
❑ No
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Yes
❑ No
❑ Yes
K o
❑ NA
ElNE
❑ Yes
WNo
❑ NA
❑ NE
12128104 Continued

Facility Number: — • Date of Inspection •
Waste Collection & Treatment
4. Is storage capacity (structural plus storm storage plus heavy rainfall) less than adequate?
a. If yes, is waste level into the structural freeboard?
�t
Structure 1 Structure 2 Structure 3 Structure 4
Identifier: I ;L� L G ia�•
Spillway?:
Designed Freeboard.(in):
Observed Freeboard (in):
5. Are there any immediate threats to the integrity of any of the structures observed?
(iel large trees, severe erosion, seepage, etc.)
G. Are there structures on -site which are not properly addressed and/or managed
through a waste management or closure plan?
❑ Yes -No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes No ❑ NA ❑ NE
Structure 5 Structure b
❑ Yes .No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ YesW(l) ❑ 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? El Yes Io El NA El NE
8. Do any of the stuctures lack adequate markers as required by the permit? ❑ Yes �'No . ❑ NA ElNE
(Not applicable to roofed pits, dry stacks and/or wet stacks) ' �No
9. Does any part of the waste management system other than the waste structures require El Yes ❑ NA ❑ NE
maintenance or improvement?
Waste Application
10. Are there any required buffers, setbacks, or compliance alternatives that need ❑ Yes "No ❑ NA ❑ NE
maintenance/improvement?
11. Is there evidence of incorrect application? If yes, check the appropriate box below. ❑ Yes �No
❑ NA ❑ NE
ElExcessive Ponding ElHydraulic Overload ElFrozen Ground ElHeavy Metals (Cu, Zn, etc.)
❑ PAN ❑ PAN > 10% or 10 lbs ❑ Total Phosphorus ❑ Failure to Incorporate Manure/Sludge into Bare Soil
❑ Outside of Acceptable Crop Window ❑ Evidenceof Wind Drift, ❑ Application Outside of Area
12. Crop type(s)
13.
Soil type(s) Q v v
14.
Do the receiving crops differ from those designated in the CAWMP?
❑ Yes
�eNo
❑ NA
❑ NE
15.
Does the receiving crop and/or land application site need improvement?
❑ Yes
N"
El NA
❑ NE
16,
Did the facility fail to secure and/or operate per the irrigation design or wettable acre detennination ?
❑ Yes
;7No
❑ NA
❑ NE
17.
Does the facility lack adequate acreage for land application?
❑ Yes
No
❑ NA
❑ NE
18.
Is there a lack of properly operating waste application equipment?
❑ Yes
KNo
❑ NA
❑ NE
Comments (refer to question ##): Explain any YES answers and/or any recommendations or any other comments.
Use drawings of facility to better explain situations. (use additional pages as necessary):
AL
Pq_k0
Reviewer/Inspector Name
Phone:
Reviewer/Inspector Signature:J
Date:
12128104 Continued

Facility Number: 141 — N I Pate of Inspection 4 0
Required Records & Documents /
19. Did the facility fail to have Certificate of Coverage & Permit readily available? ❑ Yes LINo- ❑ NA ❑ NE,
r
20. Does the facility fail to have all components of the CAWMP readily available? If yes, check El Yes &/No ❑ NA ❑ NE
the appropriate box.
❑ WUP ❑Checklists El Design El Maps ❑ Other .,�
21. Do s record keeping need improvement?. ` tow. ❑ Yes Lld'N0 ❑ NA ❑ NE
Waste A Wicaion
p��Crop
ly Freeboard
Waste Analysis Soil Analysis Waste Transfers ,,_,/ tron
Rainfall ocking Yield �/J 120 Minute Inspections n/Monthly and 1" Rain Inspections IJ Weather Code
"'
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 gNA ❑ NE
24. Did the facility fail to calibrate waste application equipment as required by the permit?
25. Did the facility fail to conduct a sludge survey as required by the permit?
26. Did the facility fail to have an actively certified operator in charge?
27. Did the facility fail to secure a phosphorus loss assessment (PLAT) certification?
Other Issues
❑ Yes KNo
ElNA
ElNE
❑ Yes ❑ No
(*1A '
❑ NE
❑ Yes �No
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Yes WNo
❑ NA
❑ NE
28. Were any additional problems noted which cause non-compliance of the permit or CAWMP?
29. Did the facility fail to properly dispose of dead animals within 24 hours and/or document
and report the mortality rates that were higher than normal?
30. At the time of the inspection did the facility pose an odor or air quality concern?
If yes, contact a regional Air Quality representative immediately
31. Did the facility fail to notify the regional office of emergency situations as required by
General Permit? (ie/ discharge, freeboard problems, over application)
32. Did Reviewer/Inspector fail to discuss review/inspection with an on -site representative?
33. Does facility require a follow-up visit by same agency?
❑ Yes
No
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Yes
J (No
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Yes
PIo
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Yes
WNo
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Yes
9No
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Yes
n No
❑ NA
❑ NE
Additional i c Drawings:
Ir,tt ~ - fir• J 1 I J� I � j l /y / j
r
12128104

Division of Water Qualir,
Facility Number 0 0 Division of Soil and Water Conservation PM
0 Other Agency
Type of Visit Compliance Inspection 0 Operation Review 0 Structure Evaluation 0 Technical Assistance
Reason for Visit XRoutine 0 Complaint 0 Follow up 0 Referral 0 Emergency 0 Other ❑ Denied Access
Date of Visit: Arrival Time: Ll d Departure Time: /1 County: wll Region: U f U
Farm Name: jz=r= OnwrnanCa k4me re- FcLrrn5 Owner Email: _ _ 6,/s6 r a
Owner Name: � 1 ,CTI Spe-a f MQn _ R a. I B r n W n& ip ad: , NIG V 7.21' T
Mailing Address:
Physical Address:
Facility Contact: 14)ei14 [ owrAan Title:
Onsite Representative: `�� (�QO W n'lon
Certified Operator: _ (�� o w rno-n
Phone No: 6 .S (o — 7 vs a_
Integrator:
Operator Certification Number:
Back-up Operator: I Back-up Certification Number:
Location of Farm: Latitude: 3(a o Longitude: e ®®
N_)c�r4h() ' Q0- 9W LSO bV) Spear Man �d. CiueSt off' j ,y aq)
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 -Layer
Dry Poultry
❑ La ers
❑ Non -Layers
❑ Pullets
❑ Turkeys
❑ Turkey Poults
❑ Other
Discharkes & Stream Impacts
1. Is any discharge observed from any part of the operation?
Discharge originated at: ❑ Structure ❑ Application Field ❑ Other
a. Was the conveyance man-made?
Design Current
Cattle Capacity Population
Dairy Cow
aZ 0
Dairy Calf
❑ Dairy Heifei
❑ Dry Cow
❑ Non -Dairy
❑ Beef Stocket
❑ Beef Feeder
❑ Beef Brood Cow
Number of Structures: ©:
b. Did the discharge reach waters of the State? (If yes, notify DWQ)
c. What is the estimated volume that reached waters of the State (gallons)?
d. Does discharge bypass the waste management system? (If yes, notify DWQ)
2. Is there evidence of a past discharge from any part of the operation'?
3. Were there any adverse impacts or potential adverse impacts to the Waters of the State
other than from a discharge?
❑ Yes [�No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes
❑ No
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Yes
❑ No
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Yes
No
❑ Yes
o
❑ NA
❑ NE
Q„ Yes
❑ No,
❑ NA
❑ NE
12128104 Continued
r

Facility Number: q Date of Inspection
Waste Collection & Treatment
4. Is storage capacity (structural plus storm storage plus heavy rainfall) less than adequate? ❑ Yes INo ❑ NA ❑ NE
a. If yes;. is waste level into the structural freeboard? ❑ Yes ❑ No ❑ NA ❑ NE
Structure I /Str_ucture 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 No ❑ NA ❑ NE
(ic/ 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 *No ❑ NA ❑ NE
8. Do any of the stuctures lack adequate markers as required by the permit? ❑ Yes IkNo ❑ 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 Aanlication
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 ElNA ❑ NE
ElExcessive Ponding ElHydraulic Overload ElFrozen Ground ElHeavy Metals (Cu, Zn, etc.)
❑ PAN ❑ PAN > 10% or 10 lbs ❑ Total Phosphorus ❑ Failure to Incorporate Manure/Sludge into Bare Soil
❑ Outside of Acceptable Crop ,Window El Evidence of Wind Drift ❑ Application Outside of Area
12. Crop type(s) [�(�Q1[ Ci r(i 0t(�Y'
13. Soil type(s)
14. Do the receiving crops differ from those designated in the CAWMP? ❑ Yes b(No ❑ NA ❑ NE
15. Does the receiving crop and/or land application site need improvement? ❑ Yes �oo
ElNA ElNE
16. Did the facility fail to secure and/or operate per the irrigation design or wettable acre determination?❑ Yes ❑ NA ❑ NE
17. Does the facility lack adequate acreage for land application? ❑ Yes No ❑ NA ❑ NE
18. Is there a lack of properly operating waste application equipment? ❑ Yes No ❑ NA ❑ NE
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):
pr'�w WO"TR /
I IffivMV X
3
Reviewer/Inspector Name
Reviewer/Inspector Signatu
Phone:
Date:
12128104
- s X�:6
a /-7/o
Continued

Facility Number: — *ate of Inspection 0
Required Records & Documents
19. Did the facility fail to have Certificate of Coverage & Permit readily available? ❑ Yes ..k(No ❑ NA ❑ NE
20. Does the facility fail to have all components of the CAWMP readily available? If yes, check ❑ Yes )6o ❑ NA ❑ NE
the appropirate box. ❑ WUP ❑ Checklists ❑ Design ❑Maps ❑Other
21. �tpplication
keeping need im ovement? if yes, ZAnalysis
appropriate box below. ❑ Yes No ❑ NA ❑ NE
Weekly Freeboard oil Analysis Waste Transfers -i �'r
N'Rainfal!
Stocking
Crop Yield 1120 Minute Inspections
I Monthly and V Rain Inspections ❑ Weather Code
22. Did the facility fail to install and maintain a rain gauge?
El Yes
Ey�o
❑ NA
❑ NE
23. If selected, did the facility fail to install and maintain rainbreakers on irrigation equipment?
❑ Yes
ElNo
XNA
ElNE
24. Did the facility fail to calibrate waste application equipment as required by the permit?cr_4 ElYes
PNo
[INA
ElNE
25. Did the facility fail to conduct a sludge survey as required by the permit'?
ElYes
ElNo
VNA
ElNE
26. Did the facility fail to have an actively certified operator in charge?
ElYes
0 No
❑ NA
❑ NE
27. Did the facility fail to secure a phosphorus loss assessment (PLAT) certification? ❑ Yes VNo ❑ NA ElNE
Other Issues
28.
Were any additional problems noted which cause non-compliance of the permit or CAWMP?
ElYes
No
❑ NA
ElNE
29.
Did the facility fail to properly dispose of dead animals within 24 hours and/or document
ElYes
o
[INA
ElNE
and report the mortality rates that were higher than normal?
30.
At the time of the inspection did the facility pose an odor or air quality concern?
ElYes
No
ElNA
❑ NE
If yes, contact a regional Air Quality representative immediately
III
31.
Did the facility fail to notify the regional office of emergency situations as required by
ElYes
�No
❑ NA
ElNE
General Permit? (iel discharge, freeboard problems, over application)
32.
Did ReviewerAnspector fail to discuss review/inspection with an on -site representative?
ElYes
XNo
ElNA
ElNE
33.
Does facility require a follow-up visit by same agency?
❑ Yes
*No
ElNA
ElNE
Additional Comments and/or Drawings:
oo? -9 Iri t lad 5'y -1 416 4' 1.S 37 0 .z re- 511- 1
�i
d
j0� i9/03 IbAl fl000
12128104

Division of Water Quality
❑ Division of Soil and Water Conservation
❑ Other Agency
Facility Number: 410009 Facility Status: Active Permit: AWC410009 ❑ Denied Access
Inspection Type: Compliance -Inspection Inactive or Closed Date:
Reason for Visit: Routine County: Guil#ord Region: Winston-Salem
Date of Visit: 02/27/2007 Entry Time:10:10 AM Exit Time: 11�20 AM Incident #:
Farm Name: Q&mere Farms V. 1. Bowman Owner Email:
Owner: V I Bowman
Mailing Address: 8151 Spearman Rd Downs Summit NC 27214
Physical Address:
Facility Status: ❑ Compliant ❑ Not Compliant Integrator:
Location of Farm: Latitude: 36°14'30" Longitude: 79°44'55"
1-40 east towards GSO. North on US Hwy 29 to NC Hwy 150 in Brown Summit. left onto NC Hwy 150. Right onto Spearman Rd. Farm
is on right.
Question Areas:
Discharges & Stream Impacts
Records and Documents
Certified Operator: Kelly V Bowman
Secondary OIC(s):
Waste Collection & Treatment Waste Application
Other Issues
Operator Certification Number: 21309
On -Site Representative(s): Name Title Phone
On -site representative Kelly Bowman Phone. [phone]
24 hour contact name Kelly Bowman Phone: [phone]
Primary Inspector: MqI' a sebrock Phone:
Inspector Signature: LLADate: aa-
Secondary Inspector(s):
Inspection Summary:
7. Fresh burrow holes were observed in the embankment of the upper WSP. Suggest trapping and repairing holes
21. Don't forget to record crop yields for small grain this spring and hay for 2007.
21. Records look great!
28. Need to revise acreage in WUP for T-538 F-4 since operator says this is one field now,
12/4/06 waste analysis =9.5 lbs. N/1000 gal.
Page: 1

• 0
Permit: AWC410009 Owner - Facility: V I Bowman Facility Number : 410009
Inspection Date: 02/27/2007 Inspection Type: Compliance Inspection Reason for Visit: Routine
Regulated Operations Design Capacity Current Population
Cattle
Cattle -Milk Cow 240 228
Total Design Capacity: 240
Total SSLW: 336,000
Waste Structures
Type Identifier Closed Date Start Date Designed Freeboard Observed Freeboard
aste Pond MOWER STAGE 144.00
aste Pond UPPER STAGE 38.00
Page: 2

I'
r1
•
Permit: AWC410009 Owner- Facility: V I Bowman Facility Number: 410009
Inspection Date: 02/27/2007 Inspection Type: Compliance inspection Reason for Visit: Routine
Dischames & 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?
❑
■
❑ ❑
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 andlor managed through a waste management ❑
■
❑ ❑
or closure plan?
7. Do any of the structures need maintenance or improvement?
■
❑
❑ Cl
8. Do any of the structures lack adequate markers as required by the permit? (Not applicable to roofed pits,
❑
■
❑ ❑
dry stacks and/OF wet stacks)
9. Does any part of the waste management system other than the waste structures require maintenance or
❑
■
❑ ❑
improvement?
Waste Ap licp ation
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: AWC410009 Owner - Facility: V I Bowman
Facility Number : 410009
Inspection Date: 02t2712007 Inspection Type: Compliance Inspection
Reason for Visit: Routine
Waste Application
Yes No NA NE
PAN?
❑
Is PAN > 10%/10 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
Corn (Silage)
Crop Type 2
Corn (Grain)
Crop Type 3
Small Grain (Wheat,
Barley, Oats)
Crop Type 4
Crop Type 5
Crop Type 6
Soil Type 1
Soil Type 2
Soil Type 3
Soil Type 4
Soil Type 5
Soil Type 6
14. Do the receiving crops differ from those designated in the Certified Animal Waste Management
❑
■
❑ ❑
Plan(CAWMP)?
15. Does the receiving crop and/or land application site need improvement?
❑
■
❑ ❑
16. Did the facility fail to secure and/or operate per the irrigation design or wettable acre determination?
❑
■
❑ ❑
17. Does the facility lack adequate acreage for land application?
❑
■
❑ ❑
18. Is there a lack of properly operating waste application equipment?
❑
■
❑ ❑
Records and Documents
Yes
No
NA NE
19. Did the facility fail to have Certificate of Coverage and Permit readily available?
❑
■
❑ ❑
20. Does the facility fail to have all components of the CAWMP readily available?
❑
■
❑ ❑
If yes, check the appropriate box below.
WUP?
❑
Page: 4

•
C
Permit: AWC410009 Owner - Facility: V l Bowman
Facility Number:
410009
Inspection Date: 02127/2007 Inspection Type: Compliance Inspection
Reason for Visit: Routine
Records and Documents
Yes
No
NA
NE
Checklists?
❑
Design?
❑
Maps?
❑
Other?
❑
21. Does record keeping need improvement?
0
■
❑
❑
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?
Q
■
❑
❑
27. Did the facility fail to secure a phosphorous loss assessment (PLAT) certification?
❑
■
❑
❑
Other Issues Yes No NA N
28. Were any additional problems noted which cause non-compliance of the Permit or CAWMP? ❑ ■ ❑ ❑
29. Did the facility fail to properly dispose of dead animals within 24 hours and/or document and report those ❑ ■ ❑ ❑
mortality rates that exceed normal rates?
30. At the time of the inspection did the facility pose an air quality concern? If yes, contact a regional Air ❑ ■ ❑ ❑
Quality representative immediately.
Page: 5

Permit: AWC410009 Owner - Facility: V I Bowman Facility Number : 410009
Inspection Date: 02/27/2007 Inspection Type: Compliance Inspection Reason for Visit: Routine
Other Issues Yes No NA NE
31. Did the facility fail to notify regional DWQ of emergency situations as required by Permit?
32. Did Reviewer/inspector fail to discuss review/inspection with on -site representative?
33. Does facility require a follow-up visit by same agency?
❑ ■ ❑ ❑
Page: 6

Facility Number
Division of Water Quality- 1i oem
Division of Soil and Water Conservation
O Other Agency
Type of Visit Compliance Inspection 0 Operation Review O Structure Evaluation () Technical Assistance
Reason for Visit {y Routine O Complaint O Follow up O Referral O Emergency 0 Other ❑ Denied Access
Date of Visit: Arrival Time: d t� Departure Time: County: VI Region: ��`-'JVO
�n
Farm Name: a�a� � l�iJl. Were_ POL)r }� Owner Email: /-
Owner Name: _y OWm an(] ,� Phone: S 4 +
Mailing Address: o l s 2a � c IYY�t n I `--U ' i 13rO V.%If2 u n w'l ll ±_ �C- `2) 2`
Physical Address: �P
Facility Contact: �%e.l u G 7U_ w rnCLYI Title: Phone No: LAJ W — 7L/ c-2
Onsite Representative: Integrator:
Certified Operator: , D n Operator Certification Number: 3oq
Back-up Operator:
Location of Farm:
Nosh
Swine
Wean to Finish
Wean to Feeder
Feeder to Finish
Farrow to Wean
Farrow to Feeder
Farrow to Finish
Gilts
Boars
Other
❑ Other
Back-up Certification Number:
Latitude: o 11 '
y iSo on"Sp 0-airwan 26 . L u.�5t
Design Current Design Current
Capacity Population Wet Poultry Capacity Population
❑ Layer
l ❑Non -La et
Dry Poultry
❑ Layers
❑ Non -Layers
❑ Pullets
❑ Turkeys
❑ Turkey PouIts
❑ 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)
Longitude: EA o V , EO-
o_ t � a9 )
Design Current
[..attle Capacity Population
Dairy Cow
LJ
Dairy Calf
L
❑
Dairy Heifer
❑
Dry Cow
❑
Non -Dairy
❑
Beef Stocker
❑
Beef Feeder
❑
Beef Brood Co
c. What is the estimated volume that reached waters of the State (gallons)?
Number of Structures:
d. Does discharge bypass the waste management system? (1f 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 4 No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes J� No El NA ❑ NE
12128104 Continued

