290020_INSPECTIONS_20171231

Division of Water Quality _.jW
L��
umber a Division of Soil and Water Cuiiservation
Q Other Agency
Type of Visit o pliance Inspection 0 Operation Review 0 Structure Evaluation 0 Technical Assistance
Reason for Visit Routine 0 Complaint 0 Follow up 0 Referral 0 Emergency 0 Other ❑ Denied Access
Date of Visit: Arrival Time: 6 60 1 Departure Time: LITj U I County: Region:
Farm Name: h4hOwner Email:
Owner Name: Phone: q
a
Mailing Address:
Physical Address: I V °Z'' l r d
33
Facility Contact: Title: Phone No: t
Onsite Representative: "LbIntegrator:
li' S • �i
Certified Operator: Operator Certification Number:la
Back-up Operator: Back-up Certification Number:
Location of Farm: Latitude: Mr `� Longitude: `Q ° `
- �)� �. lJd��� ...p�` ,V`'":,�.�-a." -inn � M�-: o f f I� �� �-`�`.''� �7 �•`.�-�.3f• w
Swine
Wean to Finish
Wean to Feeder
Feeder to Finish
Farrow to Wean
Farrow to Feeder
Farrow to Finish
Gilts
Other
❑ Other
Design Current Design Current
Capacity Population Wet Poultry Capacity Population
❑ Layer
II ❑ 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?
Design Current
Cattle Capacity Population
X.Dairy
Cow
Ef
Dairy Calf
❑
Dairy Heifei
❑
Dry Cow
❑
Non -Dairy
❑
Beef Stocker
❑
Beef Feeder
❑
Beef Brood Cow
Number of Structures: IT-1
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 No ❑ NA ❑ NE
12128104 Continued

Facility Number: • Date of Inspection
Waste Collection & Treatment
4. is storage capacity (structural plus storm storage plus heavy rainfall) less than adequate? ❑ Yes No ❑ NA ❑ NE
a. If yes, is waste level into the structural freeboard? ❑ Yes ❑ No ❑ NA ❑ NE
Structure ID
4tructure 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
(ie/ large trees, severe erosion, seepage, etc.) ((((((
6. Are there structures on -site which are not properly addressed and/or managed ❑ Yes KNo ❑ NA ❑ NE
through a waste management or closure plan?
If any of questions 4-6 were answered yes, and the situation poses an immediate public health or environmental threat, notify DWQ
7. Do any of the structures need maintenance or improvement? Yes ❑ No ❑ NA ❑ NE
8. Do any of the stuctures lack adequate markers as required by the permit? yes ❑ No ❑ NA ❑ NE
(Not applicable to roofed pits, dry stacks and/or wet stacks) /�
9. Does any part of the waste management system other than the waste structures require ❑ Yes OKO ❑ NA ❑ NE
maintenance or improvement?
Waste ADDlication
10. Are there any required buffers, setbacks, or compliance alternatives that need ❑ Yes )k4o
❑ NA ElNE
maintenance/improvement?
11. Is there evidence of incorrect application? If yes, check the appropriate box below. ❑ Yes o ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Excessive Ponding ❑ Hydraulic Overload ❑ Frozen Ground ❑ Heavy Metals (Cu, Zn, etc.)
❑ PAN ❑ PAN > 10% or 10 lbs ❑ Total Phosphorus ❑ Failure -to Incorporate Manure/Sludge into Bare Soil
El Outside of Acceptable Crop Window ❑ Evidence of Wind Dri ❑ pplication Outside of Area
12. Crop type(s)a�}
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 j��No
❑ NA
❑ NE
16. Did the facility fail to secure and/or operate per the irrigation design or wettable acre determination?❑ Yes ❑ No
XNA
❑ NE
17. Does the facility lack adequate acreage for land application?
❑ Yes [(No
❑ NA
❑ NE
18. Is there a lack of properly operating waste application equipment?
❑ Yes J'°1""
❑ NA
❑ NE
Comments (refer to question #): Explain any YES answers and/or any recommendations or any other comments.
Use drawings of facility to better explain situations. (use additional pages as necessary):
�m - novae �.
ti
AAL��Z� Aoa
Reviewer/Inspector Name Phone: aT at
Reviewer/Inspector SignatureUNJ Date: .dnn
J
%, 1 12128101 Continued