Facility Number: — i Date of Inspection aZ -7 jQ
Waste Collection & Treatment
4. Is storage capacity (structural plus storm storage plus heavy rainfall) less than adequate? ❑ Yes No ❑ NA ❑ NE
a. If yes, is waste level into the structural freeboard? ❑ Yes ❑ No ❑ NA ❑ NE
Structure I Structure 2 Structure 3 Structure 4 Structure 5 Structure 6
Identifier: _U$ P_ Loww ST- e
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
(ie/ large trees, severe erosion, seepage, etc.)
6. Are there structures on -site which are not properly addressed and/or managed ❑ Yes No ❑ NA ❑ NE
through a waste management or closure plan?
If any of questions 4-6 were answered yes, and the situation poses an immediate public health or environmental threat, notify DWQ
7. Do any of the structures need maintenance or improvement? Yes ❑ No ❑ NA ❑ NE
8. Do any of the stuctures lack adequate markers as required by the permit? ❑ Yes No ❑ NA [I NE
(Not applicable to roofed pits, dry stacks and/or wet stacks) 11I11199--
9. Does any part of the waste management system other than the waste structures require [] Yes 4No ❑ NA ❑ NE
maintenance or improvement?
Waste Application
10. Are there any required buffers, setbacks, or compliance alternatives that need ❑ Yes X ,
No ElNA ElNE
maintenance/improvement`?
l l . Is there evidence of incorrect application? If yes, check the appropriate box below. ❑ Yes o El NA El NE
❑ Excessive Ponding [I Hydraulic Overload [I Frozen Ground El Heavy Metals (Cu, Zn, etc.) ,
❑ PAN ❑ PAN > 10% or 10 ibs ❑ Total Phosphorus ❑ Failure to Incorporate Manure/Sludge into Bare Soil
❑ Outside of Acceptable Crop Window ❑ Evidence of Wind Drifl ❑ Application Outside of Area
a
12. Crop type(s) AN
13.
Soil type(s) V
14.
Do the receiving crops differ from those designated in the CAWMP?
❑ Yes
�No
❑ NA
❑ NE
15.
Does the receiving crop and/or land application site need improvement?
❑ Yes
No
❑ NA
❑ NE
16.
Did the facility fail to secure and/or operate per the irrigation design or wettable acre determination?❑ Yes
No
❑ NA
❑ NE
17.
Does the facility lack adequate acreage for land application?
❑ Yes
*o
❑ NA
❑ NE
18.
Is there a lack of properly operating waste application equipment?
❑ Yes
19No
❑ NA
❑ NE
Comments (refer to question #): Explain any YES answers and/or any recommendations or any other comments.
Use drawings of facility to better explain situations. (use additional pages as necessary):
Reviewer/Inspector Name ' �bV-0C'U_ Phone: — a
Reviewer/Inspector Signatur(E-A.14-0 Date: oZ o1 O

Facility Number: — -�te of Inspection t?
Required Records & Documents
19. Did the facility fail to have Certificate of Coverage & Permit readily available?
❑ Yes L] 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 appropirate box. ❑ WUP ❑ Checklists ❑ Design El Maps ❑Other
21. Dos record keeping need improvement? +flea-e ❑ Yes o ❑ NA ❑ NE
Waste Ap�(Sltocking
n We ly Freeboard Waste Analysis Soil Analysis Waste Transfers ."Zti#ieation
l� Rainfall Cro Yield �'ff0 Minute Ins ections onthl and 1"Rain Ins ections WeatherCode
P P Y P
22.
Did the facility fail to install and maintain a rain gauge?
❑ Yes
KNo
❑ NA
❑ NE
23.
If selected, did the facility fail to install and maintain rainbreakers on irrigation equipment?
❑ Yes
❑ No
K NA
❑ NE
24.
Did the facility fail to calibrate waste application equipment as required by the permit?
❑ Yes
9No
❑ NA
❑ NE
25.
Did the facility fail to conduct a sludge survey as required by the permit?
❑ Yes
❑ No
ANA
❑ 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
❑ No
XNA
❑ NE
Other Issues
28.
Were any additional problems noted which cause non-compliance of the permit or CAWMP?
❑ Yes
WNo
❑ NA
❑ NE
29.
Did the facility fail to properly dispose of dead animals within 24 hours and/or document
❑ yes
No
❑ NA
❑ NE
and report the mortality rates that were higher than normal?
30.
At the time of the inspection did the facility pose an odor or air quality concern'?
❑ Yes
No
❑ NA
❑ NE
If yes, contact a regional Air Quality representative immediately
31.
Did the facility fail to notify the regional office of emergency situations as required by
❑ Yes
No
❑ NA
❑ NE
General Permit? (ie/ discharge, freeboard problems, over application)
32.
Did Reviewer/Inspector fail to discuss review/inspection with an on -site representative?
❑ Yes
)(No
❑ NA
❑ NE
33.
Does facility require a follow-up visit by same agency?
❑ Yes
Wo
❑ NA
❑ NE
Additional Comments and/or Drawings:
al CC4 `fields ? u7k7 '4
door Soll ep_s� ? "l-C .
1600
I
T
`f 12128104

Division of Water Quality
❑ Division of Soil and Water Conservation
❑ Other Agency
Facility Number: 410009 Facility Status: Active Permit. AWC41000 !-I Denied Access
Inspection Type: Compliannc InSl2ection Inactive or Closed Date:
Reason for Visit: Routine — County: Guild Region:WinstQn-Salem
Date of Visit: 08/18/2006 Entry Time:09:30 AM Exit Time: 11:00 AM Incident #:
Farm Name: Oakmere Farms V. I. Bowman Owner Email:
Owner: V I Bowman _ Phone: 000-65Q3526
Mailing Address: 8151 Spearman Rd Brown Summij NG 27214
Physical Address:
Facility Status: ❑ Compliant ❑ Not Compliant Integrator:
Location of Farm: Latitude: 36"14'30" Longitude: 7 '44' 5"
1-40 east towards GSO. North on US Hwy 29 to NC Hwy 150 in Brown Summit, left onto NC Hwy 150. Right onto Spearman Rd. Farm
is on right.
Question Areas:
Discharges & Stream Impacts Waste Collection & Treatment Waste Application
Records and Documents Other Issues
Certified Operator: Kelly V Bowman
Secondary OIC(s):
Operator Certification Number: 21309
On -Site Representative(s): Name Title Phone
On -site representative Kelly Bowman Phone: [phone]
24 hour contact name Kelly Bowman Phone: [phone]
Primary Inspector: Ma
Rgsebro Phone:
Inspector Signature: Date:
Secondary Inspector(s):
Inspection Summary:
3. Checked the creek flowing through heifer lot and it looks good.
18. Checked all irrigation hydrants --look ok.
21. Don't forget to obtain 2006 soil test results.
21. Don't forget to record small grain and hay yields.
6/15/06 "Upper" waste analysis= 15.8 lbs. N/1000 gal.
Page: 1

9
Permit: AWC410009 Owner - Facility: V I Bowman
Inspection Date: 08/18/2006 Inspection Type: Compliance Inspection
Facility Number: 410009
Reason for Visit: Routine
Regulated Operations Design Capacity Current Population
Cattle
O Cattle - Dry Cow 1 45
Cattle -Milk Cow 240 1 215
Total Design Capacity: 240
Total SSLW: 336,000
Waste Structures
Type Identifier Closed Date Start Date Designed Freeboard Observed Freeboard
k1ste Pond LOWER STAGE 96.00
k1ste Pond UPPER STAGE 50.00
Page: 2

Permit: AWC410009 Owner- Facility: V I Bowman Facility Number. 410009
Inspection Date. 08/18/2006 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? ❑ 0 ❑ ❑
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?
❑ ■
❑
❑
If yes, is waste level into structural freeboard?
❑
5. Are there any immediate threats to the integrity of any of the structures observed (Le./ large trees, severe
❑
■
❑
❑
erosion, -seepage, etc.)?
6. Are there structures on -site that are not properly addressed and/or managed through a waste management
❑
■
❑
❑
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?
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: AWC410009 Owner • Facility: V I Bowman
Inspection Date: 08/18/2006 Inspection Type: Compliance Inspection
Facility Number: 410009
Reason for Visit: Routine
Waste Application
Yes No NA' NE
PAN?
❑
Is PAN > 10%/10 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
Corn (Silage)
Crop Type 2
Corn (Grain)
Crop Type 3
Sudan Grass
Crop Type 4
Crop Type 5
Crop Type 6
Soil Type 1
Soil Type 2
Soil Type 3
Soil Type 4
Soil Type 5
Soil Type 6
14. Do the receiving crops differ from those designated in the Certified Animal Waste Management
❑ ■ ❑ ❑
Plan(CAWMP)?
15. Does the receiving crop and/or land application site need improvement?
❑ ■ ❑ ❑
16. Did the facility fail to secure and/or operate per the irrigation design or wettable acre determination? ❑ ■ ❑ Cl
17. Does the facility lack adequate acreage for land application?
❑ ■ ❑ ❑
18. Is there a lack of properly operating waste application equipment?
❑ ■ ❑ Cl
Records and Documents
Yes No NA NE
19, Did the facility fail to have Certificate of Coverage and Permit readily available?
❑ ■ ❑ ❑
20. Does the facility fail to have all components of the CAWMP readily available?
❑ ■ ❑ ❑
If yes, check the appropriate box below.
WUP?
❑
Page: 4

li •
Permit: AWC410009 owner - Facility: V I Bowman Facility Number: 410009
Inspection Date: 0811812006 Inspection Type: Compliance Inspection Reason for visit: Routine
Records and Documents Yes No NA NE
Checklists? ❑
Design? ❑
Maps? ❑
Other? ❑
21. Does record keeping need improvement? ❑ ■ ❑ ❑
If yes, check the appropriate box below.
Waste Application?
❑
120 Minute inspections?
❑
Weather code?
❑
Weekly Freeboard?
❑
Transfers?
❑
Rainfall?
❑
Inspections after > 1 inch rainfall 8, 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?
❑
01111
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 toss assessment (PLAT) certification?
❑
❑
■
❑
Other Issues
Yes
No
NA
NE
28. Were any additional problems noted which cause non-compliance of the Permit or CAWMP?
❑
■
❑
❑
29. Did the facility fail to properly dispose of dead animals within 24 hours and/or document and report those ❑ ■ ❑ ❑
mortality rates that exceed normal rates?
30. At the time of the inspection did the facility pose an air quality conoem? If yes, contact a regional Air ❑ ■ ❑ ❑
Quality representative immediately.
Page: 5

0 0 1
Permit: AWC410009 Owner - Facility: V I Bowman
Facility Number: 410009
Inspection Date: 08/18/2006 Inspection Type: Compliance Inspection
Reason for Visit: Routine
Other Issues
Yes No
NA
NE
31. Did the facility fail to notify regional DWQ of emergency situations as required by Permit?
Q ■
11
❑
32. Did Reviewer/Inspector fail to discuss review/inspection with on -site representative?
❑ ■
Q
❑
33. Does facility require a follow-up visit by same agency?
❑ ■
❑
❑
Page: 6

Division of Water Quality
Facility Number O 9Division of Soil and Water Conservation �0
Other Agency RM
Type of Visit P Compliance Inspection 0 Operation Review 0 Structure Evaluation 0 Technical Assistance
Reason for Visit x Routine 0 Complaint 0 Follow up 0 Referral 0 Emergency 0 Other ❑ Denied Access
Date of Visit: Arrival Time: Departure Time: County:
Farm Name: 61 y p _ 5 r-w-s _„ __„_ Owner Email:
t l € O rr�l Region: ,S
Owner Name: VJC 1 1pso y'A Cain___ Phone: q — C'j
Mailing Address: OeDx man n na na�N
Physical Address: Sim .0— I ._
Facility Contact: l WA �O t�'1r1/1 wn Title: PhoneNo:
Onsite Representative: �1G.T�eOUJ Integrator:
Certified Operator: 1? l ""'' 0 w (nC! Ci Operator Certification Number:
Back-up Operator:
Location of Farm:
Nett an S �eojr maw
Swine
Wean to Finish
Wean to Feeder
Feeder to Finish
Farrow to Wean
Farrow to Feeder
Farrow to Finish
Gilts
Boars
Other
❑ Other
Back-up Certification Number:
Latitude: ®� ® Longitude:
. lb N y tsa UJP_sE- 0 u5 4W4 a9
Design Current Design Current
Capacity Population Wet Poultry Capacity Population
❑ Layer
❑ Non -La er
Dry Poultry
❑ Layers
❑ Non -La ers
❑ Puliets
❑ 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?
Design Current
Cattle Capacity Population
Dairy Cow
Lj _Dairy Calf
❑ Dairy Heifer
❑ Dry Cow
❑ Non -Dairy
❑ Beef Stocker
❑ Beef Feeder
❑ Beef Brood Cow
b. Did the discharge reach waters of the State? (If yes, notify DWQ)
c. What rs the estimated volume that reached waters of the State (gallons)?
Number of Structures: F271'
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 El NA El NE
El Yes o ❑ NA ❑ NE
Page 1 of 3 12128104 Continued

Facility Number: LAI— 0 Date of Inspection is
Waste Collection & Treatment
4. Is storagecapacity (structural plus storm storage plus heavy rainfall) less than adequate?
' a. If yes, is waste level into the structural freeboard?
Structure Structure 2 Structure 3 Structure 4
11
Identifier: v W WiP—f �7
Spillway?:
Designed Freeboard (in):
Observed Freeboard (in):
Lo
5. Are there any immediate threats to the integrity of any of the structures observed?
(ie/ large trees, severe erosion, seepage, etc.)
6. Are there structures on -site which are not properly addressed and/or managed
through a waste management or closure plan?
❑ Yes No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes 111❑No ❑ NA ❑ NE
Structure 5 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 t reat, 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 *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
❑ 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 Ibs ❑ Total Phosphorus ❑ Failure to Incorporate Manure/Sludge
into Bare Soil
❑ Outside of Acceptable Crop WinMUw ❑ Evidence of Wind Drift ❑ Application Outside of Area
12.
Crop type(s) A&2 aJA4!1 /I AU—)
13.
Soil type(s) V 1-1)
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
oElNA
tNo
❑ NE
16.
Did the facility fail to secure and/or operate per the irrigation design or wettable acre determination ?
❑ Yes
El NA ElNE
17.
Does the facility lack adequate acreage for land application?
ElYes
LNo
❑ NA ❑ NE
18.
is there a lack of properly operating waste application equipment?
❑ Yes
NtNo
❑ NA ❑ NE
Comments (refer to question #): Explain any YES answers and/or any recommendations or any other comments.
Use drawings of facility to better explain situations. (use additional pages as necessary):
l % • .01
Ghec l� h 4M-�s &t, •
a w atmo Sri I ��sts ? nK Wi5t,
&Z!Zro Pun
Reviewer/ pector Name I Phone: SeZ0
Reviewer/Inspector Signatu 141771 Date: O
Page 2 of 3 12/28104 Continued

0 . 9
Facility Number: — Sate of Inspection S 0
Required Records & Documents
19. Did the facility fail to have Certificate of Coverage & Permit readily available? ❑ Yes V[��INElNA ElNE
20. Does the facility fail to have all components of the CAWMP readily available? If yes, check ElYes ❑ NA ❑ NE
the appropriate box.
❑ WUP ❑Checklists ❑Design ❑Maps ❑Other
21. Do record keeping nee�t�wy��board
ovement? w. Yes ❑ No ❑ NA ❑ NE
Waste Applica 'on Waste Analysis S=Anis WasteTransfers
Vainfall Stocking ❑ Crop Yield ly and I" Rain Inspections �Weather
22. Did the facility fail to install and maintain a rain gauge? ❑ Yes No
23. If selected, did the facility fail to install and maintain rainbreakers on irrigation equipment? ❑ Yes ❑ No
24. Did the facility fail to calibrate waste application equipment as required by the permit? C(ek-kt Yes IXJ No
25. Did the facility fail to conduct a sludge survey as required by the permit? QCM Yes /❑ No
26. Did the facility fail to have an actively certified operator in charge? ❑ Yes ;<No
27. Did the facility fail to secure a phosphorus loss assessment (PLAT) certification? ❑ Yes ❑ No
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 Rev iewer/[nspector fail to discuss review/inspection with an on -site representative?
33. Does facility require a follow-up visit by same agency?
El NA El NE
XNA ❑ NE
❑NA ❑NE
*A ❑ NE
❑NA El NE
�<NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes
o
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Yes
No
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Yes
[No
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Yes
No
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Yes
❑ NA
❑ NE
IMNo
❑ Yes
To
❑ NA
❑ NE
Additional Comments and/or Drawings:
�}
C �x u.)
a
0(o I S: 1 has• N/ I o00 q-a_ .
U
4-`
Page 3 of 3 12128104

Division of Water Quality
[] Division of Soil and Water Conservation
❑ Other Agency
Facility Number: 410009 Facility Status: Active Permit: AWC410009 ❑ Denied Access
Inspection Type: Comaiiance inspection Inactive or Closed Date:
Reason for Visit: Routine I County: Region: Winston-Salem
Date of Visit: 05/26/2005 Entry Time:10715 AM Exit Time: 12:00 PM Incident #:
Farm Name: Oakmere Farms V. I. Bowman- Owner Email:
Owner: V I Bowman
Phone: [phone]
Mailing Address: 8151 Spearman Rd _ ]gown Summit NC 27214
Physical Address:
Facility Status: ❑ Compliant ❑ Not Compliant Integrator:
Location of Farm: Latitude: 36°14'30" Longitude: 79°44'55"
1-40 east towards GSO. North on US Hwy 29 to NC Hwy 150 in Brown Summit. left onto NC Hwy 150. Right onto Spearman Rd. Farm
is on right.
Question Areas:
0 Discharges & Stream Impacts
Records and Documents
0 Waste Collection & Treatment Waste Application
0 Other issues
Certified Operator: Kelly V Bowman Operator Certification Number: 21309
Secondary OIC(s):
On -Site Representative(s): Name Title Phone
On -site representative Kelly Bowman Phone: [phone]
24 hour contact name Kelly Bowman
Phone: [phone]
Primary Inspector: Me issa M Rosebrock Phone: [phone]
Ext.383
Inspector Signature:
94A4Date: 51176 d s
Secondary Inspector(s):
Phone:
Phone:
Inspection Summary:
3. Checked two heifer pastures with creek access for cattle. Banks and water look good at this time.
18. Operator has installed pressure gauge on irrigation gun. May want to check hydrants next time.
21. Fall 2004 small grain application records look good.
21. Operator has soil test results dated 513105 for samples pulled in November 2004 and March 2005. Look ok.
21. Went over new permit requirements with operator.
10/22/04 waste result=5.4 lbs. NIi000 gal.
Page: 1

0
Permit: AWC410009 Owner - Facility: V I Bowman Facility Number: 410009
Inspection Date: 05/26/2006 Inspection Type: Compliance Inspection Reason for Visit: Routine
Regulated Operations Design Capacity Current Population
Cattle
O Cattle -Milk Cow 240 23C
Total Design Capacity: 240
Total SSLW: 336,000
Waste Structures
Type Identifler Closed Date Start Date Designed Freeboard Observed Freeboard
Waste Pond LOWER STAGE 72.00
Waste Pond UPPER STAGE 42,00
Page: 2

I
• •
Permit: AWC410009 Owner - Facility: V I Bowman Facility Number: 410009
Inspection Date: 05/26/2005 Inspection Type: Compliance Inspection Reason for Visit: Routine
DischarQPS R 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? (it 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?
❑
Yes
■ ❑
No NA
❑
NE
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 andlor 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
NF
Waste Application
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%/10 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
Corn (Silage)
Crop Type 2
Small Grain (Wheat,
Barley, Oats)
Crop Type 3
Fescue (Hay)
Crop Type 4
Crop Type 5
Page: 3

o •
Permit: AWC410009 Owner - Facility: V I Bowman
Facility Number: 410009
Inspection Date: 05/26/2005 Inspection Type: Compliance Inspection
Reason for Visit: Routine
NA
Waste Aaolica#inn
Crop Type 6
Ypq
No
NF_
Soil Type 1
Soil Type 2
Soil Type 3
Soil Type 4
Soil Type 5
Soil Type 6
14. Do the receiving crops differ from those designated in the Certified Animal Waste Management Plan(CAWMP)? 130
Cl
❑
15. Does the receiving crop and/or land application site need improvement?
❑
■ ❑
❑
16, Did the facility fail to secure andlor 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?
Cl
`
■ ❑
No NA
❑
NE
Records and DoryD e+ nts
19. Did the facility fail to have Certificate of Coverage and Permit readily available?
gg
❑
■ ❑
❑
20. Does the facility fail to have all components of the CAWMP readily available?
❑
■ ❑
❑
If yes, check the appropriate box below
WUP?
❑
Checklists?
❑
Design?
❑
Maps?
❑
Other?
❑
21. Does record keeping need improvement?
■
❑
❑ ❑
If yes, check the appropriate box below.
Waste Application?
❑
120 Minute inspections?
■
Weather code?
■
Weekly Freeboard?
❑
Transfers?
❑
Rainfall?
❑
Inspections after > 1 inch rainfall & monthly?
■
Waste Analysis?
❑
Annual soil analysis?
❑
Crop yields?
■
Stocking?
❑
Annual Certification Form (NPDES only)?
❑
22. Did the facility fail to install and maintain a rain gauge?
❑
■
❑ ❑
23. If selected, did the facility fail to install and maintain a rainbreaker on irrigation equipment (NPDES only)?
❑
❑
■ ❑
24. Did the facility fail to calibrate waste application equipment as required by the permit?
❑
■
❑ ❑
25, Did the facility fail to conduct a sludge survey as required by the permit?
❑
❑
IN ❑
26, Did the facility fail to have an actively certified operator in charge?
❑
■
Cl ❑
27, Did the facility fail to secure a phosphorous loss assessment (PLAT) certification?
❑
■
Cl Cl
Page: 4