0 0
Facility Number: — Date of Inspection
Re aired Records & Documents
19. Did the facility fail to have Certificate of Coverage & Permit readily available? ❑ Yes No El NA [INE
20. Does the facility fail to have all components of the CAWMP readily available? If yes, check ❑ Yes No El NA El NE
the appropriate box. ❑ WUP ❑ Checklists ❑ Design El Maps [I Other'
21. Doe record keeping need improvement?es ❑ No ❑ NA [I NE
EW ste Application �ee6 Freeboard Waste Analysis soil Analysis aste Transfers r
ainfall Stocking Crop Yield onthly and V Rain Inspections Bather Gode
22. Did the facility fail to install and maintain a rain gauge?
23. If selected, did the facility fail to install and maintain rainbreakers on irrigation equipment?
24.' Did the facility fail to calibrate waste application equipment as required by the permit?
25. Did the facility fail to conduct a sludge survey as required by the permit?
26. Did the facility fail to have an actively certified operator in charge?
27. Did the facility fail to secure a phosphorus loss assessment (PLAT) certification?
Other Issues
28. Were any additional problems noted which cause non-compliance of the permit or CAWMP?
29. Did the facility fail to properly dispose of dead animals within 24 hours and/or document
and report the mortality rates that were higher than normal?
30. At the time of the inspection did the facility pose an odor or air quality concern?
If yes, contact a regional Air Quality representative immediately
31. Did the facility fail to notify the regional office of emergency situations as required by
General Permit? (ie/ discharge, freeboard problems, over application)
32. Did Reviewer/Inspector fail to discuss review/inspection with an on -site representative?
33. Does facility require a follow-up visit by same agency?
❑ Yes io
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Yes'
VNA
❑ NE
El Yes
FNo
❑ NA
ElNE
❑ Yes
VNA
❑ NE
❑ Yes
No
[:1 NA
❑ NE
❑ Yes
l`' o
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Yes
o
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Yes
Ko
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Yes
ffNo
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Yes
XNo
❑ NA
❑ NE
ElYes
o
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Yes
o
❑ NA
❑ NE
Additional Comments and/or Drawings:
row
AM
I '
J�
024)

Division of Water Quality
Division of Soil and Water Conservation
❑ Other Agency
Facility Number:
Facility Status: Active Permit:
AWC290020 ❑ Denied Access
Inspection Type:
Inactive or Closed Date:
Reason for Visit: Routine
County: Davidson
Region: Winston-Salem
Date of Visit: 02/06/2007
Entry Time:09:30 6M Exit Time: 10:20 AM
Incident #:
Farm Name: Hi-Rock+falsteins
Owner Email:
Owner: Michael L Palmer
Phone: 336-7ga-2099„
Mailing Address: 1136 Palmer Rd
Wigton
NC 272921603„
Physical Address:
Facility Status: ❑ Compliant
❑ Not Compliant Integrator:
Location of Farm:
Latitude: 35"41'42"
Longitude: 80*13'33"
Hwy. 47 south of Lexington - take a
right onto Parks Rd. - then take right onto Palmer Rd.
- travel around 1 mile and the farm will be
on the right.
Question Areas:
Discharges & Stream Impacts
Waste Collection & Treatment
Waste Application
Records and Documents
© Other Issues
Certified Operator: Michael L Palmer
Operator Certification Number: 20975
Secondary OIC(s):
On -Site Representative(s): Name Title Phone
On -site representative Mike Palmer Phone:
24 hour contact name Mike Palmer Phone:
Primary Inspector: Meli Rosqbr ck Phone:
JA ()U
Inspector Signature: Date:
Secondary Inspector(s):
Inspection Summary:
8. Larry Graham is awaiting John Eddy's (PE) report prior to installing marker, according to Mr. Palmer.
14. & 28, Mr. Palmer stated that he had requested that Davidson Co. SWCDINRCS add soybeans to his waste plan.
21. 2006 soil test results ok.
21. No waste applied since May 2006.
21. Soybean yield was 48-50 budacre per Mr. Palmer, Need to record this info and keep with other records.
24. Awaiting documentation from commercial hauler, Brian Southers.
80 heifers are contained on denuded lots across the road, Buffer appears to be excluding sediment and nutrients adequately.
Page: 1