0
Permit: AWC410009 Owner - facility: V I Bowman
Inspection Date: 05/26/2005 Inspection Type: Compliance Inspection
Facility Number: 410009
Reason for Visit: Routine
Otherl5s es
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 andlor document and report those mortality
rates that exceed normal rates?
30. At the time of the inspection did the facility pose an air quality concern? If yes, contact a regional Air Quality
representative immediately.
31. Did the facility fail to notify regional DWQ of emergency situations as required by Permit?
32. Did Reviewer/Inspector fail to discuss review/inspection with on -site representative?
33. Does facility require a follow-up visit by same agency?
Page: 5

�Faciltty Number
Water Quality:Dn ision of Soil:and W'ateriiDivisionA
�(}ther Ageni y ,' .7
type of Visit &Compliance Inspection 0 Operation Review 0 Structure Evaluation 0 Technical Assistance
Reason for Visit � Routine 0 Complaint 0 Follow up 0 Referral 0 Emergency 0 Other ❑ Denied Access
Date of Visit: Arrival Time: Departure Time, County: [iJU I ! ��� Region: UDJ 20
Farm Name: ()&V— Y1P_1rjPJ t Q_(-M1 S Owner Email:
Owner Name: V Z Phone: Ip Sk — 3 S9/
Mailing Address: an W Q 7 °2
Physical Address:D
Facility Contact: Q� -^ Title: Phone No: Ug& —7 4 SZ
Onsite Representative: _V, e l 1U M 6Ln Integrator:
Certified Operator: �e�— Lw an Operator Certification Number: 5 Q_�
Rack -up Operator: Back-up Certification Number:
Location of Farm: Latitude: Dn Ea & F Longitude: ®ONOI
Swine
Wean to Finish
Wean to Feeder
Feeder to Finish
Farrow to Wean
Farrow to Feeder
Farrow to Finish
Gilts
Boars
Other
❑ Other
Design Current Design Current
Capacity Population Wet Poultry Capacity Population
❑ La er
❑ Non -La et
Dry Poultry
❑ Layers
Water Quality:Dn ision of Soil:and W'ateriiDivisionA
�(}ther Ageni y ,' .7
type of Visit &Compliance Inspection 0 Operation Review 0 Structure Evaluation 0 Technical Assistance
Reason for Visit � Routine 0 Complaint 0 Follow up 0 Referral 0 Emergency 0 Other ❑ Denied Access
Date of Visit: Arrival Time: Departure Time, County: [iJU I ! ��� Region: UDJ 20
Farm Name: ()&V— Y1P_1rjPJ t Q_(-M1 S Owner Email:
Owner Name: V Z Phone: Ip Sk — 3 S9/
Mailing Address: an W Q 7 °2
Physical Address:D
Facility Contact: Q� -^ Title: Phone No: Ug& —7 4 SZ
Onsite Representative: _V, e l 1U M 6Ln Integrator:
Certified Operator: �e�— Lw an Operator Certification Number: 5 Q_�
Rack -up Operator: Back-up Certification Number:
Location of Farm: Latitude: Dn Ea & F Longitude: ®ONOI
Swine
Wean to Finish
Wean to Feeder
Feeder to Finish
Farrow to Wean
Farrow to Feeder
Farrow to Finish
Gilts
Boars
Other
❑ Other
Design Current Design Current
Capacity Population Wet Poultry Capacity Population
❑ La er
❑ Non -La et
Dry Poultry
❑ Layers
❑ Non -Layers
❑ Pullets
❑ Turkeys
❑ Turkey Po Its
❑ Other
Discharges & Stream Impacts
1. Is any discharge observed from any part of the operation?
Discharge originated at: ❑ Structure ❑ Application Field ❑ Other
a. Was the conveyance man-made?
Design Current
Cattle Capacity Population
Dairy Cow
Dairy Calf
❑ Dairy Heifei
❑ Dry Cow
❑ Non -Dairy
❑ Beef Stockct
❑ Beef Feeder
❑ Beef Brood Cow
Number of Structures: Ell�
b. Did the discharge reach waters of the State? (If yes, notify DWQ)
c. What is the estimated volume that reached waters of the State (gallons)?
d. Does discharge bypass the waste management system? (If yes, notify DWQ)
2. Is there evidence of a past discharge from any part of the operation'?
3. Were there any adverse impacts or potential adverse impacts to the Waters of the State
other than from a discharge?
❑ Yes �No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes )� No
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Yes b� No ❑ NA ❑ NE
12128104 Continued

Facility Number: — * Date of Inspection
Waste Collection & Treatment
4. Is storage capacity (structural plus storm storage plus heavy rainfall) less than adequate?
a. If yes, is waste level into the structural freeboard?
Structure 1 Structure 2 Structure 3 Structure 4
�- Identifier: O LL
Spillway'?:
Designed Freeboard (in):
Observed Freeboard (in):
5. Are there any immediate threats to the integrity of any of the structures observed'?
(ie/ large trees, severe erosion, seepage, etc.)
6. Are there structures on -site which are not properly addressed and/or managed
through a waste management or closure plan?
❑ Yes �'No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes ❑ No NA ❑ NE
Structure 5 Structure 6
❑ Yes KNo ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes XNo ❑ NA ❑ NE
If any of questions 4-6 were answered yes, and the situation poses an immediate public health or environmental threat, notify DWQ
7. Do any of the structures need maintenance or improvement? ❑ Yes [(No ❑ NA ❑ NE
8. Do any of the stuctures lack adequate markers as required by the permit? ❑ Yes No ❑ NA ❑ NE
(Not applicable to roofed pits, dry stacks and/or wet stacks)
9. Does any part of the waste management system other than the waste structures require ❑ Yes KNo ❑ NA ❑ NE
maintenance or improvement?
Waste Application
10. Are there any required buffers, setbacks, or compliance alternatives that need ❑ Yes KNo El NA El 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 Drifl ❑ Application Outside of Area
12. Crop type(s)
13, Soil type(s)
14. Do the receiving crops differ from those designated in the CAWMP?
❑ Yes
No
❑ NA
❑ NE
15. Does the receiving crop and/or land application site need improvement?
❑ Yes
No
❑ NµA
El NE
16. Did the facility fail to secure and/or operate per the irrigation design or wettable acre determination' ElYes
NoOf
El NE
17. Does the facility lack adequate acreage for land application'?
El Yes
XNo
El NA
❑ NE
18. is there a lack of properly operating waste application equipment?
❑ Yes
KNo
❑ NA
❑ NE
Comments (refer to question #): Explain any YES answers and/or any recommendations or any other comments.
Use drawings of facility to better explain situations. (use additional pages as necessary):
Reviewer/Inspector Name l Phone:
Reviewer/Inspector Signature: Date: -a a
V . 1 12128104 Continued

r
,Facility Number: — Q D*- Inspection
Required Records & Documents
19. Did the facility fail to have Certificate of Coverage & Permit readily available? ❑ Yes No ❑ NA ❑ NE
20. Does the facility fail to have all components of the CAWMP readily available? If yes, check El Yes No ElNA ❑ NE
the appropirate box.
❑ WUP El Checklists ❑Design El Maps ❑Other
21. Xaste
record keeping neeV�we
'rovement? If yes, cheecc he appropriate box low. ] Yes ❑ No ❑ NA ❑ NE
Applic tion 1Freed Ly Waste Analysis SoilAnalysis ❑ Waste Transfers
L Rainfall [StockingCrop Yiel I 0 Minute Inspections onthly and 1" Rain Inspects s Weather Cod
Nr t s� iNo
22, Did the facility fail to install and maintain a rain gauge? ElYes ❑ NA ❑ NE
23. If selected, did the facility fail to install and maintain rainbreakers on irrigation equipment? ❑ Yes ❑ No CNA ❑ NE
24. Did the facility fail to calibrate waste application equipment as required by the permit'? Q(A 1. 060 Yes �(No ❑ NA ❑ NE
25. Did the facility fail to conduct a sludge survey as required by the permit? ❑ Yes ❑ No )(NA ❑ NE
26. Did the facility fail to have an actively certified operator in charge? ❑ Yes X No ❑ NA ❑ NE
27, Did the facility fail to secure a phosphorus loss assessment (PLAT) certification? ❑ Yes ❑ No �NA ❑ NE
Other Issues
28. Were any additional problems noted which cause non-compliance of the permit or CAWMP? ❑ Yes No ❑ NA ❑ NE
29. Did the facility fail to properly dispose of dead animals within 24 hours and/or document ❑ Yes 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? ❑ Yes No ❑ NA ❑ NE
If yes, contact a regional Air Quality representative immediately X
31. Did the facility fail to notify the regional office of emergency situations as required by ❑ Yes tNo El NA El NE
General Permit? (ie/ discharge, freeboard problems, over application)
32. Did Reviewer/inspector fail to discuss review/inspection with an on -site representative? ❑ Yes ko ❑ NA ❑ NE
33. Does facility require a follow-up visit by same agency? ❑ Yes iVNo ❑ NA ❑ NE
Additionali i Drawings:
AL
12128104

ision of Water Quality
tvision of Soil and Water Conservation, ,
0 Other Agency
Type of Visit OQ Compliance Inspection O Operation Review O Structure Evaluation Q Technical Assistance
iReason for Visit O• Routine O Complaint O Follow up O Referral O Emergency O Other ElDenied Access
Facility Number 41 09 Date of Visit: 10/12/2004 Time: 1130
0 Not O erational 0 Below Threshold
® Permitted ® Certified 13 Conditionally Certified 0 Registered Date Last Operated or Above Threshold: .........................
FarmName: ............................................................. County: Guilford ........................................... W.SR.0........
OwnerName: V.L........................................... 130tYmtall..................................................... Phone No:056.-.35.2.6 ..........................................
Mailing Address: 5.151.Sp�a�rma�a.A�Qad.......................................................................0r.Q.Wxj..5.UMMA...N.0 ........................................... 27.2.1.4 ..............
ac
Facility Contact:>l�01Y.D.O.W.Mi.t1...............................................Title:................................................................ Phone No: .... ...u....i ......
Onsite Representative: jKglly..H.9.W11thant........................................................................... Integrator:............... 4 ...... .. �....... .............................
Certified Operator: Jfglly....V.................................. Romiman........................................... Operator Certification Number:2X3,09.............................
Location of Farm:
1-40 east towards GSO. North on US Hwy 29 to NC Hwy 150 in Brown Summit. left onto NC Hwy 150. Right onto Spearman A,
Rd. Farm is on right. ;
❑ Swine [I Poultry ®Cattle ❑Horse Latitude F 36 • 14 Longitude 79 • 44 55
Design
Current Design
Current
Design Current
Swine Capacity
Population Poultry Capacity
Population Cattle
Ca ac ty Po ulation
❑ Wean to Feeder
❑ Layer
❑ Dairy
240 210
El Feeder to Finish
❑ Non -Layer
❑ Non -Dairy
❑ Farrow to Wean
❑ Farrow to Feeder
❑ Other
❑ Farrow to Finish
Total Design Capacity
240
❑ Gilts
❑ Boars
Total SSLW
336,000
Number of Lagoons
-- ... — . ,— ...—
0
2
Discharges & Stream Impacts
1. Is any discharge observed from any part of the operation? ❑ Yes ® No
Discharge originated at: ❑ Lagoon ❑ Spray Field ❑ Other
a. If discharge is observed, was the conveyance man-made? ❑ -Yes ❑ No
b. If discharge is observed, did it reach Water ofthe 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: .....IJpper..S.tage..... .....Loner. Stage ..................................................................................................................................................
Freeboard (inches): 54 48
12112103 Continued

Facility Number: 41-09 O Date of Inspection 10/12/2004 .
5. Are there any immediate threats to the integrity of any of the structures observed? (ie/ trees, severe erosion, ❑ Yes N No
seepage, etc.)
6. Are there structures on -site which are not properly addressed and/or managed through a waste management or ❑ Yes N No
closure plan?
(If any of questions 4-6 was answered yes, and the situation poses an
immediate public health or environmental threat, notify DWQ)
7. Do any of the structures need maintenance/improvement? ❑ Yes N No
8. Does any part of the waste management system other than waste structures require maintenance/improvement? ❑ Yes N No
9. Do any stuctures lack adequate, gauged markers with required maximum and minimum liquid level ❑ Yes N No
elevation markings?
Waste Application
10. Are there any buffers that need maintenance/improvement? ❑ Yes N No
I. Is there evidence of over application? If yes, check the appropriate box below. ❑ Yes N No
❑ Excessive Ponding ❑ PAN ❑ Hydraulic Overload ❑ Frozen Ground ❑ Copper and/or Zinc > 3000
12. Crop type Corn (Silage & Grain) Small Grain (Wheat, Barley, Fescue (Graze)
13. Do the receiving crops differ with those designated in the Certified Animal Waste Management Plan (CAWMP)? ❑ Yes N No
14. a) Does the facility lack adequate acreage for land application? ❑ Yes N No
b) Does the facility need a wettable acre determination? ❑ Yes N No
c) This facility is pended for a wettable acre determination? ❑ Yes N No
15. Does the receiving crop need improvement? ❑ Yes N No
16. Is there a lack of adequate waste application equipment? ❑ Yes N No
Odor Issues
17, Does the discharge pipe from the confinement building to the storage pond or lagoon fail to discharge at/or below ❑ Yes ❑ No
liquid level of lagoon or storage pond with no agitation?
18. Are there any dead animals not disposed of properly within 24 hours? ❑ Yes N No
19. Is there any evidence of wind drift during land application? (i.e. residue on neighboring vegetation, asphalt, ❑ Yes N No
roads, building structure, and/or public property)
20. At the time of the inspection did the facility pose an odor or air quality concern? If yes, contact a regional ❑ Yes N No
Air Quality representative immediately.
Comments (refer to°question #): Explain any YES answers and/or any recommendations or any other comments.
Use drawings of facility to:better explain situations: (use additional pages as necessary): Field Copy N Final Notes
_. ...<,w..... . ��
9. Marker has been re -set and looks good, y
16.Operator has new pressure gauge that he plans on installing soon.
18. Animals are picked -up for rendering.
3. 6/25/04 waste analysis=9.9 lbs. N/1000 gal. (upper)
3. Operator is awaiting waste analysis results to complete IRR-2 and SLUR-2 forms for small grain. Check next visit.
Reviewer/Inspector Name
Reviewer/Inspector Signature: Date: Q a
12112103 Continued

Facility, Number: 41—t}9 "0of Inspection 10/12/2004 0
Reuuired Records & Documents
21. Fail to have Certificate of Coverage & General Permit or other Permit readily available? ❑ Yes ❑ No
22. Does the facility fail to have all components of the Certified Animal Waste Management Plan readily available?
(ie/ WUP, checklists, design, maps, etc.) ❑ Yes ❑ No
23. Does record keeping need improvement? if yes, check the appropriate box below. ❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ Waste Application ❑ Freeboard ❑ Waste Analysis ❑ Soil Sampling
24.
Is facility not in compliance with any applicable setback criteria in effect at the time of design?
❑ Yes
❑ No
25.
Did the facility fail to have a actively certified operator in charge?
❑ Yes
❑ No
26.
Fail to notify regional DWQ of emergency situations as required by General Permit?
(ie/ discharge, freeboard problems, over application)
❑ Yes
❑ No
27.
Did Reviewer/Inspector fail to discuss review/inspection with on -site representative?
❑ Yes
❑ No
28.
Does facility require a follow-up visit by same agency?
❑ Yes
❑ No
24.
Were any additional problems noted which cause noncompliance ofthe Certified AWMP?
❑ Yes
❑ No
NPDES Permitted Facilities
30.
Is the facility covered under a NPDES Permit? (If no, skip questions 31-35)
❑ Yes
❑ No
31.
If selected, did the facility fail to install and maintain rainbreakers on irrigation equipment?
❑ Yes
❑ No
32.
Did the facility fail to install and maintain a rain gauge?
❑ Yes
❑ No
33.
Did the facility fail to conduct an annual sludge survey?
❑ Yes
❑ No
34.
Did the facility fail to calibrate waste application equipment?
❑ Yes
❑ No
35.
Does record keeping for NPDES required forms need improvement? If yes, check the appropriate box below.
❑ Yes
❑ No
[:]Stocking Form ❑ Crap Yield Form [:]Rainfall ❑ inspection After 1" Rain
❑ 120 Minute Inspections ❑ Annual Certification Form
No violations or deficiencies were noted during this visit. You will receive no further correspondence about this visit.
Additional Comments and/or Drawings:
zi
12112103

Design Current -' Y,z ;,De3agn' w Current - ;Design: _ = ~Current` :.
�;apacity Population Pgriltry;. Capacity Po ulation':'_ fie Capadtv'P6vulanow ,1
Non -Layer "^ j❑Non-Dairy
Other
iwow1iR..'i„4'.-�x�
�ii waf& Qnalityr.�-
vision of Sort. and Water Conservation ' ` p ° s �y +<� ,� t- ' ; k
� �^
OthBr-Apen
r ) S a m�.
� .. _.';.��--�; ��'+-t�'r. `?. •n ,.«,.Y.. . :,.... � .��'�_.. hz.sr� �m--. �. "�Er'y.�.°,nR! .'�sb..w ;. ?�es.�',r?�..�'v �..�k:'�'.�.�.,t�ti ;��€,g.�#`�'�a3 r'�:9�..,.,'�'."i��^�:�':.`�',t�::�y °�i?
JType of Visit AC.omplianceinspection O Operation Review O Lagoon Evaluation J
Reason for Visit
Routine Q Complaint O Follow up O Emergency Notification O Other ❑ Denied Access
Facility Number Date of Visit:
j Permitted © Certified 13 Conditionally Certified (3 Registered
Farm Naive: ... am.. mec.e...3..arms-_._---- ..------------- ---------------------_---
Owner Name: T- ....... __.._......_.
Mailing Address:
Facility Contact:
Onsite Representative:
Certified
P Time:
Not Onerational O Below Threshold
Date Last Operated of Above �eshold: -.- - .... _.....
County:.....i.4...1L.'......................... ......_ .... .
PhoneNo: .M................. ...._ ........... ..................
451
......................
Title: ..........._..._ Phone No:
hOLQ r a, Operator Certification Number: .........
Location of Farm:
N Of
IG
W-1 , Ilk 1 � O N- 1, l,Q G �-- n � 1rn11\C' 'tSU hn kV% l + ^ e iiq In • n In ': YA t rtyoA 896� I
1 JZI
❑ Swine ❑ Poultry � Cattle ❑ Horse Latitude ®• �` ®" ngitude •
Sine
❑ Wean to Feeder
❑ Feeder to Finish
Farrow to Wean
❑ Farrow to Feeder
❑ Farrow to Finish
❑ Gifts
Boars
Discharaes & 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)
c. If discharge is observed, what is the estimated flow in gal/min'?
d. Does discharge bypass a lagoon system? (If yes, notify DWQ)
2. Is there evidence of past discharge from any part of the operation?
3. Were there any adverse impacts or potential adverse impacts to the Waters of the State other than from a discharge?
Waste Collection & Treatment
4. Is storage capacity (freeboard plus storm storage) less than adequate? Spillway
�Structure 1 rtracttireo 2� Structure 3 Structure 4 Structure 5
Identifier: -� .....
Freeboard (inches): _
12112103 `aIn/a
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes j No
❑ Yes No
❑ Yes 10
Structure 6 �11
Continued

L
Facility Number: 41— Date of Inspection •
�. Are there any immediate threats to theogrity of any of the structures observed? (ie/ trees, severe erosion, ❑ Yes XNo
seepage, etc.)
6. Are there structures on -site which are not properly addressed and/or managed through a waste management or ❑ 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 XNo
8. Does any part of the waste management system other than waste structures require maintenance/improvement? ❑ Yes �io
9. Do any stuctures lack adequate, gauged markers with required maximum and minimum liquid level ❑ Yes YNO
elevation markings?
Waste Application
10. Are there any buffers that need maintenance/improvement? ❑ Yes I No
11. Is there evidence of over application? If yes, check the appropriate box below. ❑ Yes 00
❑ Excessive Ponding ❑ PAN ❑ Hydraulic Overload ❑ Frozen Ground [I Copper and/or Zinc ��''
a
12. Crop type
13. Do the receiving crops differ with those deli ated in the C fled 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 o
15. Does'the receiving crop need improvement? ❑ Yes o
16. Is there a lack of adequate waste application equipment? ❑ Yes krNo
Odor Issues
17. Does the discharge pipe from the confinement building to the storage pond or lagoon fail to discharge at/or below
liquid level of lagoon or storage pond with no agitation?
18. Are there any dead animals not disposed of properly within 24 hours? ❑ Yes KNo
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.
,.a__ ,....,.. -.___ •�j:-n.r..,. �5_, _ ,� _.,.._i.t�z.��r..x="
;Gorrients ,(refer:ta question #) Explaiin any YFS adwers and/or any iecamtneadatioas or, y�otizer comments.
Use dravvrngs pf factltty to better explain situations. use addtotsal'Pages rsecssary) Field COPY Final Notes
.',as
Q . fur Icy- re -se_+ e,5
P
(
Ito
T
PR
Reviewer/Inspector Name
Reviewer/Inspector Signature: Date:
12112103
i
Continued

Facility Number: — Date of Inspection
Required Records & Documents �/
21. Fail to have Certificate of Coverage & General Permit or other Permit readily available? El Yes LXNo
22. Does the facility fail to have all components of the Certified Animal Waste Management Plan readily available? %`
(it/ WUP, checklists, design, maps, etc.) ❑ Yes JNO
23. Doet; record keeping nee�PrGvement�Ws, if check the appro 'ate box below. ❑ Yes 'KNo
f Waste Application Freeboardste Analysis Soil Sampling
24. Is facility not in compliance with any applicable setback criteria in effect at the time of design? ❑ Yes No
25. Did the facility fail to have a actively certified operator in charge? ❑ Yes o
26. Fail to notify regional DWQ of emergency situations as required by General Permit?
(iel discharge, freeboard problems, over application) ❑ Yes No
27. Did Reviewer/Inspector fail to discuss review/inspection with on -site representative? ❑ Yes No
28. Does facility require a follow-up visit by same agency? ❑ Yes No
29. Were any additional problems noted which cause noncomph ice of the Certified AWMP? ❑ Yes No
NPDES Permitted Facilities
30. Is the facility covered under a NPDES Permit? (If no, skip questions 31-35) ❑ Yes XIS
o
31. If selected, did the facility fail to install and maintain rainbreakers on irrigation equipment? ❑ Yes ❑ No
32. Did the facility fail to install and maintain a rain gauge? ❑ Yes ❑ No
33. Did the facility fail to conduct an annual sludge survey? ❑ Yes ❑ No
34. Did the facility fail to calibrate waste application equipment? ❑ Yes ❑ No
35. Does record keeping for NPDES required forms need improvement? If yes, check the appropriate box below. ❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ Stocking Farm ❑ Crop Yield Form ❑ Rainfall ❑ Inspection After 1" Rain
eZ 120 Minute Inspections ❑ Annual Certification Form
LO No violations or deficiencies were noted during this visit. You will receive no further correspondence about this visit
ddmonal Conzrncnts and/arTiiwa tngs
TLC.-1 NL Lu(+- 2.
12112103

hnical Assistance Site Visit Repo
• DilWn of Soil and Water ConservatiorN
O Natural Resources Conservation Service
O Soil and Water Conservation District
O Other...
Facility Number 41 - ® Date: 128104 Time: 1 10"5 Time On Farm: 75 WSRO
Farm Name Oakmere Farms V. I. Bowman County Guilford Phone: [phone]
Mailing Address 8151 Spearman Road Brown Summit NC
Onsite
Representative Kelly Bowman Integrator
Type Of Visit Purpose Of Visit
® Operation Review
❑ Compliance Inspection (pilot only)
❑ Technical Assistance
❑ Confirmation for Removal
❑ No Animals -Date Last Operated:
❑ Operating below threshold
❑ Swine ❑ Poultry ® Cattle ❑ Horse
Design Current
Capacity Population
❑ Wean to Feeder
❑ Feeder to Finish
❑ Farrow to Wean
❑ Farrow to Feeder
❑ Farrow to Finish
❑ Gilts
❑ Boars
* 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
Capacity Population
❑ Layer
❑ Non -Layer
® Dairy
❑ Non -Dairy
* 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
Capacity Population
❑ Layer
❑ Non -Layer
® Dairy
❑ Non -Dairy
® Dairy
❑ Non -Dairy
2a0
216
❑ Other
27214
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 Primary Secondary
Level (Inches) 50 60IF
CROP TYPES Ismail grain silage lCorn, Silage Fescue -graze ISudan Grass Graze
SPRAYFIELD
SOIL TYPES CeB2
CcB
MaB
MhB2
7. What type of technical assistance does the onsite representative feel is needed? (list in comment section)
03/10/03

CI;
a
Facility Number 41 - 9 Date:
4128/04
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
El
El
❑ 11. Level in storm storage
26. Waste Plan Conditional Amendment
❑
❑
27. Review or Evaluate Waste Plan wlproducer
❑
❑
❑ 12. Waste structure integrity compromised
[113. Waste structure needs maintenance
28. Forms Need (list in comment section)
El
El
29. Missing Components (list in comments)
❑
❑
❑ 14. Over application >= 10% & 10 lbs.
❑
❑
❑ 15. Over application < 10% or < 10 lbs.
30. 21-11.0200 re -certification
❑ 16. Hydraulic overloading
31. Five & Thirty day Plans of Action (PoA)
❑
❑
32. Irrigation record keeping assistance
❑
❑
❑ 17. Deficient irrigation records
❑ 18. Late/missing waste analysis
33. Organ izelcomputerization of records
❑
❑
❑ 19. Late/missing lagoon level records
34. Sludge Evaluation
❑
❑
❑ 20. Late/missing soils analysis
E121. 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
®
❑
RegulatorV Referrals
41. Site evaluation
❑
❑
❑ Referred to DWQ Date:
42. Irrigation Calibration
❑
❑
❑ Referred to NCDA Date:
43. Irrigation designlinstallation
❑
❑
El Other...
system
Date:
44. Secure irrigation information (maps, etc.)
❑
❑
LIST IMPROVEMENTS
45. Operating improvements (pull signs, etc.)
❑
❑
MADE BY OPERATION
46. Wettable Acre Determination
❑
❑
1.
47. Evaluate WAD certification/rechecks
❑
❑
48. Crop evaluationlrecommendations
❑
❑
2.
49. Drainage work/evaluation
❑
❑
50. Land shaping, subsoiling, aeration, etc.
51. Runoff control, stormwater diversion, etc.
❑
❑
❑
El3
52. Buffer improvements
❑
❑
53. Field measurements(GPS, surveying, etc.)
❑
❑
4.
54. Mortality BMPs
❑
❑
55. Waste operator education (NPDES)
❑
El5.
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 Date: 4128104
MMENTS:
Waste analysis: 12-16-03 LSDS 6.9 Ibs.N11000 gals. B
The last soil samples were dated 12-13-03.
The facility and records look good. Good farm.
Mr. Bowman requested that the marker be reset on the lower waste pond.
TECHNICAL SPECIALIST Rocky Durham I Millie Langley
SIGNATURE
Date Entered: 130104
Entered By:
lRocky Durham
3
03/10/03

r
rvision of Water Quality
vision 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
Dale of Vkil: 09l22/2003 Time: t015
Facility Number 41 09
0 Not Operational 0 Below Threshold
Permitted E Certified .[3 Conditionally Certified [3 Registered pate Last Operated or Above "Threshold:
Farm Name: ............................................. County: Cuilfard --------------- ................. WSW ......
Owner Name: Y.it- - - - - ---------- �flyYroa3til- - - - - - - --- _.- -•-- Phone No: 3Cr654_�25 - - - --------------
Mailing Address: 815.1. sty rman..ft�ad........................................................................ AwnIK.SUMU)IL-N.C............................................. ZU1.4...............
Facility Contact: KA11X.0QWM;1U....................................Title:............................................... Phone No: CIZ117336,215,9293...........
Onsite Representative: K¢UJL�Q]YQ13R ---_-_--- Integrator: --------------------------------------____-•
Certified Operator: KCII,XN.................................. H.O.W. wa........................................... Operator Certification Number:".3.09 .............................
Location of Farm:
From WSRO: NC Hwy 150 east towards Brown Summit. Left onto Spearman Rd. Farm is on right.
❑ Swine ❑ Poultry ® Cattle ❑ Horse Latitude 3b ' 14 30 Longitude
Design Current
Swine Capacity Ponulation
❑ Wean to Feeder
❑ Feeder to Finish
❑ Farrow to Wean
❑ Farrow to Feeder
❑ Farrow to Finish
❑ Gilts
❑ Boars
Design Current Design Current
Poultry Capacity Population Cattle Capacity Population
❑ Layer ® Dairy 240 230
❑ Non -Layer 10 Non -Dairy
❑ Other
Total Design Capacity 240
Total SSLW 336,000
Number of Lagoons ® ❑Subsurface Drains Present ❑Lagoon Area ❑ Spray Field Area
Holding Ponds / Solid Traps 1 '_-J ❑ No Liquid Waste Management System
Discharttes & Stream Impacts
1. Is any discharge observed from any part of the operation? ❑ Yes ® No
Discharge originated at: ❑ Lagoon ❑ Spray Field ❑ Other
a. I f 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. Ifdischarge is observed, what is the estimated flow in gal/min?
d. Doss discharge bypass a lagoon system? (Il-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: _ilµp�r. tage.__...._Lowtx_S1a&e ---- ...._._---•--•--•--•--•---•--•--•--•--•----.................................... ...............
Freeboard (inches): 6 8
05103101 'Kf17! 0 t!�"� Continued

Facility Number: 41-09 Datc of Inspection 09/22/2003
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?
d . $
❑ Yes
® No
❑ Yes
® No
❑ Yes
® No
❑ Yes
® No
® Yes
[]No
Waste Application
10. Are there any buffers that need maintenance/improvement? []Yes ❑ No
11. Is there evidence of over application? ❑ Excessive Ponding ❑ PAN ❑ Hydraulic Overload ❑ Yes ® No
12. Crop type Fescue (Graze) Corn (Silage & Grain) Small Grain (Wheat, Barley, Sudex (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
Reuuired
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
[3 No violations or deficiencies were noted during this visit. You will receive no further correspondence about this visit.
tGomments (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
4. Could not tell if waste was over max, liquid mark due to discrepancy in marker.
_
9. Need to have marker height checked. Short PVC pipe is still showing 3 inches but could not see marks on the taller PVC pipe. Need
to permanently mark max. liquid level on tall pipe. Would be helpful if the spillway was also designated on the tall pipe.
19. Don't forget to take 2003 soil samples.
13. and 25. Tract/fields 5508-1 a and I b and 5479-10 received waste on sudan hay in July 2003. This crop was not listed in the WUP and
needs to be added as soon as possible. Also need to include months of application and allowable PAN.
25. Pull #3 received waste on oat hay in March 2003. WUP only lists "grass hay." Need to specify types of grasses.
w
Reviewer/Inspector Name 11V[014 a Rosebrock
Reviewerllnspector Signature: ', /, Date: h
05103101
Continued

Facility Number: 41-09 1 6
of Inspection 09/22/2003
Odor Issues
26. Does the discharge pipe from the confinement building to the storage pond or lagoon fail to discharge at/or below
liquid level of lagoon or storage pond with no agitation?
27. Are there any dead animals not disposed of properly within 24 hours?
28. Is there any evidence of wind drift during land application? (i.e. residue on neighboring vegetation, asphalt,
roads, building structure, and/or public property)
29. Is the land application spray system intake not located near the liquid surface of the lagoon?
30. Were any major maintenance problems with the ventilation fan(s) noted? (i.e. broken fan belts, missing or
or broken fan blade(s), inoperable shutters, etc.)
31. Do the animals feed storage bins fail to have appropriate cover?
32. Do the flush tanks lack a submerged fill pipe or a permanent/temporary cover?
is
14/03 Waste analyses: Lipper = 5.8 and Lower = 0.93 lbs. N/1000 gal,
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes ❑ No
for has not done any additional construction on freshwater pond .since last year. Check next visit. DWQ ,spoke with SWCD
the possible need for a 403 permitfrom the Corps of Engineers for construction.
.&I
O5103101

0 16 qm
■
Division of Water Quality
Division of Soil and Water Conservation
0 Other Agency
Type of Visit 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 Date of Visit: i2 0 Time:
'� - - --
Permitted %r Certified 0 Conditionally Certified 0 Registered Date last Operated/for Above Thresh Id'
Farm Name: 4� JLl ILM a-IrP— �LL 4�1� County: C n
Owner Name: ZF • Q i_yrYi U U Phone No:
114ailing Address: _ I! SA l P CU` c� 1� 1 �ra.(i� �U (y1(1�i! �^ l/U 7.2'
Y[ �i I
Facility Contact: Title: / Phone No: �� • �� �O • 7 I `tqZ
OnOte Representative:--4{►#egrxrfer ! r`t� i 1 U �� l\ _ h3
�! f
Certified Operator: lhQU�mn _ Operator Certification Number: O
Location of Farm:
�_ /,TO as4 . Nore_ , US Htoj `,�q, -FL; rin I e 4 on f o j-
❑ Swine ❑ Poultry *Cattle— ❑ Horse Latitude 3 ' ®4 46 Longitude ®0 ®1 11
Design Current Design Current Design Current
Swine Capacit Population
❑ Wean to Feeder
❑ Feeder to Finish
❑ Farrow to Wean
❑ Farrow to Feeder
❑ Farrow to Finish
❑ Gilts
❑ Boars
Poultry Capacity Population Cattle Capacity Population
❑ Layer I I Dairy
❑ Non -La cr I I Non -Dairy
❑ Other
Total Design Capacity >-
Total SSLW -A /_ . nn n
I t Number of Lagoons ❑ Subsurface Drains Present ❑ La oon Area ❑ Spray Field Area I
Holding Ponds 1 Solid Traps ❑ No Liquid Waste Manage ent 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 ycs, notify DWQ)
c. If discharge is observed, what is the estimated flow in gal/min?
d. Does discharge bypass a lagoon system'? (Ifyes, notify DWQ)
2. Is there evidence of past discharge from any part of the operation?
3. Were there any adverse impacts or potential adverse impacts to the Waters of the State other than from a discharge?
Waste Collection & "Treatment
4. Is storage capacity (freeboard plus storm storage) less than adequate? Spillway
Structure I Structure__ 2 Structure 3 Structure 4 Structure 5
Identifier:
Freeboard (inches):
05103101
❑ Yes XNo
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes
❑ No
❑ Yes
X.,No
❑ Yes
x No
❑ Yes
❑ No
Structure 6
Continued
4
�A-

0
Facility Number: q— Date of Inspection
5. Are there env immediate threats to the integrity of any of the structures observed? (iel trees, severe erosion,
[] Yeso
XN
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?
ill Yes
❑ No
Waste Application
T`
10. Are there any buffers that need maintenance/improvement?
❑ Yes
No
11. Is there evidene of r applicatio ? ❑ Excessive Ponding ❑ PAN ❑ Hydraulic Overload
❑ Yes
No
12. Crop typo —Al"
13. Do the re wing crops differ with those designated in the Certified A mal Waste Management Plan (CAR'MP)�
❑ Yes
No
14. a) Does the facility lack adequate acreage for land application?
❑ Yes
No
b) Does the facilit<° 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
�KNo
18. Does the facility fail to have all components of the Certified Animal Waste Management Plan readily available?
9No
(W IX'UP. checklists. design, maps, etc.) , / l / VI/
❑ Yes
19. Does record keeping need improvement? (iel irrigation, freeboard, waste analysis & soil sample reports)
❑ Yes
�5 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 D4VQ of emergency situations as required by General Permit?
(ic' discharge. freeboard problems, over application)
❑Yes
No
23. Did Reviewer/Inspector fail to discuss review/inspection with on -site representative?
❑ Yes
o
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
gNo
�❑ No violations or deficiencies were noted during this visit. You will receive no further correspondence about this visit.
+' ..rY'• .a�^.' IN":,.�5'. - - i -...i°w=�r ,--....rr�tiw r ''& �. -,-
Cornments'{refer fo question : 'E*lam any'YES answers'and/or.any recommendations or auv.other coiiiments.. 4
Use drawings of facility to better explain situations. (use additional pages as necessary).Field Copy El Final Notes MTM
.nal � —a�e •% P �:
Dq0 6? fv\ 3 i't
oK- � w--
er/Inspector Name
FRe,iewer/Inspector
Sigttaturei�� /J a Date:
' `
O5103101 i t {
Continued

❑ Yes o
❑ Yes o
❑ Yes o
❑ Yes o
(54
6311
0
•
Facility Number: 41 —�Jj Date of Inspection o� }
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?
ACIUMOnat Uomments analor urawings:
Ke-uD -�esl-, u�a+8. pond 7 41,e Ax��
6kx4UAA�4i4iA� --
-k4co.
AQ
�l � 1 r♦ +� 1
4 ,
r
q/t 41°3 ufPe, = e-.<g L-°(Aa� o A 3
0510.3101

t ~
' Technical Assistance Site Visit
DAWn of Soil and Water ConservatiorM
Natural Resources Conservation Service
Soil and Water Conservation District
Other...
Facility Number 41 - ® Date: 11103 Time: 1 9:25 1 Time On Farm: 90 WSRO
Farm Name Oakmere Farms V. I. Bowman
County Guilford Phone: [phone]
Mailing Address 8151 Spearman Road Brown Summit NC 27214
Onsite
Representative Kelly Bowman Integrator
Type Of Visit
Operation Review
Compliance Inspection (pilot only)
Technical Assistance
Confirmation for Removal
❑ No Animals -Date Last Operated:
❑ Operating below threshold
❑ Swine ❑ Poultry ® Cattle ❑ Horse
Design Current
Capacity Population
❑ Wean to Feeder
❑ Feeder to Finish
❑ Farrow to Wean
❑ Farrow to Feeder
❑ Farrow to Finish
❑ Gilts
❑ Boars
Purpose Of Visit
OO Routine
O Response to DWQIDENR referral
O Response to DSWCISWCD referral
O Response to complaint/local referral
O Requested by producer/integrator
O Follow-up
O Emergency
O Other...
Design Current
Canacitv Ponulation
❑ Layer
❑ Non -Layer
® Dairy
❑ Non -Dairy
Purpose Of Visit
OO Routine
O Response to DWQIDENR referral
O Response to DSWCISWCD referral
O Response to complaint/local referral
O Requested by producer/integrator
O Follow-up
O Emergency
O Other...
Design Current
Canacitv Ponulation
❑ Layer
❑ Non -Layer
® Dairy
❑ Non -Dairy
® Dairy
❑ Non -Dairy
240
210
❑ Other
GENERAL QUESTIONS:
1. Is waste discharging from any part of the operation and reaching surface waters or wetlands? ❑ yes ® no
2. Is there evidence of a past waste discharge from any part of the operation that waste reached ❑ yes ® no
surface waters or wetlands?
3. Does any problem pose an immediate threat to the integrity of the waste structure (large trees, ❑ yes ® no
seepage, severe erosion, etc.)?
4. Is there evidence of nitrogen over application, hydraulic overloading or excessive ponding ❑ yes ® no
requiring DWQ notification?
6- Is there evidence of improper dead animal disposal that poses a threat to the environment ❑ yes ® no
andlor 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 Primary Secondary
Level (inches) 40 12
CROP TYPES mall Grain corn, Silage Fescue -graze
SPRAYFIELD
SOIL TYPES Ce132 ccB
7. What type of technical assistance does the onsite representative feel is needed? (list in comment section)
1 03/10/03