•
Permit: AWC290020 Owner - Facility: Michael L Palmer Facility Number: 290020
Inspection Date: 02/06/2007 Inspection Type: Compliance Inspection Reason for Via It: Routine
Regulated Operations Design Capacity Current Population
Cattle
Cattle -Milk Cow 275 50
i Total Design Capacity: 275
Total SSLW: 385,000
Waste Structures
Type Identifier Closed Date Start Date Designed Freeboard Observed Freeboard
kaste Pond I WSP 30.00
y
Page: 2

Permit: AWC290020 Owner - Facility: Michael L Palmer Facility Number: 290020
Inspection Date: 02/06/2007 Inspection Type: Compliance Inspection Reason for Visit: Routine
Discharnes & 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?
❑
■ 130
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)
❑
■ ❑ Cl
2. Is there evidence of a past discharge from any part of the operation?
❑
■ ❑ Cl
3. Were there any adverse impacts or potential adverse impacts to Waters of the State other than from a
❑
woo
discharge?
Waste Collection, Storage _& Treatment
Yes
No NA NE
4. Is -storage capacity less than adequate?
❑
■ ❑ D.
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 slacks)
9. Does any part of the waste management system other than the waste structures require maintenance or
❑
■ ❑ ❑
improvement?
Waste ApIiCp anon
Yes
No NA NE
10. Are there any required buffers, setbacks, or compliance alternatives that need maintenance or
❑
000
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

0 . 0
Permit: AWC290020 Owner - Facility: Michael L Palmer
Inspection Date: 02/06/2007 Inspection Type: Compliance Inspection
Facility Number: 290020
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 (Grain)
Crop Type 2
Corn (Silage)
Crop Type 3
Soybeans
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.
WU P?
❑
Page: 4

•
•
Permit: AWC290020 Owner- Facility: Michael L Palmer
Facility Number: 290020
Inspection Date: 02/06/2007 Inspection Type: Compliance Inspection
Reason for Vislt: Routine
Records and Documents
Yes No NA NE
Checklists?
❑
Design?
❑
Maps?
❑
Other?
❑
21. Does record keeping need improvement?
■ ❑ ❑ ❑
If yes, check the appropriate box below.
Waste Application?
❑
120 Minute inspections?
❑
Weather code?
❑
Weekly Freeboard?
❑
Transfers?
❑
Rainfall?
❑
Inspections after > 1 inch rainfall $ monthly?
❑
Waste Analysis?
❑
Annual soil analysis?
❑
Crop yields? ■
Stocking? ❑
Annual Certification Form (NPDES only)? Cl
22. Did the facility fail to install and maintain a rain gauge? ❑ ■ ❑ ❑
21 If selected, did the facility fail to install and maintain a rainbreaker on irrigation equipment (NPDES only)? ❑ 0011
24. Did the facility fail to calibrate waste application equipment as required by the permit? ❑ ■ ❑ ❑
25. Did the facility fail to conduct a sludge survey as required by the permit? ❑ ■ ❑ ❑
26, Did the facility fail ,to have an actively certified operator in charge? ❑ ■ ❑ ❑
27, Did the facility fail to secure a phosphorous loss assessment (PLAT) certification? ❑ ■ ❑ ❑
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 ❑ ■ ❑ Cl
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

0 •
Permit: AWC290020 Owner - Facility: Michael L Palmer Facility Number: 290020
Inspection Date: 02/06/2007 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

Division of Water Quality
Facility Number . - I aZ •Division "Milan and Water Conservation
Other Agency
Type of Visit Compliance Inspection 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: Z Q Arrival Time: Departure Time: R County: �V Region: 0S F-0
Farm Name: _ W� Ro ;K `` o 15'_6 Y'1 5 _ __ Owner Email:
Owner Name: M 1 �. al �Yi Phone: 9 Z_ a 09g
Mailing Address: a '
aZ
Physical Address:
Facility Contact: u I i ot, rA 1 in jj Title:
Onsite Representative: _ r+� ��L
Certified Operator:,`-
Back-up Operator:
Phone No:
Integrator:
Operator Certification Number: a� 0 27 5
Back-up Certification Number:
Location of Farm: J� Latitude: �� ` ®" Longitude: Boo a' [
4l "
w 41 5f,� o'FiroM Zl. Y 1 n q 7,M . �'• o Iti+() o,-r vs • o n �
pad �.. � • � � Snu`Hn. a��o w C'•h ' �d . 1 � �' f on �. �
Design C•nrrent
Design
Current Design Current
Swine IN City Population Wet Poultry
C►apacity
Population C*attle Capacity Population
❑ Wean to Finish ❑ Layer
DairyCow cP
❑ Wean to Feeder
❑ Non -Layer
Dair Calf
❑ Feeder to Finish
❑ DairyHeifer
❑ Farrow to Wean Dry Poultry
❑ D Cow
❑ Farrow to Feeder
❑ Non -Dairy
❑ Farrow to Finish ❑ Layers
❑ Beef Stocker
❑ Gilts ❑Non -La Non -Layers
❑ Beef Feeder
❑ Pullets
❑ Boars
ElBeef Brood Co
❑ Turke s
Other ❑ Turkey Pou Its
❑ Other ❑ Other
Number of Structures:
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)
c. What is the estimated volume that reached waters of the State (gallons)?
d. Does discharge bypass the waste management system? (If yes, notify DWQ)
2. Is there evidence of a past discharge from any part of the operation?
3. Were there any adverse impacts or potential adverse impacts to the Waters of the State
other than from a discharge?
Page I of 3
❑ Yes XNo ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes ❑ No ❑ NA ❑ NE
9
❑ Yes ❑ No
y
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Yes )KNo
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Yes blNo
❑ NA
❑ NE
12128104
Continued

Facility Number: ; — 01 0 Date of Inspection b •
Waste Collection & Treatment
4. is storage capacity (structural plus storm storage plus heavy rainfall) less than adequate?
❑ Yes ZNo
❑ NA ❑ NE
a. If yes, is waste level into the structural freeboard?
❑ Yes ❑ No
[]NA ❑ NE
Structure 1 Structure 2 Structure 3 Structure 4
Structure 5
Structure 6
j Identifier:
M f Spillway?:
Designed Freeboard (in):
Observed Freeboard (in): 30
5. Are there any immediate threats to the integrity of any of the structures observed?
❑ Yes NrNo
❑ NA ❑ NE
(ie/ large trees, severe erosion, seepage, etc.)
6. Are there structures on -site which are not properly addressed and/or managed
❑ Yes 5�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?
0Yes ❑ 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 XNo
❑ NA ❑ NE
maintenance or improvement?
Waste Application
10. Are there any required buffers, setbacks, or compliance alternatives that need
❑ Yes [ANo
❑ NA ❑ NE
maintenance/improvement?
11. Is there evidence of incorrect application? If yes, check the appropriate box below.
❑ Yes �No
❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Excessive Ponding ❑ Hydraulic Overload ❑ Frozen Ground ❑ Heavy Metals (Cu, Zn, etc.)
❑ PAN ❑ PAN > 10% or l0 lbs ❑ Total Phosphorus ❑ Failure to Incorporate Manure/Sludge into Bare Soil
❑ Outside of Acceptable Crop Window ❑ Evidence of Wind Drift ❑ Application Outside of Area
12. Crop type(s) ��}� Leann , Corr]
_
13. Soil type(s)
14. Do the receiving crops differ from those designated in the CAWMP?
N 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 deter it�on ?
❑ Yes
❑ No
X 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):
Reviewer/inspector Name I r Phone:
Reviewer/inspector Signature: Date: Q
Page 2 of 3 ' V v 12129104 Continued