L 1
a
Facility Number 41 - 9 Date:
411103
PARAMETER
0 No assistance provided/requested
[18. 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
El
El❑
[111. Level in storm storage
26. Waste Plan Conditional Amendment
❑
❑
27. Review or Evaluate Waste Plan wlproducer
❑
❑
❑ 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. 2H.0200 re -certification
❑ 16. Hydraulic overloading
31. Five & Thirty day Plans of Action (PoA)
❑
❑
32. Irrigation record keeping assistance
❑
❑
❑ 17. Deficient irrigation records
❑ 18. Late/missing waste analysis
33. Organize/computerization of records
❑
❑
❑ 19. Late/missing lagoon level records
34. Sludge Evaluation
❑
❑
❑ 20. Late/missing soils analysis
❑ 21. Crop needs improvement
35. Sludge or Closure Plan
❑
❑
❑ 22. Crop inconsistent with waste plan
36. Sludge removal/closure procedures
❑
❑
37. Waste Structure Evaluation
❑
❑
❑ 23. Irrigation maintenance deficiency
❑ 24. Deficient sprayfield conditions
38. Structure Needs Improvement
❑
❑
39. Operation & Maintenance Improvements
❑
❑
40. Marker check/calibration
❑
❑
Regulatory Referrals
41. Site evaluation
❑
❑
❑ Referred to DWQ Date:
42. Irrigation Calibration
❑
❑
❑ Referred to NCDA Date:
43. Irrigation design/installation
❑
❑
El Other...
system
Date:
44. Secure irrigation information (maps, etc.)
❑
❑
LIST IMPROVEMENTS
45. Operating improvements (pull signs, etc.)
❑
❑
MADE BY OPERATION
❑
❑
46. Wettable Acre Determination
1
47. Evaluate WAD certificationlrechecks
❑
❑
48. Crop evaluationlrecommendations
❑
❑
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)
❑
�'
56. Operation & maintenance education
❑
❑
57. Record keeping education
❑
❑
6
58. Croplforage management education
❑
❑
59. Soil and/or waste sampling education
❑
❑
03/10/03

Facility Number 41 - Date: 4/1103
ENTS:
'aste analysis: 10-30-02 LSD 6.4 Ibs.N./1000 gals. B
Mr. Bowman called in a high Freeboard level to the DENR, Division of water quality, in the Winston-Salem regional office.
Mr. Bowman has recently lowered the waste pond levels by irrigation and is beginning to pump and haul today. The
:eboard level reflected above is below the spillway of the lower waste pond.
Talked to Mr. Bowman about some of the proposed requirements of the new State cattle waste permit. Mr. Bowman has
:nt in his permit application.
TECHNICAL SPECIALIST Rocky Durham 1 Fil-rie Langley
SIGNATURE
Date Entered: /7/03 Entered By: lRocky Durham
3 03/10/03

1 N
vision of Water Quality
vision 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 Q Complaint Q Follow up O Emergency Notification O Other ❑ Denied Access
Date of Visit: 10/28/2402 'Tillie: 1300
Facility Number 41 09
FO Nat Operational 0 Below Threshold
® Permitted ® Certified 13 Conditionally Certified 0 Registered Date Last Operated or Above Threshold: .........................
Farm Name: Qalcna�xQ. axr>Us.Y .h. a�rnna�n............................................................ County: G.U11ford ............................................ MRA........
OwnerName: Y..L........................................... D.Q.WJU8jn ..................................................... Phone No: 6S.6r S.2.C....................................................................
Mailing Address:&a,51.Spg0xMala.RQAd........................................................................ 13KQW.Q.$MMMit...NC............................................ 27214...
Facility Contact: KRRAY.B.Q.W}:tX1a,11............................................... Title: ................................................................
� Phone No: 33.6,,65.6j.4'5.2 .......................
Onsite Representative: Rdly..Dommam.................. . Integrator: t -[ � ,.+. 4[.. -.... `Alt_..11_ni3
r... ...................
Certified Operator:,)llx.yr................................. UluMAR .......................................... Operator Certification Number: 2,13.OQ.............................
Location of Farm:
From WSRO: NC Hwy 150 east towards Brown Summit. Left onto Spearman Rd. Farm is on right. +
❑ Swine ❑ Poultry ® Cattle ❑ Horse Latitude 36 • 14 6 3066 Longitude 79 • 44 1 5544
Design Current
Swine Canacity Ponulation
❑ Wean to Feeder
❑ Feeder to Finish
❑ Farrow to Wean
❑ Farrow to Feeder
❑ Farrow to Finish
❑ Gilts
❑ Boars
Design Current Design Current
Poultry Capacity Population Cattle Capacity Population
❑ Layer ®Dairy 240 210
❑ Non -Layer ❑ Non -Dairy
❑ Other
Total Design Capacity 240
Total SSLW 336,000
Number of Lagoons ® ❑ Subsurface Drains Present ❑ Lagoon Area ❑ Spray Field Arca
Holding Ponds / Solid Traps 0 10 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 Dr potential adverse impacts to the Waters of the State other than from a discharge.
Waste Collection & Treatment
4. Is storage capacity (freeboard plus storm storage) less than adequate? ® Spillway
Structure 1 Structure 2 Structure 3 Structure 4 Structure 5
Identifier: ......i.lpper.staga..... .... .Lou=. Stage............................................................................................................... ......
Freeboard (inches): 66 72
05103101
.

Facility Number: 41-09 0 Dale of Inspection 10/28/2002 1 0
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?
❑ Yes
® No
❑ Yes
® No
❑ Yes
® No
❑ Yes
® No
❑ Yes
® No
Waste Application
10. Are there any buffers that need maintenancelimprovement? ❑ Yes IN No
11. Is there evidence of over application? ❑ Excessive Ponding ❑ PAN ❑ Hydraulic Overload ❑ Yes ® No
12. Crop type Corn (Silage & Grain) Small Grain (Wheat, Barley,
13. Do the receiving crops differ with those designated in the Certified Animal Waste Management Plan (CAWMP)? ❑ Yes ® No
14.' a) Does the facility lack adequate acreage for land application? ❑ Yes ® No
b) Does the facility need a wettable acre determination? ❑ Yes ® No
c) This facility is pended for a wettable acre determination? ❑ Yes ® No
15.
Does the receiving crop need improvement?
[]Yes
® No
16.
Is there a lack of adequate waste application equipment?
❑ Yes
® No
Required Records & Documents
17.
Fail to have Certificate of Coverage & General Permit or other Permit readily available?
❑ Yes
® No
18.
Does the facility fail to have all components of the Certified Animal Waste Management Plan readily available?
(iel WUP, checklists, design, maps, etc.)
❑ Yes
® No
19.
Does record keeping need improvement? (ie/ irrigation, freeboard, waste analysis & soil sample reports)
❑ Yes
® No
20.
is facility not in compliance with any applicable setback criteria in effect at the time of design?
❑ Yes
® No
21.
Did the facility fail to have a actively certified operator in charge?
❑ Yes
® No
22.
Fail to notify regional DWQ of emergency situations as required by General Permit?
(ie/ discharge, freeboard problems, over application)
❑ Yes
® No
23.
Did Reviewer/Inspector fail to discuss review/inspection with on -site representative?
❑ Yes
® No
24.
Does facility require a follow-up visit by same agency?
❑ Yes
® No
25.
Were any additional problems noted which cause noncompliance of the Certified AWMP?
❑ Yes
® No
0 No violations or deficiencies were noted during this visit. You will receive no further correspondence about this visit.
Comments (refer to question #): Explain any YES answers and/or any recommendations or any other comments. ;
'Us e drawings of facility to better explain situations. (use additional pages as necessary}: ❑Field Copy ® Final Notes
19. Still need to take 2002 soil samples by the end of the year, October 2002 waste sample result not back yet. Need to catch up the
_
SLUR- 1I forms when the sample comes back.
Operator is planning on digging out a 0.5 acre freshwater pond between heifer barn and new development. Wants to start digging out
next Summer. No dam will be needed. Will use fill dirt to fill in the low areas on other slopes and plans to grade and seed slopes. Pond
to be no more than 8' deep. Will be about 200' long.
Reviewer/Inspector Name �Meli Rosekrock' —�
Reviewer/Inspector Signature Date: ff2
05103101 v r Continued

Facility Number. 41_09 1 16)f Inspection 10/28/2002 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
.J
J
05103101

1PM
Division of Water Quality
Division of Soil sfld"Water Cbnservation
O Other Agency ,
Type of Visit Compliance Inspection O Operation Review O Lagoon Evaluation
Reason for Visit Routine Q Complaint O Fallow up O Emergency Notification O Other ❑ Denied Access
(late of Visit: d- T Time: I
Facility Number
Not Operational 0 Below Threshold
0 Permitted OCertified [3 Conditionally Certified ❑ Registered Date Last Operated r Above Threshold:
Farm Name: CAL M6re, 9� r M514]r Row ' A n iel County: U) I -lord
Owner Name: _- V + 17 Phone No:
1 .SLR r iro - ��romno�
Mailing Address: -, '�//�
Facility Contact: Title: Phone No: 6. 7 ` ss-�
Onsite Representative: j Integrator:
Certified Operator: , _jze ilq Bn to ma o Operator Certification Number: ���
Location of Farm:
From k_),Se6 : NC 140 4.ea5f s o �S S m' 7�a !e k
_Onfa gar rn w um i r n 15 on rr hi
❑ Swine ❑ Poultry Cattle ❑ Horse Latitude I Longitude ®'
Design Current
Design Current
Design Current
Swine Capacity Population
Poultry
Ca acity Population Cattle
Capacity Pa ulation
❑ Wean to Feeder
❑ Laver
Dairy
❑ Feeder to Finish
❑Non -Laver
Non -Dairy
i
❑ Farrow to Wean
❑ Farrow to Feeder
❑ Other
❑ Farrow to Finish
Total Design Capacity
a Q
❑ Gilts
Total SSLW
(p TOO
❑ Boars
Number of Lagoons ® 10 Subsurface Drains Present ❑ La o0o Area ❑ Spray Field Area
HoldingPonds I Solid Traps 11�� J
p ❑ No Liquid Waste Management System
Discharees & Stream Impacts
I. Is any discharge observed from any part of the operation? ❑ Yes No
Discharge originated at: ❑ Lagoon ❑ Sprav Field ❑ Other
a. If discharge is observed, was the conveyance man-made? ❑ Yes ❑ No
b. If discharge is observed, did it reach Water of the State? (If yes, notify DWQ) El Yes ❑ No
c. If discharge is observed. what is the estimated flow in gallmin?
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?
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes No
❑ Yes N0
Waste Collection & Treatment
4. Is storage capacity (freeboard plus storm storage) less than adequate? 0Spillway ❑ Yes No
Structure Structure _ , Structure 3 Structure 4 Structure S Structure 6
Identifier: LL-A1.
vole—
Freeboard (inches). tT
0$103101 Continued

Facility Number: Date of Inspection
5. Are there any immediate threats to the integrity of any of the structures observed? (ie/ trees, severe erosion,
seepage, etc.)
6. Are there structures on -site which are not properly addressed and/or managed through a waste management or
closure plan?
(If any of questions 4-6 was answered yes, and the situation poses an
immediate public health or environmental threat, notify DWQ)
7. Do any of the structures need maintenance/improvement?
8. Does any 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
A_ w 0,1 _ A A _ 0
12. Crop type y
13. Do the receiving crops differ with those d ignated in the Certified
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?
1 Waste Management Plan (CAWMP)?
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?
19. Does the facility fail to have all components of the Certified Animal Was Management Plan readily available?
(ie/ WUP, checklists, design, maps, etc.)
19. Does record keeping need improvement? (ie/ irrigation, freeboard, wa to 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 XNo
❑ Yes �, No
❑ Yes ZNo
❑ Yes XNo
❑ Yes �_<
No
❑ Yes o
❑ Yes 1!No
❑ Yes No
❑ Yes No
El Yes
❑ Yes jVNo
❑ Yes XNo
❑ Yes No
❑ Yes No
❑ Yes �No
❑ Yes No
❑ Yes R<o
❑ Yes No
❑ Yes 4,No
❑ Yes No
❑ 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 Canv ❑ Final Notes._
1 q. tf 4,k4p 200a-
6/�_ e
Reviewer/Inspector Name l
ReviewerAnspector Signature: Date: dvZ�
05103101 j r Continued

n
Facility Number: —An I
0 0
Date of Inspection
Qdor Issues
26. Does the discharge pipe from the confinement building to the storage pond or lagoon fail to discharge at/or below
liquid level of lagoon or storage pond with no agitation?
27. Are there any dead animals not disposed of properly within 24 hours?
28. Is there any evidence of wind drift during land application? (i.e. residue on neighboring vegetation, asphalt,
roads, building structure, and/or public property)
29, Is the land application spray system intake not located near the liquid surface of the lagoon?
30. Were any major maintenance problems with the ventilation fan(s) noted? (i.e. broken fan belts, missing or
or broken fan blade(s), inoperable shutters, etc.)
3 t. 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`?
Additional Comments and/or Drawings:
o
el-IJ a--%
-J�-46�'t J*,�X4 �*,� 4u�
11 a dam,, u,��O� 1 u� �v cc�P �✓p�t
❑ Yes No
❑ Yes No
1q. Ud A-ek&I-)AIP �5&1)
4-�Tl #-)l
05103101 ��,t�,Q��� 73� 5 o a,3

vision of Water Quality
vision of Soil and Water Conservation
O Other Agency
Type of Visit O Compliance Inspection O. Operation Review O Lagoon Evaluation
Reason for Visit O Routine O Complaint O Follow up O Emergency Notification O Other ❑ Denied Access
Facility Number
Dale ul' Visit:
4/1R/2002 'I'imc: 15:15
41 9
O Not Operational O Below Threshold
® Permitted ® Certified [3 Conditionally Certified © Registered Date Last Operated or Above Threshold: .........................
Farm Name: ............................................................ County: Guilford ........................................... WS[3Q........
Owner Name: V„L........................................... jbwmarl........................
Mailing Address: 8j51.5.Pvajr n0iQ.RQad.............................................
Facility Contact: ..............................................................................Title:
Onsite Representative: Belly.AOy.KJI11,an........................
...................
Certified Operator. Kpjjy..V...................... ... I3Qtlt...........
Location of Farm:
.. Phone No: 656-352.6.............
Bro.Y! ll.ril,AIX117111.t...N.0................
Phone No:.......
................... Integrator:
2.7.214..............
.................. Operator Certification Number: Z1309.............................
arm is approx. 1 mile N. off NC 150 on Spearman Rd. on right. A
❑ Swine ❑ Poultry ® Cattle El Horse Latitude 36 • 14 30 Longitude 79 • 44 & 55 «
Design Current
Swine CaDacity 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 I 1 ® Dairy 240 210
❑ Non -Layer I Non -Dairy
❑ Other
Total Design Capacity 240
Total SSLW 336,000
Number of Lagoons 1 -1 JE1 Subsurface Drains Present 110 Lagoon Area ❑ Spray Field Area
Holding Ponds / Solid Traps 12 ❑ No Liquid Waste Management System
Discharues & 'ram Impacts
1. Is any discharge observed from any part of the operation? ❑ Yes ® No
Discharge originated at: ❑ Lagoon ❑ Spray Field ❑ Other
a. If discharge is observed, was the conveyance man-made? ❑ Yes ❑ No
b. If discharge is observed, did it reach Water of the State'? (If yes. notify DWQ) ❑ Yes ❑ No
c. If discharge is observed, what is the estimated flow in gal/min?
d. Does discharge bypass a lagoon system'? (If yes. notify DWQ) ❑ Yes [:]No
2. Is there evidence of past discharge from any part of the operation? ❑ Yes ® No
3. Were there any adverse impacts or potential adverse impacts to the Waters of the State other than from a discharge? ❑ Yes ® No
Waste Collection & Treatment
4. Is storage capacity (freeboard plus storm storage) less than adequate? ® Spillway ❑ Yes ® No
Structure I Structure 2 Structure 3 Structure 4 Structure 5 Structure 6
Identifier: ...... Upper..W.SP...... .....Lctwrr,WSP............................
Freeboard (inches): 30 24
05103101 Continued

Facility Number: 41-9 is Date of Inspection 4118/2002 is
5. Are there any immediate threats to the integrity of any of the structures observed? (ie/ trees, severe erosion,
seepage, etc.)
6. Are there structures on -site which are not properly addressed and/or managed through a waste management or
closure plan?
(If any of questions 4-6 was answered yes, and the situation poses an
immediate public health or environmental threat, notify DWQ)
7. Do any of the structures need maintenance/improvement?
8. Does any part of the waste management system other than waste structures require maintenance/improvement?
9. Do any'stuctures lack adequate, gauged markers with required maximum and minimum liquid level
elevation markings?
Waste Application
10. Are there any buffers that need maintenance/improvement?
❑ Yes
IN No
❑ Yes
® No
❑ Yes
® No
❑ Yes
® No
❑ Yes
® No
❑ Yes
® No
11. Is there evidence of over application? ❑ Excessive Ponding ❑ PAN ❑ Hydraulic Overload ❑ Yes ® No
12. Crop type Small Grain (Wheat, Barley, 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
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 IN No
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes ® No
0 No violations or deficiencies were noted during this visit. You will receive no further correspondence about this visit.
o�mmm nts (refer to 'question D- Explain any YES answers and/or any recommendations or any other comments.
I1${,ryU'se drawingsof facility to better explain situations. (use additional pages as necessary): ❑ Field Copy ®Final Notes
Facility and records are in compliance.
_
Mr. Bowman has not had to irrigate waste since the Spring of 2001. Mr. Bowman will pump the lower pond back to the upper pond to be
able to mix solids more thoroughly.
Ld
Reviewer/lnspector Name ;Rocky Durham
Reviewer/Inspector Signature: Date:
05103101 Continued

Facility Number: 41-9 1) )f Inspection 4/18/2002
- 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 ari .nor rawmgs:, . t:
Waste analysis: 11-01-01 ALD 8.2 lbs.N/1000 gals. B
Soil analysis dated 1-18-02. Two samples were calling for one or more tons of lime per acre. Mr. Bowman applied lime to these
fields.
05103101

'0
iyision of Water Quality.:
iyision of Soil and Water°Conservation
ther Agency
Type of Visit O Compliance inspection O Operation Review O Lagoon Evaluation
Reason for Visit *Routine O Complaint O Follow up O Emergency Notification O Other ❑ Denied Access
Facility Number 4] 09 Date or visit: 9/14/2001 Time: 1010 Printed on: 9/14/2001
o rho Q �•rmobalw,
® Permitted ® Certified 0 Conditionally Certified ❑ Registered Date Last Operated or Above Threshold:. ... ... .:.... ............ .
Fsrr�lWutttrr_-Qultit r� no y �.Rtrtvttlatt "Way; 4r941014._.....................:............_ WSA-0
OwnerName:Y.J........................................... RQW.Majo ..................................................... Phone No: ?r.�S.fi, 2��.................. ......... ................................
Mailing Address:U54.5mairantautAwd....................................................................... Biro m.5mmmitAK........................................... 2.7.2,14 ..............
Facility Contact: Kelly..BiA1Y.Man............................................... Title:...:........................:................................... Phone Nfl: 33.&65.6,145.2 ......................
Onsite Representative: Mly-13UY.KJtT am........................................................................... Integrator:......................................................................................
Certified Operator:&lly........................................ Bom man,.......................................... Operator Certification Number.2,13.09 .............................
Location of Farm:
farm is approx. 1 mile N. off NC 150 on Spearman Rd. on right. +
w
❑ Swine ❑ Poultry ® Cattle ❑ Horse Latitude 3b • 14 & 30 <l Longitude 79 ' 44 { 55 44
Design Current
Swine Canacity Ponulation
❑ Wean to Feeder
❑ Feeder to Finish
❑ Farrow to Wean
❑ Farrow to Feeder
❑ Farrow to Finish
❑ Gilts
❑ Boars
Design Current Design Current
Poultry Capacity Population Cattle Capacity Population
❑ Layer I I ro
Dairy 240 ❑ Non -Layer Non -Dairy
❑ Other
Total Design Capacity 240
Total SSLW 1 336,000
Number of Lagoons 0 ❑ Subsurface Drains Present 110 Lagoon Area 10 Spray Fiel[1 Area
Holding Ponds / Solid Traps L� ❑ No Liquid Waste Management System
Discharecs & Strygm Im ac
1. Is any discharge observed from any part of the operation? ❑ Yes ® No
Discharge originated at: ❑ Lagoon ❑ Spray Field 0 Other
a. If discharge is observed, was the conveyance man-made'? ❑ Yes ❑ No
b. If discharge is observed, did it reach Wetter of the State`? (If yes, notify DWQ) ❑ Yes ❑ No
c. It'discharge is observed, what is the estimated flow in gal/Hein?
d. Does discharge bypass a lagoon system? (If yes, notify DWQ) ❑ Yes ❑ No
2. is there evidence of past discharge from any pan 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: ..... Upper -Stage ..... .....Lower..Stage................................. .................................................................................................................
Freeboard (inches): 16 39
05103101 h��2 3 / ontinued