C�A
11
Facility Number: a — 02 9 ote of Inspection b
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 XNo ❑ NA ❑ NE
the appropriate box. ❑ WUp ❑ Checklists ❑ Design El Maps El Other
21. Does record keeping need i 'provement? I o Yes ❑ No ❑ NA ❑ NE
EI❑ Waste Appli ation e ly Freeboard Waste Analysis Soil nalysis
Rainfall Stocking op Yield Monthly and 1" Rain Inspections E Weather 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 VNA ❑ NE
24. Did the facility fail to calibrate waste application equipment as required by the permit? ❑ Yes 13�No ❑ NA ❑ NE
25. Did the facility fail to conduct a sludge survey as required by the permit?
❑ Yes
❑ No
VNA
❑ 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?
KYes
❑ No
❑ 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
XNo
❑ 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
YNo
❑ NA
❑ NE
33. Does facility require a follow-up visit by same agency?
❑ Yes
PNo
❑ NA
❑ NE
Additional Comments and/or Drawings:
S be S 'In Mr. Palmer nc+�h � bcwi&ne) 5��
AL
a �,al►lo�-a.�-Ion ? wa�,a+t t� on B�i�.n sotrN„�xs .
Ma-r �e-c ? Lox � [!t r0. a �vt ° 5 LL- t � +�� 0 n :To h v. e
a1- a ob b 5011 5&.+ 1e s
No Lk--as+e- 0_� lied 5 r l"c&
s
on eecl 104 (Je,noAeJ) OLC rcSS road . bo- j(�
O�P S to be, C'm+6"c 0'( !�Jmeet4 Jrk ,
01�0 by tel� 4r Sal I eat j-. 0 bu.
�u4 reCorj 5 j V) bco
Ur
fe
Page 3 of 3
I2/28/04

Division of Water Quality
❑ Division of Soil and Water Conservation
❑ Other Agency
Facility Number: 220020
Facility Status: Active Permit: 6M2900 0 Denied Access
Inspection Type: Compliance Inspection
Inactive or Closed Date:
Reason for Visit: Routine
County: Davidson Region: W'nston-Salem
Date of Visit: 10/26/2oa6
Entry Time:12:35 PM ., Exit Time: 02:00 PM Incident #:
Farm Name: Hi -Rock HQlsteins
Owner Email:
Owner: Michael L Palmer,
Phone: [phone]
Mailing Address: 1136 Palmer Rd
Lexington NC 272921603
Physical Address:
Facility Status: ❑ Compliant
❑ Not Compliant Integrator:
Location of Farm:
Latitude: 35°41'42" Longitude: 80°13'33" _
Hwy. 47 south of Lexington - take a
right onto Parks Rd. - then take right onto Palmer Rd. - travel around 1 mile and the farm will be
on the right.
Question Areas:
Discharges & Stream Impacts
Waste Collection & Treatment Waste Application
Records and Documents
Other Issues
Certified Operator: Michael L Palmer
Operator Certification Number: 20975
Secondary OIC(s):
On -Site Representative(s): Name Title Phone
On -site representative Mike Palmer Phone:
24 hour contact name Mike Palmer Phone:
Primary Inspector: M li sa Rosebrock Phone:
Inspector Signature: IliaDate:
Secondary Inspector(s):
Inspection Summary:
3. Buffer on heifer lot looks good.
8. Need marker for waste storage pond.
21. Don't forget to obtain 2006 soil samples.
28. and 14. Need to add soybeans to WUP.
24. Need calibration documentation from Southers.
Most recent waste analysis=2,4 lbs. N/1000 gal.
Page: 1

4
r:
Permit: AWC290020 Owner- Facility: Michael L Palmer
Inspection Date: 10/26/2006 Inspection Type: Compliance Inspection
Facility Number: 290020
Reason for Visit: Routine
Regulated Operations Design Capacity Current Population
Cattle
O Cattle -Milk Cow 275 40
Total Design Capacity: 275
Total SSLW: 385,000
Type Identifier Closed Date Start Date Designed Freeboard Observed Freeboard
aste Pond WSP 54.00
Page: 2

Permit: AWC290020 Owner- Facility: Michael L Palmer Facility Number: 290020
Inspection Date: 10/26/2006 Inspection Type: Compliance Inspection Reason for Visit: Routine
Dlscharges.A_Stream Impacts Yes No NA NE
1. Is any discharge observed from any part of the operation? 001113
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
CEO
❑
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 (LeJ 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

i •
Permit: AWC290020 Owner - Facility: Michael L Palmer
Facility Number :
290020
Inspection Date: 1012612006 Inspection Type: Compliance Inspection
Reason for Visit: Routine
Waste A lication
------- --PP
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
Crop Type 3
Crop Type 4
Crop Type 5
Crop Type 6
Soil Type 1
Soil Type 2
Soil Type 3
Soil Type 4
Soil Type 5
Soil Type 6
14. Do the receiving crops differ from those designated in the Certified Animal Waste Management
■
❑
❑
❑
Plan(CAWMP)?
15. Does the receiving crop and/or land application site need improvement?
❑
■
❑
❑
16. Did the facility fail to secure and/or operate per the irrigation design or wettable acre determination? ❑
■
❑
❑
17. Does the facility lack adequate acreage for land application?
❑
■
❑
❑
18. Is there a lack of properly operating waste application equipment?
❑
■
❑
❑
Records and Documents
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?
❑
■
Cl
❑
If yes, check the appropriate box below.
WU P?
❑
Page: 4

• 0 . I
Permit: AWC290020 Owner - Facility: Michael L Palmer Facility Number: 290020
Inspection Date: 10/26/2006 Inspection Type: Compliance inspection Reason for Visit: Routine
Records and Documents Yes No NA NE
Checklists? ❑
Design? ❑
Maps? ❑
Other? ❑
21. Does record keeping need improvement? ❑ ■ ❑ Cl
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)?
❑
Cl
■
❑
24. Did the facility fail to calibrate waste application equipment as required by the permit?
❑
■
❑
❑
25. Did the facility fail to conduct a sludge survey as required by the permit?
Cl
❑
■
❑
26. Did the facility fail to have an actively certified operator in charge?
❑
■
❑
❑
27. Did the facility fail to secure a phosphorous loss assessment (PLAT) certification?
❑
❑
■
❑
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 ONOO
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

•
Ll
Permit: AWC290020 Owner - Facility: Michael L Palmer
Facility Number. 290020
Inspection Date: 1012612006 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 Reviewerlinspector fail to discuss review/inspection with on -site representative?
33. Does facility require a follow-up visit by same agency?
❑ ■ ❑ Cl
❑ ■ ❑ ❑
Page: 6

Type of Visit C mpliance Inspection O Operation Review O Structure Evaluation Q Technical Assistance
Reason for Visit Routine Q Complaint O Follow up Q Referral O Emergency O Other ❑ Denied Access
Date of Visit: tp Arrival Time: Departure Time: County: ��i,t Region:
Farm Name: Owner Email:
Owner Name: Yoe PffAi)N4'V_- Phone: _,. ,3 ' �� ' a C)9
Mailing Address: JL.24o a ex, PA f Lei, n a far? , toC _ Q
Physical Address:
Facility Contact: 14,9Rat t -eJY" Title:
Onsite Representative: YY &QJ �Q1%L
Certified Operator: t r y16) att--L Q ex -
Back -up Operator:
Phone No:
Integrator:_
a o�
Operator Certification Number:
Back-up Certification Number:
Location of Farm: Latitude: 1.7J1 RT I NXI Longitude: ®°
From bex1�orn ' 5A i s bury + • l F1(x4- sc.ac_wvLp Pet. ij&�t `
4
h+ x)+o Fla 'd u ~�1 l��i J a�.; J e
Design
Current
Design
Current esign Current
Swine Capacity
Population Wet Poultry
Capacity
Population Cattlewo,apacity Population
.
❑ Wean to Finish
❑ Layer
ai Cow X-7
❑ we to Feeder
❑ Non -Layer
Dai Calf
❑ Feeder to Finish
❑ DairyHeifer
❑ Farrow to Wean
Dry Poultry
❑ D Cow
❑ Farrow to Feeder
❑ Non -Dairy
❑ Farrow to Finish
❑ Layers
❑ Beef Stocker
❑Beef Feeder
ElNon-La ersEl
POGilts
Pullets
Boars
❑ Beef Brood Cow
❑ Turkeys
Other ❑ Turkey Poults
❑ Other 10 Other
Number of Structures:
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)
c. What is the estimated volume that reached waters of the State (gallons)?
d. Does discharge bypass the waste management system? (If yes, notify DWQ)
2. Is there evidence of a past discharge from any part of the operation?
3. Were there any adverse impacts or potential adverse impacts to the Waters of the State
other than from a discharge?
Page 1 of 3
❑ Yes �No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes XNo
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Yes XNo
❑ NA
❑ NE
12128104 Continued