Facility Number: 41-09 is Date of Inspection 9/14/2001 Printed on: 9/14/2001
5. Are there any immediate threats to the integrity of any of the structures observed? Oe/ trees, vere erosion, ❑ Yes ® No
seepage, etc.)
6. Are there structures on -site which are not properly addressed and/or managed through a waste management or
closure plan? ❑Yes ®No
(If any of questions 4-6 was answered yes, and the situation poses an
immediate public health or environmental threat, notify DWQ)
7. Do any of the structures need maintenance/improvement? ❑ Yes ® No
8. Does any part of the waste management system other than waste structures require maintenance/improvement? (aYes J&No
9. Do any stuctures lack adequate,.gauged markers with required maximum and minimum liquid level
elevation markings? ❑ Yes ' ® No
10. Are there any buffers that need maintenance/improvement? ❑ Yes 0 No
1. Is there evidence of over application? ❑ Excessive Ponding ❑ PAN ❑ Hydraulic Overload ❑ Yes ® No
12. Crop type Corn (Silage & Grain) Small Grain (Wheat, Barley,
13. Do the receiving crops differ with those designated in the Certified Animal Waste Management Plan (CAWMP)? ❑ Yes ® No
14. a) Does the facility lack adequate acreage for land application? ❑ Yes ® No
b) Does the facility need a wettable acre determination? ❑ Yes ® No
c) This facility is pended for a wettable acre determination? ❑ Yes ® No
15. Does the receiving crop need improvement?
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/] n spector fail to discuss review/inspection with on -site representative?
24. Does facility require a follow-up visit by same agency?
25. Were any additional problems noted which cause noncompliance of the Certified AWMP?
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes ® No
® No violations or deficiencies were noted during this visit. You will receive no further correspondence about this visit.
Commie y(referto qi estioii #.)::a n an )JES answers arild/o racy rec nndns�yoranyoA the r co m nts
Use drawingsofifacility to better explain situations. (use additional a es,as necessar ,)�
,. -, P., ,..,,.�.y f ❑ Field Copy ® Final Notes
4. Upper waste storage pond is staged so that overflow from upper, travels by gravity into lower waste storage pond. Upper WSP has
adequate storage capacity.
Records and operation look real good?
w
Reviewer/Inspector Name 'Melissa Rosebrock
Reviewer/Inspector Signature: Date: a
05103101 Continued

Facility Number: 41-09 I] of Inspection 9/1A/2001
Printed on: 9/14/2001
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 19 No
Q Yes Q No
❑ Yes 09,No
[:[Yes. Qhlo.
❑ Yes ❑ No
J
05103101

Division of Water Q,a
IN
Division of Soil and.Water Conservation
3 :"
�pM •
Q Other Agency
. 1. a ,
. - ..' � , a x..
t g` r, •� i . _ �
? � e. J<
Type of Visit IQ Compliance Inspection O Operation Review Q Lagoon Evaluation
Reason for Visit 40 Routine O Complaint O Follow up O Emergency Notification O Other 1 ❑ Denied Access
Facility Number Date of Visit: Time:
Q Not Operational Q Below Threshold
Permitted qCertified 13 Conditionally Certified © Registered Date Last OperI.,
r Above Threshold:
.........................
Farm Name: ....v..�..... �. ill } .l.li'... �,� . �rf .j li County:...�.L.l�?......f....................................................
111, 0 � � /_ / I_ . 3 c- �
Owner Name:.....ifJ....j�....wl may) .......................................................................... Phone No:...,f':...LP..:5k...........a........�.........`..,......
Facility Contact: .......►.`.1Q:..Ll j. ........Y.:.....BNO .0 Title:................................................................ Phone No: :.. `+rcA; 7 4S-01-
Mailing Address:..... g1.s.I..........Spw, ..r-n-lan- I�........f-B own.5.um.m....... ..................
Onsite Representative: ...... L4.1.11......ajow.finn................................ Integrator:............................................................MM.........................
Certified Operator: ............. 1�.I..14.......V.!..... .31 D�&Mar)......................... Operator Certification Number:............,...,. 311-:�........
Location of Farm:
arrn '1S 1Mt 1t hbN-�a& NC IA»� 1S0 on Spe.our Man Pd ., or) r�h'+.
❑ Swine ❑ Poultry (d Cattle ❑ Horse Latitude ®• � ®�� Longitude • _q ®«
Design Current
awtuc
❑ Wean to Feeder
❑ Feeder to Finish
❑ Farrow to Wean
❑ Farrow to Feeder
❑ Farrow to Finish
❑ Gilts
❑ Boars
Design Current Design Current .
Poultry CapacityCipacity Population Cattle Capacity Po ulatiori
❑ Layer I Ila Dairy I 9W)
❑ Non -Layer Non -Dairy
❑ Other
Total Design Capacity a µ Q
Total SSLW
Number of Lagoons ❑ Subsurface Drains Present ❑ Lagoon Area 10 Spray Field Area '�
Holding Ponds / Solid Traps JE1 No Liquid Waste Management System
Discharges & Stream Impacts
1. Is any discharge observed from any part of the operation? ❑ YesTo
Discharge originated at: ❑ Lagoon ❑ Spray Field ❑ Other
a. If discharge is observed, was the conveyance man-made? ❑ Yes ❑ No
b. If discharge is observed, did it reach Water of the State'? (if yes, notify DWQ) ❑ Yes ❑ No
c. If discharge is observed, what is the estimated flow in gal/min?
d. Does discharge bypass a lagoon system? (If yes, notify DWQ) ❑ Yes ❑ No
2. Is there evidence of past discharge from any part of the operation? ❑ Yes No
3. Were there any adverse impacts or potential adverse impacts to the Waters of the State other than from a discharge? ❑ Yes No
Waste Collection & Treatment P
4. Is storage capacity (freeboard plus storm storage) less than adequate? 0 Spillway ❑ YesNo
' `Structure 1 Structure 2 Structure 3 Structure 4 Structure 5 Structure 6
Identifier: .... �.ppex................Lowp_.�................................................................................................................................................
Freeboard (inches): 1
5100 �� Continued on back

Facility Number: — Date of Inspection
0
5. Are there an immediate threats to the rit of an of the structures observed? (ie/ trees, severe erosion,
Y g Y Y
❑Yes
*No
seepage, etc.)
6. Are there structures on -site which are not properly addressed and/or managed through a waste management or
closure plan?
Cl Yes
KNO
(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
9No
9. Do any stuctures lack adequate, gauged markers with required maximum and minimum liquid level
elevation markings?
❑ Yes
KNO
Waste Application
10. Are there any buffers that need maintenance/improvement?
❑ Yes
No
11. Is there evidence of over application? ❑ Excessive Ponding ❑ PAN ❑ Hydraulic Overload
❑ Yes
�No
a
/ ,
12. Crop type Co r t n JQL6;:C1
13. Do the receiving crops differ with those design ted in the Certified Animal Waste Manage ent Plan (CAWMP)?
❑ Yes
A_No
14. a) Does the facility lack adequate acreage for land application?
[I Yes
No
b) Does the facility need a wettable acre determination?
❑ Yes
NrNo
c) This facility is pended for a wettable acre determination?
❑ Yes
*0
15. Does the receiving crop need improvement?
❑ Yes
No
J�
16. Is there a lack of adequate waste application equipment?
❑ Yes
XNO
Required Records & Documents
17. Fail to have Certificate of Coverage & General Permit readily available?
❑ Yes
O(No
18. Does the facility fail to have all components of the Certified Animal Waste Management Plan readily available?
❑ Yes
(ie/ WUP, checklists, design, maps, etc.)
•O"No
19. Does record keeping need improvement? (ie/ irrigation, freeboard, waste analysis & soil sample reports)
❑ Yes
,�rNo
20, Is facility not in compliance with any applicable setback criteria in effect at the time of design?
❑ Yes
�io
21, Did the facility fail to have a actively certified operator in charge?
❑ Yes
X No
22. Fait to notify regional DWQ of emergency situations as required by General Permit?
(ie/ discharge, freeboard problems, over application)
❑ Yes
ANo
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?
❑ YesXN0
R.�'�1Q y;off defc�encies rr re pQted. during �hjs;visit' - Y;oo Will-tecciye 0o fu
• corres oridence:ab' if this visit:.'
omments (refer to question #): Explain any YES answers and/or any,recommendations orany other comments
F
se drawings of facility to better explain situations. use additional pages°as necessary}•
0
iA r,J SIP Z�-_&'L_Cj
Reviewer/Inspector Name
Reviewer/Inspector Signa
�'90111110EIIMI

Facility Number: of I nspection
Odor Issues
26. Does the discharge pipe from the confinement building to the storage pond or lagoon fail to discharge at/or belowe�
liquid level of lagoon or storage pond with no agitation?
27. Are there any dead animals not disposed of properly within 24 hours? ❑ Yes j No
28. Is there any evidence of wind drift during land application? (i.e. residue on neighboring vegetation, asphalt, ❑ Yes VNo
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.) ❑ Yes 14 No
31, Do the animals feed storage bins fail to have appropriate cover? -$Aces—E3 #a
32, Do the flush tanks lack a submerged fill pipe or a permanent/temporary cover? its--B-�Te
Additional omments an or ravings:
5100
5100

(110 ision of Water Quality
ision of Soil and Water Conservation
Q Other Agency 's
Type of Visit O Compliance Inspection O Operation Review O Lagoon Evaluation
Reason for Visit O Routine O Complaint O Follow up O Emergency Notification O Other ❑ Denied Access
Facility Number 41 9 Dane of Visit; S/t/2{101 •111113:30
ie; Printed on: 8/28/2461
Not Operational O Below Threshold
® Permitted ® Certified 13 Conditionally Certified 0 Registered Date Last Operated or Above Threshold:. ........................
Farm Name: ........................ County: Gullftr.d ............................................ WSR.0........
......................... .
OwnerName: Y.J...........................................&.W.Maja ..................................................... Phone No: 65.6:-,3.S.2.6 ...................................................................
Mailing Address: $151.5F1`cad'matt.&Ad......................................................................: bm..wx0)a>1 mit...K............................................ 27.214 .............
Facility Contact: ..............................................................................Title:.................................... Phone No
Onsite Representative: KvIly..BowuAI................... .. Integrator: ........................................................................
Certified Operator:Rdlx....................................... bomioq a....................................._.... Operator Certification Number: 2X3.09.............................
Location of Farm:
'arm is approx. 1 mile N. off NC 150 on Spearman Rd. on right. A
❑ Swine ❑ Poultry ® Cattle ❑ Horse Latitude 36 • 14 f 306, Longitude 79 • 44 & 5566
Design Current
Swine Capacity Population
❑ Wean to Feeder
❑ Feeder to Finish
❑ Farrow to Wean
❑ Farrow to Feeder
❑ Farrow to Finish
❑ Gilts
❑ Boars
Design Current Design Current
Poultry Capacity Population, Cattle Capacity Population
❑ Layer I I ® Dairy 240 1 225
❑ Non -Layer ❑ Non -Dairy
❑ Other
Total Design Capacity 240
Total SSLW 336,000
Number of Lagoons 0 ❑ Subsurface Drains Present 110 Lagoon Area 10 Sprav Field Area
Holding Ponds 1 Solid Traps 1 2 JE1 No Liquid Waste Management System
Dischars•es & Strepni Impacts
1. Is any discharge observed from any part of the operation? ❑ Yes ® No
Discharge originated at: []Lagoon ❑ Spray Field []Other
a. if discharge is observed, was the conveyance man-made? ❑ Yes ❑ No
b. If discharge is observed, did it reach Water of the State? (If yes. notify DWQ) ❑ Yes ❑ No
c. If discharge is observed, what is the estimated flow in gal/min`?
d. Does discharge bypass a lagoon system? (If yes. notify DWQ) ❑ Yes ❑ No
2. Is there evidence of past discharge from any part of the operation? ❑ Yes ® No
3. Were there any adverse impacts or potential adverse impacts to the Waters of the State other than from a discharge? ❑ Yes ® No
Waste Collection & Treatment
4. Is storage capacity (freeboard plus storm storage) less than adequate? ® Spillway ❑ Yes ® No
Structure I Structure 2 Structure 3 Structure 4 Structure 5 Structure 6
Identifier: ............ pper........... ........... Lower ........... .................................... ...........
........................ ......................................................................
Freeboard (inches): 66 18
05103101 Continued

Facility Number: 41-9 O Date of Inspection 5/1/2001 0 Printed on: 8/28/2001 ?,1*
5. Are there any immediate threats to the integrity of any of the structures observed? (ie/ trees, severe erosion, ❑ Yes ® No
seepage, etc.)
6. Are there structures on -site which are not properly addressed and/or managed through a waste management or
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 maintenancelimprovement? [:]Yes ® No
9. Do any stuctures lack adequate, gauged markers with required maximum and minimum liquid level
elevation markings? ❑ Yes ® No
Waste ADPliCa1i011
10. Are there any buffers that need maintenance/improvement? ❑ Yes ® No
11. Is there evidence of over application? ❑ Excessive Ponding ❑ PAN ❑ Hydraulic Overload ❑ Yes ® No
12. Crop type Corn (Silage & Grain) Fescue (Graze) Small Grain (Wheat, Barley,
13. Do the receiving crops differ with those designated in the Certified Animal Waste Management Plan (CAWMP)? ❑ Yes ® No
14. a) Does the facility lack adequate acreage for land application? ❑ Yes ® No
b) Does the facility need a wettable acre determination'? ❑ Yes ® No
c) This facility is pended for a wettable acre determination? ❑ Yes ® No
15. Does the receiving crop need improvement? ❑ Yes ® No
16. Is there a lack of adequate waste application equipment'? ❑ Yes ® No
Rgqtjired Records & Document
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 Rev iewerAnspector fail to discuss review/inspection with on -site representative?
❑ Yes
® No
24.
Does facility require a follow-up visit by same agency?
❑ Yes
® No
25.
Were any additional problems noted which cause noncompliance of the Certified AWMP?
❑ Yes
® No
L
0 No violations or deficiencies were noted during this visit. You will receive no further correspondence about this visit.
Comments (refer to question #): Explain any YES answers and/or any recommendations or any other comments...
Use drawings of facility to better explain situations. (use additional pages as necessary): ❑Field Copy ®Final Notes
M1 .�
}A'-
t
7. Continue efforts to get rid of groundhogs. Mr. Bowman has been trying to, and backfilling the holes with soil.
_
4. Need to pump the lower holding pond. Getting close to the max. liquid level. Mr. Bowman can transfer waste from the lower WSP to
the upper, if needed. Since the upper WSP has been pumped down, the only liquid the lower WSP will be getting, for a while, is any
rainfall that lands on it. Mr. Bowman wanted to have some liquid to apply in case of drought.
Waste analysis: l 1/21/00 LSD 8.7 lbs. N11000 gals. B, 8.1 tbs. N/1000 gals.
Reviewer/Inspector Name jRocky Durham
ReviewerA nspecto r Signature: Date:
05103101 Continued

Fal-6ty Number: 41-9 Def Inspection 5/1/2001 Printed on: 8/28/2001
i
d o r Su
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
r11
05103101
J

vision of Water Quality
lision of Soil and Water Conservation
Q Other Agency
Type of Visit © Compliance Inspection O Operation Review O Lagoon Evaluation
Reason for Visit O Routine O Complaint Q Follow up O Emergency Notification O Other ❑ Denied Access
Facility Number 4I 09 Date of visit: 9120/20b0 'time: 1015 Printed on: 9/20/2000
- - --] 0 Not O erational Q Below Threshold
® Permitted ® Certified 13Conditionally Certified ©Registered Datc Last Operated or Above Threshold: .................
Farm Name: QaRmKre..> ir0A................ .............. ................... County: G.uAlfoxd............................................ WSRA........
OwnerName: V. 1............................................. f3.atY.malt..................................................... Phone No: 33.6:-.656:4526 ...........................................................
Facility Contact: K9lb...V,.B01Y.lglAt3......................................... l'itle .. .. ..... Phone No: §..{SG�.7.4 z....................
Mailing Address: 81.5.$P.gax=alu.RQAd....................................................................... > xQ�Yn. .ulx►l>t3it..N........................................... 2.7.214 ..............
Ottsite Representative: Belly..4][t)��1........................................................................... Integrator:...........................................................................
Certified Operator: Kelly.Y................................... 09.]Y1t ma.......................................... Operator Certification Nuniber:2.13.09 .............................
Location of Farm:
farm is approx. I mile N. off NC 150 on Spearman Rd. on right. +
❑ Swine ❑ Poultry ® Cattle ❑ Horse Latitude 36 ' l4 30 Longitude 79 • 44 4 55 «
Design Current
Design Current
Design Current
Swine Capacity Population
Poultry
Capacity Population Cattle
Capacity Population
❑ Wean to Feeder
[]Layer
® Dairy
240
El Feeder to Finish
❑ Non -Layer
❑ Non -Dairy
❑ Farrow to Wean
❑ Farrow to Feeder
❑ Other
❑ Farrow to Finish
Total Design Capacity
240
❑Gilts
Total SSLW
336,000
❑ Boars
Number of Lagoons 0 ❑ Subsurface Drains Present ❑ Lagoon Area JE1 Spray Field Area
Holding Ponds / Solid Traps 2 ❑ No Liquid Waste Management System
Discharges & Stream Impacts
1. Is any discharge observed from any part of the operation? ❑ Yes ® No
Discharge originated at; ❑ Lagoon ❑ Spray Field ❑ Other
a. If discharge is observed, was the conveyance man-made? ❑ Yes ❑ No
b. if discharge is observed, did it reach Water of the State'? (If yes, notify DWQ) ❑ Yes ❑ No
c. If discharge is observed, what is the estimated flow in gal/min?
d. Does discharge bypass a lagoon system? (If yes, notify DWQ) ❑ Yes ❑ 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: ......... Rated.##.I.......... .......... pjcnw.#}.2.......... ................................... ....................................
Freeboard (inches): 18 42�
5100 Continued on back

Facility Number: 41--09 Date of Inspection 912pI2000 Printed on: 9/20/2000
5. Are there any immediate threats to the i ity of any of the structures observed? (ie/ treevere 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 environmentaI 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) Small Grain (Wheat, Barley,
13. Do the receiving crops differ with those designated in the Certified Animal Waste Management Plan (CAWMP)? ❑ Yes ® No
14. a) Does the facility lack adequate acreage for land application? ❑ Yes ® No
b) Does the facility need a wettable acre determination? ❑ Yes ® No
c) This facility is pended for a wettable acre determination? ❑ Yes ® No
15. Does the receiving crop need improvement?
16. Is there a lack of adequate waste application equipment?
Required Records & Documents
17. Fail to have Certificate of Coverage & General Permit 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?
N6 viola,66ris;or deficiencies•were;n6ted [iutiiig•this;visit.-;Y6u;wi11:re0ive416,fu:rtket-; ;
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):
7. Need to repair burrow holes indams.
). Recommend horizontal markings on liquid level markers.
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes ® No
Reviewer/Inspector Name MCI'M Rosebrock
Reviewer/Inspector Signature: Date: 7 11 Q t 5100

Facility Number: 41-09 Da of Inspection 9/20/2000 Printed on: 9/20/2000
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 thdre any evidence of wind drift during land application'? (i.e. residue on neighboring vegetation, asphalt,
❑ Yes
® No
roads, building structure, and/or public property)
29.
Is the land application spray system intake not located near the liquid surface of the lagoon?
❑ Yes
® No
30.
Were any major maintenance problems with the ventilation fan(s) noted? (i.e. broken fan belts, missing or
or broken fan blade(s), inoperable shutters, etc.)
❑ Yes
® No
31.
Do the animals feed storage bins fail to have appropriate cover?
❑ Yes
® No
32. Do the flush tanks lack a submerged fill pipe or a permanent/temporary cover? ❑ Yes ❑ No
Additional omments and/or Drawings:
5100

ivision of Water Quality
ivision of Soil and Water Conservation 0
0 Other Agency
Type of Visit jSompliance Inspection O Operation Review O Lagoon Evaluation i
Reason for Visit Routine O Complaint O Follow up O Emergency Notification yQ Other ❑ Denied Access
Facility Number
Date ur Visit: t� Time: == Printed on: 7/21/2000
Q Not Operational Q Below Threshold
)i Permitted Certified ❑ Conditionally Certified © Registered Date last Operated or Above 'Threshold: .........................
Farm Name: ........... i r......F Farm. .. County: &U.1.1 ..pord
Owner Name: �!,' �.[IQ..................... Phone No:...ti.Jl '..!.�+/L?.�...t.a ...a.......... ........... ........ ............. --
Facility Contact: ....C.....[. ......:..Y...,............................................................ . Phone
Mailing Address:........ ........��.G �t�Q�'�...... �..!.......t...�.i�}.�1�... .mra.J... /..J..`��
l.. ...�.7.� �..�
Onsite Representative:....L�It.. 1�.1.ovary. a.n ............................... Integrator:......................................................................................
Certified Operator: ........ 1......e....i.. ......If .......8.,(,�.(,❑.i Q Operator Ccrtilication Number:....p�
.. �...........
Location of Farm:
f7/Lrm is pf-6y--. 1 e- Aor ; tic rs0 on 5 Pear Ma- -`
�'- =_f
❑ Swine ❑ Poultry ecattle ❑ Horse Latitude �" �` Longitude �• �� �«
Design Current
Swine CaDdeitV Poeulation
❑ Wean to Feeder
❑ Feeder to Finish
❑ Farrow to Wean
❑ Farrow to Feeder
❑ Farrow to Finish
❑ Gilts
❑ Boars
Design Current Design Current
Poultry Capacity Population C the Capacity Population
❑ Layer Dairy
❑ Non -Layer ❑ Non -Dairy
❑ Other
Total Design Capacity o2 46
Total SSLW 133 G
Number of Lagoons ❑ Subsurface Drains Present 110 t,ag,-,m Area ❑ Spray Field Area
Holding Ponds / Solid Traps 1 012- ❑ No Liquid Waste Management System
Discharges & Stream Im acGti
I. Is any discharge observed ftom any part of the operation'?
❑ Yes
�No
I3iscbarge origin,ued at ❑ Lagoon ❑ Spray Field ❑ Other
a. If discharge is observed, was the conveyance man-made'?
❑ Yes
❑ No
b. If discharge is Observed. did it reach Water of the State'' (If yes, notify DWQ)
El Yes
❑ No
c. II dischan.,e is observed. what is the estimated flow In gal/Iron'?
d. DoCs diSCI argc bypass a lagoon system:' (If ycs, 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 ol' the State Other than from a discharge'?
ElYes
,No
Waste Collection & 'treatment
4. Is storage capacity (freeboard plus storm storage) less than adequate? Spillway
❑ YesN
o
uucu, c I Still aurc 2 Structure ; Structure 4 Structure 5
I Nnd.:��
Structure
Identifici: p.4.
.............. ..).. ...............................................................
Frechoard (inches):
5100 Continued
on back
M

1 �^
Facility Number: — Date of Inspection pv� Printed on.• 7/21/2000
5. Are there any immediate threats to the ir�tL�grity of any of the structures observed? (ic/ trees, severe erosion,
seepage, etc.)
6. Are there structures on -site which arc 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/improvenicnt?
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?
1. Is there evidence of over application'! ❑ Excessive Ponding ❑ PAN ❑ Hydraulic Overload
12. Crop type
0
13. Do the receiving crops differ w h throse designated in M Certified Animal Waste Management Plan (CAWMP)?
14. a) Does the facility lack adequate acreage for land application?
b) Does the facility need a wettable acre determination?
c) rhis 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 readilyavailable?
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/ 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?
(ic/ discharge, freeboard problems, over application)
23. Did Reviewer/Inspector fail to discuss review/inspection with on -site representative'!
24. Does facility require a follow-up visit by sarme agency'?
25. Were any additional problems noted which cause noncompliance of the Certified AWMP?
10 yiolations;or deficiencies -Were noted• dtWi ft • his:visit: • Yoit witl•reeeiye rio: fufrther ;
:'corres ondence:abau+tth'isvisit:':':':':':':':':':':':':'::':':':':':':':':::':'::':':':':'::':':';
❑ Yes KNO
❑ Yes No
1XVes ❑ 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):
' K-Ae J z66
❑ Yes �No
❑ Yes r}(J No
❑ Yes No
❑ Yes No
❑ Yes I
❑ Yes t
❑ Yes o
El Yes No
❑ Yes VN0
❑ Ycs ,,�ro
❑ Yes No
❑ Yes No
❑ Yes No
❑ Yes k o
ElYes No
❑ Yes No
❑ Yes X No
Reviewer/Inspector Name 1
Reviewer/Inspector Signatur A � MA A t Jh, A7 Date: eZ DO 5100

Facility Number: — sot' Inspection Printed on: 7/21/2000
Odor Issues
26. Does the discharge pipe from the confinement building to the storage pond or lagoon fail to discharge at/or below es No
liquid level of lagoon or storage pond with no agitation'?
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?
I .
❑ Yes �] No
❑ Yes, No
❑ Yes No
❑ Yes �No
El Yes �No
�-— rya
Additional Comments and/orDrawings:
�
e b
5100

0 siou of Water Quality
erasion of Soil and Water Conservation S
0 Other Agency
Type of Visit O Compliance Inspection O Operation Review O Lagoon Evaluation
Reason for Visit O Routine O Complaint Q Follow up O Emergency Notification O Other ❑ Denied Access
Facility Number 41,- 9
}ate of Visit: 6/15/2000 'Tim9:50
e: Printed on: 9/20/2000
� -�
0 Not Operational 0 Below Threshold
® Permitted ® Certified [3 Conditionally Certified 13Registered Date Last Operated or Above Threshold: ....
Farm Name: ...................... County: G.U11fard ............................................ W.SRQ........
OwnerName:V.L........................................... U.QAy.W;j.0 ..................................................... Phone No: 6Sf-352.G......................,........,....................................
Facility Contact:.............................................................................. Fitle Phone No:
Mailing Address: S..S.1..Sp�ax.tl�a>ul.l�Qat�........................................................................ I xv�Y�I. unn�li.t.. G............................................ 2.7.214 ..............
Onsite Representative:,KGjIy,...9.kYAihal]t.................... Integrator:......
...........................I...................
Certified O ►erator:. gjjy. Y............. Operator Certification Number QQ.............................
1 ...................... �4ryaraar�..................................... 2.X3.
Location of Farm:
'arm is approx. 1 mile N. off NC 150 on Spearman Rd. on right. +
❑ Swine ❑ Poultry 0 Cattle ❑ Horse Latitude Longitude 79 •F 44 , 55
Design Current
S►►'ine Capacity Population
❑ Wean to Feeder
❑ Feeder to Finish
❑ Farrow to Wean
❑ Farrow to Feeder
[:]Farrow to Finish
❑ Gilts
❑ Boars
Design Current Design Current
Poultry Capacity Population Cattle
Capacity Population
❑ Layer ® Dairy 240 211
❑ Non -Layer 10 Non -Dairy
❑ Other
Total Design Capacity 240
Total SSLW 336,000
Number of Lagoons l❑ Subsurface Drains Present ❑ Lagoon Area I0 Spray Field Area
Holding Ponds / Solid Traps 1 2 10 No Liquid Waste Management System
DischarLes & Stream Impacts
1. Is any discharge observed from any part of the operation? ❑ Yes 0 No
Discharge originated at: ❑ Lagoon ❑ Spray Field ❑ Other
a. If discharge is observed, was the conveyance man-made? ❑ Yes ❑ No
b. If discharge is observed, did it reach Water of the State? (If yes, notify DWQ) ❑ Yes ❑ No
c. If discharge is observed, what is the estimated flow in gal/min?
d. Does discharge bypass a lagoon system'? (If yes, notify DWQ) ❑ Yes ❑ No
2. Is there evidence of past discharge from any part of the operation? ❑ Yes ®No
3. Were there any adverse impacts or potential adverse impacts to the Waters of the State other than from a discharge? ❑ Yes 0 No
Waste Collection & Treatment
4. Is storage capacity (freeboard plus storm storage) less than adequate? ® Spillway ❑ Yes ® No
Structure I Structure 2 Structure 3 Structure 4 Structure 5 Structure 6
Identifier: .......... pmhoff .......... ........... Lowex ....................................................................................................................... ............................
Freeboard (inches): 72 36
5100 Continued on back

-:. 1
Facility Number: 41-9 Date of Inspection 6/15/2000 Printed on: 9/20/2000 w
5. Are there any immediate threats to theority of any of the structures observed? (ie/ trsevere 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 N No
(If any of questions 4-6 was answered yes, and the situation poses an
immediate public health or environmental threat, notify DWQ)
7. Do any of the structures need maintenance/improvement? ❑ Yes ® No
8. Does any part of the waste management system other than waste structures require maintenance/improvement? ❑ Yes N No
9. Do any stuctures lack adequate, gauged markers with required maximum and minimum liquid level
elevation markings? ❑ Yes N No
Waste Application
10. Are there any buffers that need maintenance/improvement? ❑ Yes N No
11. Is there evidence of over application? ❑ Excessive Ponding ❑ PAN ❑ Hydraulic Overload ❑ Yes N No
12. Crop type Corn (Silage & Grain) Small Grain (Wheat, Barley,
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 ❑ No
b) Does the facility need a wettable acre determination? ❑ Yes ❑ No
c) This facility is pended for a wettable acre determination? ❑ Yes ❑ No
15. Does the receiving crop need improvement?
16. Is there a lack of adequate waste application equipment?
Required Records & Documents
17. Fail to have Certificate of Coverage & General Permit readily available?
18. Does the facility fail to have all components of the Certified Animal Waste Management Plan readily available?
(ie/ WUP, checklists, design, maps, etc.)
19. Does record keeping need improvement? (ie/ irrigation, freeboard, waste analysis & soil sample reports)
20. Is facility not in compliance with any applicable setback criteria in effect at the time of design?
21. Did the facility fail to have a actively certified operator in charge?
22. Fail to notify regional DWQ of emergency situations as required by General Permit?
(ie/ discharge, freeboard problems, over application)
23. Did Reviewer/Inspector fail to discuss review/inspection with on -site representative?
24. Does facility require a follow-up visit by same agency?
25. Were any additional problems noted which cause noncompliance of the Certified AWMP?
:: No yiblatioris:or :deficiencies were;noted ;during -this; visit.• ;You;vr ill receive no further ;
correspondence. abouf this .visit: :
❑ Yes N No
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes N No
❑ Yes N No
❑ Yes N No
❑ Yes M No
❑ Yes N No
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes N No
❑ Yes N 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):
,arm looks good. Records looked good. +
i 19. Need to start keeping weekly levels on the holding ponds per the General Pcrmit.
Reviewer/Inspector Name Rocky Durliam Millie Langley
ReviewerAnspector Signature: Date: S/pp

I
Facility Number: 41-9 Da t Inspection 6/15/2000 Printed on: 9/20/2000
•
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
and/orDrawings:
5100
J

Date ul' Inspection
12/13/99
Facility Number 41 9 P
Time of Inspection 11:20 24 hr. (hh:mm)
® Permitted ® Certified 0 Conditionally Certified [j Registered IQ Not OperationalOperationall Date Last Operated:
Farm Name: Aalimmv.. birmt..................... ..... County: Guilford ............................................ 1' 5RQ........
OwnerName: Y.,,1'............................................. O.W.Malt..................................................... Phone No: 65.6,-.352.6 ......................................................
FacilityContact: ..............................................................................'1'itle:................................................................ Phone No:.....................................
Mailing Address:$1.51.SArarmaia.RoAd................................. ......... ........................................... 27214
C3nsite Representative: jKelly..13A}F'xu7pl................. .. Integrator:.......... .......................
Certified Operator:&elly...Y.A................................. 0.31J1t1,�R.......................................... Operator Certification Numher:J3,99.............................
Location of Farm:
fardmlh.a xox+,.l..uk...N.,.gf:f. .......... ..................... .............. .................. I ...... .............
Pi
Latitude 36 ' 14 3U Longitude 7y • 44 55
Design Current Design Current Design Current
Swine Capacity Population Poultry Capacity Population Cattle Capacity Population
❑ Wean to Feeder ❑ Layer ®Dairy 240 210
❑ Feeder to Finish ❑ Non -Layer ❑ Non -Dairy
❑ Farrow to Wean
❑ Farrow to Feeder ❑ Other
" ❑ Farrow to FinishTotal Design Capacity 240
❑ Gilts
❑ Boars Total SSLW " 336,000
`Number of Lagoons'r Lagoon 1r r- Y Field Are
" ,. ❑Subsurface Drains Present ❑ id,o i Area ❑Spa �
Holding Ponds'/ Solid Traps' 2 `� " ❑ No Liquid Waste Management System
.
Dischar= & Stream Impacts
1. is any discharge observed from any part of the operation?
Discharge originated at: ❑ Lagoon ❑ Spray Field ❑ Other
a. Ifdischar-e is observed, was the convevance man-made?
- b. ]f dischar��e is observed. did it reach Wriser cif the Sicite'? f lf'j°°es. notify DWQ) ---
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes ❑ No
c. [l'dischar:re is observed, what is the estimated flow in L,,al/min:'
d. Does disch.irre bypass a ]agoon sysiesn'! (I (yes, notify DWQ) ❑ Yes ❑ No
2. Is there evidence of past discharge from any part of the operation? ❑ Yes ® No
3. Were there any adverse impacts or potential adverse impacts to the Waters of the State other than from a discharge? ❑ Yes ® No
Waste Collection & Treatment
4. Is storage capacity (freeboard plus storm storage) less than adequate? ❑ Spillway ❑ Yes ® No
Structure l Structure 2 Structure 3 Structure 4 Structure 5 Structure 6
Identifier: Pond #I Pond #2
Freeboard (inches): I"
................7.2:'.............. ............ 72..................1.............I........
........... .................................... .................................... ...... ..............................
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 12/13/99

Facility Nember: 41--9 Date of Inspection F 1-2/13/99
6. Are there structures on -site which are Alkerly addressed and/or managed through a wwanagement 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
Wgste 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 Small Grain (Wheat, Barley, Fescue (Hay) 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
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?
(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?
0; No viblati6ns:o:r :deficiencies -were nbted :during.this: visit.:You:will �&eM no further,
corresporidence: about this :visit.
❑ Yes ® No
[]Yes ® No
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes ® No
[--]Yes ® No
❑ Yes ® No
[]Yes ® No
[:]Yes ® No
[:]Yes ® No
ords in excellent order, up-to-date.
rator noted an ongoing need for ground hog eradication on dikes around both ponds. No current problems evident, but 'JA
mmend continued efforts in this area.
W
Reviewer/Inspectnr Name Tom
Reviewer/Inspector Signature: Date:
on 12/13/99

Routine O Com taint O Follow-u p of DW(
Facility Number
© Registered 0 Certified © Applied for Permit © Permitted
FarmName:.... 6.1..................� m % . .........................................
Follow-up of DSWC review O Other
Date of Inspection 2
Time of Inspection 24 hr. (hh:mm
13 Not O crational Date Last Opei ieditt � t'
...................
County:......U....V� 1L............ .......... e r.. :a......
SEP _ g
OwnerName: ................................................... ........................................................................ Phone No: ............ ........................................................... .......:._....
"
FacilityContact: ................................................................ ..... Title:..
MailingAddress:.... ................................................. ..................................................
Onsitc Representative:..... ..�r.. ........
.1.......
CertifiedOperator...................................................................................................
Location of Farm:
��S�Or1.•�eti�t
............................................... Phone No: .....
1�i
V
............................................................................................ ..........................
.......... Integrator: ........................................................................
Operator Certification Number..........................................
Latitude • 4 Lf Longitude ' 09. 4'
v� ip? x al F '4 Design C" , t a g p 9 DeSl tli. Cilrrellt � + x <i � � DiS —D ' a'tr66ent
Swine �, °r }cppactty �Populatiany� Poultry � CapacytY Population Cattle � Capacity Populatton
❑ Layer F Dairy
�> ❑ Non -Layer ❑ Non Dairy
i
,yy ❑Other
Total MMgn Capacity
�3<�s r t Total SSLW
4 p. a:-"1 `;•'; dra¢ ; a .,: .yp •"�°a, x'iw� '; %E:
Number o€ Lagoons / Holding Pdnds� Subsurface Drains Present ❑ Lagoon Area ❑ Spray Field Area
k
�,x ❑ No Liquid Waste Management System,
2i'S s'a r3 «.,b�fs3`. ..x?�'t
❑ Wean to Feeder
❑ Feeder to Finish
❑ Farrow to Wean
❑ Farrow to Feeder
❑ Farrow to Finish
❑ Gilts
❑ Boars
General
1. Are there any buffers that need maintenance/improvement? ❑ Yes �j No
2. Is any discharge observed from any part of the operation? ❑ Yes (f dNo
Discharge originated at: ❑ Lagoon ❑ Spray Field ❑ Other /
a. If discharge is observed, was the conveyance man-made? ❑ Yes �No
b. If discharge is observed, did it reach Surface Water? (If yes, notify DWQ) ❑ Yes []'No
c. If discharge is observed, what is the estimated flow in gaUmin?
d. Does discharge bypass a lagoon system? (If yes, notify DWQ) ❑ Yes No
3. Is there evidence of past discharge from any part of the operation? ❑ Yes No
4. Were there any adverse impacts to the waters of the State other than from a discharge? ❑ Yes No
5. Does any part of the waste management system (other than lagoons/holding ponds) require ❑ Yes VN.
maintenance/improvement? //
6. Is facility not in compliance with any applicable setback criteria in effect at the time of design? ❑ Yes 1 No
7. Did the facility fail to have a certified operator in responsible charge? ❑ Yes ❑ �10
7/25/97 Continued on back

Facility Number: — e
8. Are there lagoons or storage ponds on site which need to be properly closed? ❑ Yes P No
Structures (Lagoons.Holding Ponds Flush Pits etc.
9. Is storage capacity (freeboard plus storm storage) less than adequate? ❑ Yes x'No
Structure I Structure 2 Structure 3 Structure 4 Structure 5 Structure 6
Identifier:
Freeboard(ft):........-/.I........I....................3....................
................................ .................................... .................................... ................ ........ ............
10. Is seepage observed from any of the structures? ❑ Yes EX -No
11. Is erosion, or any other threats to the integrity of any of the structures observed? ❑ Yes gNo
12. Do any of the structures need maintenance/improvement? Yes ❑ No
(If any of questions 9-12 was answered yes, and the situation poses
an immediate public health or environmental threat, notify DWQ)
13. Do any of the structures lack adequate minimum or maximum liquid level markers? ❑ Yes R(No
Waste Anolication
14. Is there physical evidence of over application? ❑ Ye oNo
(If in excess of WMP, or runoff entering
',�waters of the State, notify DWQ) //
l5. Crop type .61% ......../ /�1i...... /L�............................................................................................................................................................
16. Do the receiving crops differ with those designated in the Animal Waste Management Plan (AWMP)? ❑ Yes ETNo
17. Does the facility have a lack of adequate acreage for land application? ❑ Yes No
18.
Does the receiving crop need improvement?
❑ Yes
PNo
19.
Is there a lack of available waste application equipment?
❑ Yes
JZ No
20.
Does facility require a follow-up visit by same agency?
❑ Yes
PNo
21.
Did Reviewer/Inspector fail to discuss review/inspection with on -site representative?
❑ Yes
ZfNo
22.
Does record keeping need improvement?
Cl Yes
6 No
For Certified or Permitted Facilities Only
23. Does the facility fail to have a copy of the Animal Waste Management Plan readily available? ❑ Yes P No
24. Were any additional problems noted which cause noncompliance of the Certified AWMP? ❑ Yes d No
25. Were any additional problems noted which cause noncompliance of the Permit? ❑ Yes lJ No
0 No. viol ations,ordeficiencies.were,noti d-duringthis'.visit'.-You;vxill-irece_i've-no-furiher:
: coerespQndehce dl}oul-this:visit.-:
`�ut�ments'�(refer�ty qu�ort #��F.ttplarn any�YES ansWers�and/or flny'recommendattons p�r��tty'otIiex coketrts'� ;
A...'Tc,E r 'a+ff 'sa}.AF�'YS Y¢$ �yT.k '�wf:'S`a�� `�'6 � ,�f'"°"SYy�i#, t •Jr P., y awF. ..x ��,i,.`6+�.'r.4+:.. ,�:C$, t 5� i �•
Use drawings'�ai'Ffacilxty tpibettCl' expiair► srtuahons. (tlse addrtlorral}pages as necessary,}!°X^�� '���' i�� �
I
7/25/97
AL
Reviewer/Inspector Name n MEAMM i R
rn
h. �, s' 4e`s _ 3• L. yw4 • � An es
Date:
Reviewer/Inspector Signature:424
11