Facility Number: — Ao • Date of Inspection a7
Waste Collection & Treatment XNo
4. Is storage capacity (structural plus storm storage plus heavy rainfall) less than adequate? ❑Yes ElNA ❑ NE
a. If yes, is waste level into the structural freeboard? ElYes ❑ No ❑ NA ❑ NE
Structy 1 Structure 2 Structure 3 Structure 4 Structure 5 Structure 6
Identifier: '��
Spillway?: e
Designed Freeboard (in):
Observed Freeboard (in):
5. Are there any immediate threats to the integrity of any of the structures observed? ❑ Yes
XNo ❑ NA ❑ NE
(iel 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 ❑ 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
j<No ❑ NA ❑ NE
maintenance or improvement?
Waste Application
10. Are there any required buffers, setbacks, or compliance alternatives that need ❑ Yes
XNo ❑ NA ❑ NE
maintenance/improvement?
11. Is there evidence of incorrect application? If yes, check the appropriate box below. ❑ Yes
No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Excessive Ponding ❑ Hydraulic Overload ❑ Frozen Ground ❑ Heavy Metals (Cu, Zn, etc.)
❑ PAN ❑ PAN > 10% or 10 Ibs ❑ Total Phosphorus ❑ Failure to Incorporate Manure/Sludge into Bare Soil
❑ Outside of Acceptable Crop Window ❑ Evidence of Wind Drift ❑ Application Outside of Area
12. Crop type(s) —
0 & ,")
13. Soil type(s)
14. Do the receiving crops differ from those designated in the CAWMP?
Yes
❑l No ❑ NA
❑ NE
15. Does the receiving crop and/or land application site need improvement?
❑ Yes
j?Sj 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
)tNo ❑ NA
❑ NE
18. Is there a lack of properly operating waste application equipment?
❑ Yes
O(No ❑ NA
❑ NE
Comments (refer to question #): Explain any YES answers and/or any recommendations or any other comments -
Use drawings of facility to better explain situations. (use additional pages as necessary):
M-5 0w �s .
Reviewer/Inspector Name [lilt S [" Phone:
Reviewer/Inspector Signature: Date: Q2(p Q
Page 2 of 3 k� 12178104 Continued

cl�
Facility Number: — Qate of Inspection O •
Required Records & Documents
19. Did the facility fail to have Certificate of Coverage & Permit readily available? ❑ Yes N El NA ❑ NE
20. Does the facility fail to have all components of the CAWMP readily available? If yes, check ❑ Yes No ❑ NA ❑ NE
the appropriate box. ❑ WUp ❑ Checklists ❑ Design El Maps El Other
21. Does cord keeping need improvement? i El Yes No ❑ NA [I NE
Waste Application L� Weekly Freeboard Waste Analysis Soil Analysis ❑�ctsrs n
Rainfall Stocking ❑ Crop Yield s M onthly and 1" Rain Inspections Weather Code
22.
Did the facility fail to install and maintain a rain gauge?
❑ Yes
VNo
❑ NA
❑ NE
23.
If selected, did the facility fail to install and maintain rainbreakers on irrigation equipment?
❑ Yes
❑ No
1!�NA
❑ NE
24.
Did the facility fail to calibrate waste application equipment as required by the permit?
❑ Yes
NNo
❑ 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
No
❑ NA
❑ NE
27.
Did the facility fail to secure a phosphorus loss assessment (PLAT) certification?
❑ Yes
iiii❑"``No
9NA
❑ NE
Other Issues
28.
Were any additional problems noted which cause non-compliance of the permit or CAWMP?
Yes
❑l No
❑ NA
❑ NE
29.
Did the facility fail to properly dispose of dead animals within 24 hours and/or document
❑ Yes
Lilo
❑ NA
❑ NE
and report the mortality rates that were higher than normal?
T
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
0 No
❑ NA
❑ NE
General Permit? (ie/ discharge, freeboard problems, over application)
32.
Did Reviewer/Inspector fail to discuss review/inspection with an on -site representative?
❑ Yes
9No
❑ NA
❑ NE
33.
Does facility require a follow-up visit by same agency?
❑ Yes
VNo
❑ NA
❑ NE
Additional Comments and/or Drawings:
01
a�. ao�1�S.�Iroo6 .
C,d (A) v P,a
I oZ co
0
o3 �-
Page 3 of 3
12128104