C
10 Routine 0 Com Dint 0 Follow-up of DWQ inspection 0 Follow-up of DSWC review 0 Other
. Facility Number
Date of Inspection:ZZLO/291
Time of Inspection I ZZ10 124 hr. (hh:mm)
D Registered H Certified ® Applied for Permit 13 Permitted 0 Not O erational Date Last Operated:
..........................
Farm Name: �QI�MC1� Fq/n-. Count u,/'4'v
y:.....................................................................................
Owner Name:.,,,,.,,, „ r • �pow"O'% Phone No: 3t�o� �4 SJ -75-&
y....-......q.......................................................................................... 3.. �a..'......................................................
Facility Contact: .�t IL Uo(tiv►1a - Title: .09 .. Phone No: �37� 169'(�"
Mailing Address: ... F/Ey.... �??!ar►�ut ��4�'+'.. k+'?t'!!......./ ............................../�........................................... ......... I—.............
.............I..................... .
Onsite Representative: �Clrr QdT:`................................................. Integrator:......................................................................................
Certified Operator:....1.'�:���►:�........I.:.....��i± a�...................................................... Operator Certification Number:.....ZZR.5 .................
Location of Farm:
T'3!��...� ............................. ng./c ... .........:.....
�..
.............. .......
LatitudeF 3Q Longitude 1 % 9
❑ Wean to Feeder
❑ Feeder to Finish
❑ Farrow to Wean
❑ Farrow to Feeder
❑ Farrow to Finish
❑ Gilts
❑ Boars
General
I. Are there any bUt3ers that need maititeuance/improvement'? ❑ Yes r*No
2. Is any discharge observed from any part of die operation? ❑ Yes 2,'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 Surface Water'? (Ifyes, notify DWQ) ❑ Yes ❑ No
c. If discharge is observed, what is the estimated flow in gal/min?
d. Does discharge bypass a lagoon systenh7 (If yes, notify DWQ) ❑ Yes ❑ No
3. Is there evidence of past discharge from any part of the operation? ❑ Yes No
4. Were there any adverse impacts to tie waters of the State other than from a discharge? ❑ Yes No
5. Does any part of die waste management system (other than lagoons/holding ponds) require ❑ Yes V1 No
nhaintenaiiee/improvement'?
6. is facility not in compliance with any applicable setback criteria in effect at tie time of design'? ❑ Yes No
7. Did the facility fail to have a certified operator in responsible charge'? ❑ Yes 9lo
7/25/97
0

Facility Number: ell — 9 Date of Inspection -7/30 98
8. Are there lagoons or storage ponds on site need to be properly closed'?
Structures (Lagoons HoldinL, Ponds. Flush Pits, etc.)
9. Is storage capacity (freeboard plus storm storage) less than adequate'?
Structure 1 Structure 2 Stnucture 3
Identifier: .... 4}.�.8q...�................ nf.4°' . Z................................................
Freeboard (ft): 1-0 I—-
10. Is seepage observed from any of die strictures'?
Is
Structure 4 Structure 5
11. Is erosion, or any other threats to the integrity of any of tie structures observed'?
12. Do any of the structures need maintenance/improvement'?
❑ Yes Xf No
❑ Yes U�No
Structure 6
❑ Yes � No
❑ Yes ONO
❑ Yes �No
(If any of questions 9-I2 was answered yes, and the situation poses an
immediate public health or environmental threat, notify DWQ)
13. Do any of the structures lack adequate minimum or maximum liquid level markers'? ❑ Yes ZNo
Waste Application
14. Is there physical evidence of over application'? ❑ Yes kNo
(If in excess of WMP, or runoff entering waters of the State, notify DWQ)
15. Crap type L8/�. ..............................................................................................................I...........
16. Do the receiving crops differ with those designated in die Aninhal Waste Management flan (AVW-')'? C] Yes KNo
17. Does die facility have a lack of adequate acreage for land application? ❑ Yes �10
18. Does the receiving crop need improvement'? ❑ Yes ,N No
19. is there a lack of available waste application equipment'? ❑ Yes N 'No
20. Does facility require a follow-up visit by same agency'? ❑ Yes ONO
21. Did Reviewer/Inspector fail to discuss review/im1pe :tion with on -site representative'? ❑ Yes P No
22. Does record keeping need improvement'? ❑ Yes RNo
For Certified or Permitted Facilities Oniv
23. Does die facility fail to have a copy of the Animal Waste Management Plan readily available'? ❑ Yes "�'No
24. Were any additional problems noted which cause noncompliance of the Certified AWMP'? ❑ Yes d�TNo
25. Were any additional problems noted which cause noncompliance of the Pennit'? ❑ Yes -kl No
jp�•No•y. olatiorls;ar:deiideadeg.were:rr'oted:dtrribg.tWS•visit.' Yoq-VA1'reCeive-no'fdrt ter•'
:::carresotideirce aUiouf phis:vasiti. : : ::::::::::.::: : ::. : : : :.:. : :::.:
Reviewer/Inspector Name
Reviewerllnspector Signature: .I l P Date: 7/30/f _S

1'
State ,of North Carolina
Department of Environment,
Health and Natural Resources `
Winston-Salem Reglonai Office
James B, Hunt, Jr., Governor IDF-:::HNF;Z
Jonathan B. Howes, Secretary
DIVISION OF WATER QUALITY
September 5, 1997
Mr. V. I. Bowman
8151 Spearman Rd.
Browns Summit, NC 27214
SUBJECT: Farm Inspection
Bowman Dairy Farm
Guilford County
Dear Mr. Bowman:
An inspection of your facility was conducted by Ron Linville of this office
on August 19, 1997. Mr. Kelly Bowman was present and courteous during portions
of the inspection.
The inspection revealed that concerns from our previous site visit had been
resolved satisfactorily. Additionally, it is our understanding that although 450
cows are on your farm, only 200 dairy cows are concentrated at any given time
while the balance are on pasture.
As Kelly Bowman was extremely busy, we were unable to leave a copy of our
inspection with him. It is enclosed herein for your review and files. Thank you
for your prompt attention to matters pertaining to water quality. If you have
any questions about this letter, please do not hesitate to contact Ron Linville
or me at [phone].
Sincerel
M. Steve Mauney
Water Quality Supervisor
CC: Guilford County S&W Conservation District
Central Files
WSRO
a:\bowman.97
585 Woughtown Street, 4 FAX [phone]
Winston-Salem, North Carolina 27107-2241 An Equal Opportunity/Affirmative Action Employer vf
Voice 910 771-4600 50% recycled/10% post -consumer paper
vx

� 111�a Division of Soil ai
Division of Water
ater Conservation p Other
10 tcoutine p c:ompiamr p roarow-up of uwy inspection O ro
Facility Number
® Registered p Certified p Applied for Permit p Permitted
Farm Name: .0al mere.Eairin.........................................................
Owner Name:.Y..l............................................ Balymaa................
-tip of 1RJw1r•evieNry p Vther
Date or lnspection ® .
'1 une of' tnspeebon ® 24 hr. (1111:mm)
p Not 01 Date Last Operated:
County. Gililfnrd WCRCI
.............. Phone No: 65ft-.3526 ........................................................
Facility Contact: Kelly..V.B�awmnart.........................................Title: OTLC .................................................... Phone No: .9.1.016.56,3526 ........................
Mailing Address: S151.5pcarwaa,Road........................................................................ B-ro.iyn..S:uxn.m.it..NC............................................ 27214 .............
Onsite Representative: Kelly.Ro matt...........................................................................]ntegriitor:......................................................................................
Certified Operator:Kelly..Y................................... Roxy..majn........................................... Operator Certification Nuniber:2.13.0 .............................
Location of Farm:
arin-ii,appro�cn?x.p:..:.v ... .15.U:1�!n...�?�ari[nan ..a .ram t.....................................................................................................................................
.u..�...,,.,..,. .....f _
•
Latitude ®0®4 ®" Longitude ®•
r +Swine
Capacity Population
❑ eanto ee er
❑ Feeder to Finish
❑ Farrow to Wean
❑ Farrow to Feeder
p Farrow to Finish
p Gilts
❑ Boars
- Ifesign [ urrenDesign Current
Poultry `' :' `Capacity' Pogulatiom.. Cattle Capacity Population
-- - -.
❑Layer ® airy
❑ Non -Layer ❑ Non- airy
❑ Other
M Total, Desirgn Capacity250
Total'SSLW 350,000
,
- Lagoon Area �r:� �c c rea
Number oFLagoons /fHolding Potids .` ❑ u Msur ace rams resent ❑ g ❑ Spray
0
,.: :... p o rqur rite anagenient yytem
General
I. Are there any buffers that need maintenance/improvement? ❑ Yes ® No
2. Is any discharge observed from any part of the operation? p Yes IN 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 Surface Water? (If yes, notify DWQ) ❑ Yes H No
c. lfdiwliarge is observed, what is the estimated flow in galhnin?
d. Does discharge bypass a lagoon system? (Ii'yes, notify DWQ) Yes ®No
3. Is there evidence of past discharge from any part of the operation? p Yes ® No
4. Were there any adverse impacts to the waters of the State other than from a discharge? ❑ Yes H No
5. Does any partof the waste management system (other than lagoons holding ponds) require []Yes ® No
maintenance/improvement?
6. Is facility not in compliance with any applicable setback criteria in effect at the time of design? []Yes N No
7. Did the facility fail to have a certified operator in responsible charge? ❑ Yes ® No
7/25197

� ace iy um er: 41_9 0.
8. Are there Iagoons or storage ponds on site which need to be properly closed?
Yes
® No
Structures (Laguons,l-,lolding Ponds, Flush Pits eta
9. Is storage capacity (freeboard plus storm storage) less than adequate?
❑ Yes
® No
Structure I Structure 2 Structure 3 Structure 4 Structure 5
Structure 6
Identifier: I 2
Freeboard(ft):................3..................................4.................................................... ................ 3.................
10. Is seepage observed from any of the structures?
❑ Yes
® No
11. Is erosion, or any other threats to the integrity of any of the structures observed?
❑ Yes
® No
12. Do any of the structures need Maintenance/improvement?
❑ Yes
® No
(If any of questions 9-12 was answered yes, and the situation poses an
immediate public health or environmental threat, notify DWQ)
13. Do any of the structures lack adequate minimum or maximum liquid level markers?
[]Yes
❑ No
Waste Application
14. Is there physical evidence of over application?
p Yes
® No
(If in excess of WMP, or runoff entering waters of the State, notify DWQ)
15.
Crop type .......Corn.4,Silage.&.Crain.)....... ...................... Feszue......................................... ......................................... ...........................................................
16.
Do the receiving crops differ with those designated in the Animal Waste Management Plan (AWMP)?
[]Yes
M No
17.
Does the facility have a lack of adequate acreage for land application?
p Yes
® No
18.
Does the receiving crop need improvement?
❑ Yes
® No
19.
Is there a lack of available waste application equipment?
❑ Yes
®No
20.
Does facility require a follow-up visit by same agency?
❑ Yes
® No
21.
Did Reviewer/Inspector fail to discuss review/inspection with on -site representative`?
❑ Yes
Ig No
22.
Does record keeping need improvement?
p Yes
® No
For Certified or Permitted Facilities Only
23.
Does the facility fail to have a copy of the Animal Waste Management Plan readily available?
p Yes
p No
24.
Were any additional problems noted which cause noncompliance of the Certified AWMP?
❑ Yes
❑ No
25.
Were any additional problems noted which cause noncompliance of the Permit?
❑ Yes
p No
c(.. o.via tions.or a .teren.cies'were.n.a e . ;urYngt us;rtstt:. t) - receive no urt er...
• • . �o1'reSj?4ne� �4Qdt :tti�s•vis��:: • ... • . • . • . • . • . • . • . . • . ::. :.. .. :..... ..
Reviewerllnspector Name
Reviewer/Inspector Signature: ���� _�� _ Date: 97

DSWC Arlal Feedlot Operatlon Revlew
® DWQ Animal Feedlot Oper'atlon<SiteInspectlon
>'M
0 Routine O Complaint O Follow-up of DWQ ins ection O Follow-up of DSWC review O Other
acility Number Date of Inspection70
F
Time of Inspection t1 Q 24 hr. (hh:mm)
Total Time (in fraction of hours
Farm Status: "eg[stered ❑ Applied for Permit (ex:1.25 for 1 hr 15 min)) Spent on Review % .._
❑ Certified ❑ Permitted or Ins pection includes travel andprocessing)
❑ Not O erational Date Last Operated:..............................................................................................._............
Farm Name :..... v. ....�kl.i .. P1..Y....X .........................................
County:....... t.t.......-..�................................................
Land Owner Name:.... T ................ ! .a ..................... Phone No:...�tl �,l...._�L.t....P. .. ?..�� ..............
Facility Conctact:..,[.C.—1.1...y.... V.:.....r,�.�:Sr�.Yk1. �!�. Title:.......... 0....(...(Z . ......... Phone No:
Mailing Address:..!?.. -....................Z.�.�. ! ... .k... �� +...�7..H...G............... ...I.. t .t. ....
Onsite Representative:... ...1-1.`�.. ..x. 1 ..Q._ .. ram......................... Integrator:
p
Certified Operator: ..... �.�.,�...,U...�...... ,L.J �:.............. Operator Certification Number:.... .�. ..+n+,.1.............,
Location of Farm:
....... ........................
.......... ............. ...... �........r.-t.....,.... R .:........... .........-:.j..... Y.. ...►.�a....... tin1:. �-� :........ _41P.>?:K.�lt. f .... � !C`
Latitude t--iG'.J' ®� �« Longitude 1 ®�
Type of Operation and Design Capacity
:Ai € �� ,
z: { rDe51gn�z.�A CUrreRt "�` I}CS[gq CUrrenY �Des[gn r3 °CUCCCIit
Swine Ca aci APO ulation Poult Ca aci Po' i4 t[on Cattle ,; Cak"a`ci Po` i�latio�'
�.
❑ Wean to FeederI❑ Layer Dai
❑ Feeder to Finish ❑ Non -Layer ❑ Non-DaiEX
Farrow to Wean
Farrow to Feeder Total Design*Cap q
zs
Farrow to Finish
M SAPT061 SSLW
❑ Other
>,,^.ix---Y
eneral
I. Are there any buffers that need maintenance/improvement? ❑ Yes ENo
2. 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 Surface Water? (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)
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
4/30/97 maintenance/improvement?
❑ Yes &�"No
❑ Yes (9 No
❑ Yes J0 No
❑ Yes
[K No
[:]Yes
®No
❑ Yes
0 No
❑ Yes
RNo
Continued
on back

[Facility Number: ..../...... ..............
6. Is facility not in compliance with any affible setback criteria in effect at the time of d*?
❑ Yes RNo
7. Did the facility fail to have a certified operator in responsible charge?
8. Are there lagoons or storage ponds on site which need to be properly closed?
Structures (Lagoons and/or Holding Ponds)
9. Is storage capacity (freeboard plus storm storage) less than adequate?
Freeboard (ft): Structure 1 Strug
e 2 Structure 3
............................ ........ .................
10. Is seepage observed from any of the structures?
Structure 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)
13. Do any of the structures lack adequate minimum or maximum liquid level markers?
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes UNo
❑ Yes 9 No
Structure 5 Structure 6
Waste Application
14. Is there physical evidence of over application?
(If in excess of WMP, or runoff entering waters of the State, notify DWQ)
15. Crop type 01..O..V-.:! ........ 1 S t k Q 1`� `............... .............................................. ....................................
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?
For Certified Facilities Qnly
22. Does the facility fail to have a copy of the Animal Waste Management Plan readily available?
23. Were any additional problems noted which cause noncompliance of the Certified AWMP?
24. Does record keeping need improvement?
❑ Yes
® No
❑ Yes
ONo
❑ Yes
[K No
❑ Yes
❑ No
❑ Yes
KNo
❑ Yes RNo
❑ Yes [;YNo
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes PrNo
❑ Yes No
❑ Yes [)RNo
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes ❑ No
Corrirrtents'(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
vj 04
l '
r
I
Reviewer/Inspector Name `` Y� + � 'O'V _,ffl 1
Reviewer/Inspector Signature: Date: -
cc: Division or Water Quality. W ter Ouality Section. Facility Assessment Unit 4/30/97

JUL-14-1995
15;34 FROM DEM WATER QUALITY SECTION TO
W5KU r . r el ruc
Farm No
Mailing
County:
Site Re
quires Amatc Attention:
Facility No.
DMSION OF ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT
ANIMAL FEEDLOT OPERATIONS STYE VISITATION RECORD
DATE: &' 7 � Sf1995
Time: /v oo
�x t%l'
Integrator: I Phone;
On Site Representative: Phone:
Physical AddresSl ,=tion:
Type of Operation: Swine Poultry Cattle ✓���
Design Capacity: _ /„r7 Number of Animals on Site: 0 ,
DEM Certification Number: ACE DEM Certification Number: ACNEW
Latitude: ' _ W r3 Longitude: ? 2 Elevation: Feet
Circle Yes or No
Does the Animal Waste Lagoon have sufficient freeboard of 1 Foot + 25 year 24 hour stom event
(approximately 1 Foot + 7 inches) Yes 049 Actual Freeboard: 4— —1-Ft. Inches
Was any seepage observed from the lagoon(s)? Yes or io Was any erosion observed? Yes or Co
Is adequate land available for spray? Q or No is the cover crop adequate? a ' No
Crop(s) being utilized: rc►. ' + S, ( -a 1
Does the facility meet SCS minimum setback criteria? 200 Fcct from Dwellings? a %r No
100 Feet from Wells? Yes or No^'�''
Is the animal waste stockpiled within 100 Feet of USGS Blue Line Stream? Yes J
Is animal waste land applied or spray irrigated within 25 Feet of a USGS Map Blue Line? Yes or(9
Is animal waste discharged into waters of the state/by man-made ditch, flushing system, or other
similar man-made devices? Yes or No %%�ul P ��f Yes, Please Explain.
Does the facility maintain adequate waste management records (volumes of manure, land applied,
spray irrigated on specific acreage with c9vercrop)? Yes or No
cc: Facility Assessment Unit Use Attachments if Needed.
TOTAL P.02

r
V CA n Cf`Ip�

Sha R :-Ivirzz Irrunc4inte A'-nLicn
001c2it7 Nutty !
VISI : TION RECORD
DAI-E, / 7 3495
Owner; G;t1�Y` n.;f _ Rarra NHM=
Cotmtl: -., CS'[JyL FolZ D
Agent VisiL,B Sim _ sD nl ' % / phone: lo —3 3 3-47 Yao
Cperator: oulm R ry SDI _ Phan: 210 -/.a -/o - 3 t'v
On Site Re7Pmcn=Jva' NG'r °-`'y r- P9anc:
Mysical Address r l� -
.% lu' Al C.
Tyre of Or= -lion: ,Swine Poultry Cattle L P 4 .e f>
D,sigR Capacity- 175— :ti`um€ er of Animals on Sitt: 4 k�01A) ..-_--
1,iirnrSe:!��° - r z—' 3 Longitudoc -e' S5 " ._�..~.
Type of in�pcc,,Icn: Gmund Aerial —
Circle YQS DINC
Doc- the AniixA Waste Lagacn l!tve miTtcic:it freboard of 1 Fvat 25 yew-4 hour storm event
(,,Ipproeimnlely I Foot =7 nchas) Ycs dr a Err : :nasd: Z-Q i �.�. _ Inches
For facilities wiLh moro t nn =e iaSr'nsl, p1WSC address the cuter )agaoas' 'Tczioatd tinder the
Clitnincilis sz-- ion.
Wns any seuptlgc observed t`'` Iagcon(s)? Yeg o Na as1,cm erosion of thz dam?: Yes ► v
Is ad:rlua;c lard av016le for iard spplic:uian? Yes or Nsz Fs the czivc; crop :d�aaf=7 Ycs cr No
A iu(inal Cou:rnentx:� f 2 u �o�f�, ��✓ U•' e ;101entlls-.
?Aoto,Y /,D � -e 6oc�� e p _
Fa-'t to [phone] Signature orANit
lyler9er �,l�u+a � - Ae !I
Z