Division of Water Quality
❑ Division of Soil and Water Conservation `
❑ Other Agency
Facility Number: 290020 Facility Status: Active Permit. AWC290020 ❑ Denied Access
Inspection Type: Compliance Inspection _ Inactive or Closed Date:
Reason for Visit: Routine County: Dgvidson Region: Winston-Salem
Date of Visit: 11/22/2005 Entry T1me:09:30 AM Exit Time: 11:10 AM Incident #:
Farm Name: Hi -Rock Holsteins Owner Email:
Owner:
Phone: [phone]
Malling Address: 1136 Palmer Rd Lexington NC 272921603
Physical Address:
Facility Status: ❑ Compliant ❑ Not Compliant Integrator:
Location of Farm: Latitude: 35"41'42" Longitude: 80°13'33"
Hwy. 47 south of Lexington - take a right onto Parks Rd. - then take right onto Palmer Rd. - travel around 1 mile and the farm will be
on the right.
Question Areas:
Discharges & Stream Impacts Waste Collection & Treatment Waste Application
Records and Documents Other Issues
Certified Operator: Michael L Palmer Operator Certification Number: 20975
Secondary OIC(s):
On -Site Re prosentative(s): Name Title Phone
24 hour contact name Mike Palmer
On -site representative Mike Palmer
Primary Inspector: Melissa Rosebrock
Inspector Signature:
Secondary Inspector(s):
Phone:
Phone:
Phone: [phone]
Ext.383
Date:
Inspection Summary:
3. and 9, There was evidence of solid waste washing from the heifer lot (across the road)and into the stream buffer. Suggest fencing
corner to allow vegetation to grow or to install 2"x12" boards to trap solids. Problem may correct itself when the temporary fence is
removed and the lot enlarged. Check next visit.
7. and B. Construction on the WSP enlargement is continuing. When completed, there is to be vegetation on the dam. Consultant is to
install marker also.
18, Contracts with Grassy Knob to pump (Southers).
21. 2005 Soil samples to be sent to Raleigh around the firstof December.
21, Per operator, after SWCD revises WUP, the PAN number for small grain silage is to be raised from 72 to 105. Confine with tech
specialist.
21. Could not locate T-3827 F-7 in the chart in the WUP. It is in the map section, however.
21. 11/14/05 waste analysis=6.7 Ibs Nl1000 gal.
Page: 1

Permit: AWC290020 Owner- Facility: Michael L Palmer Facility Number. 290020
Inspection Date: 11/22/2005 inspection Type: Compliance Inspection Reason for Visit: Routine
Regulated Operations Design Capacity Current Population
Cattle
O Cattle -Milk Caw 275 164
Total Design Capacity: 275
Total SSLW: 385,000
Waste Structures
Type Identifler Closed Date Start Date Deslgned Freeboard Observed Freeboard
Las
Pond WSP 36.00
Page: 2

Permit: AWC290020 Owner- Facility: Michael L Palmer Facility Number: 290020
Inspection Date: 11/22/2005 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? ❑ ■ ❑ Cl
b. Did discharge reach Waters of the State? (if yes, notify DWQ) 0000,
c. Estimated volume reaching surface waters?
d. Does discharge bypass the waste management system? (if yes, notify DWQ) ❑ ■ ❑ ❑
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 Slate other than from a ■ ❑ ❑ ❑
discharge?
Waste Collection, Storage & Treatment Yes No NA NE
4. Is storage capacity less than adequate? ❑ ■ ❑ ❑
If yes, is waste level into structural freeboard?
❑
5. Are there any immediate threats to the integrity of any of the structures observed (I.e./ large trees, severe
❑
■
❑ ❑
erosion, seepage, etc.)?
6. Are there structures on -site that are not properly addressed and/or managed through a waste management
❑
■
❑ ❑
or closure plan?
7, Do any of the structures need maintenance or improvement?
■
❑
❑ ❑
8. Do any of the structures lack adequate markers as required by the permit? (Not applicable to roofed pits,
■
❑
❑ ❑
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: AWC290020 Owner- Facility: Michael L Palmer
Inspection Date: 11/22/2005 Inspection Type: Compliance Inspection
Facility Number: 290020
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
Small Grain (Wheat,
Barley, Oats)
Crop Type 2
Corn (Silage)
Crop Type 3
Fescue (Hay)
Crop Type 4
Crop Type 5
Crop Type 6
Soil Type 1
Soil Type 2
Soil Type 3 I
Soil Type 4
Soil Type 5
Soil Type 6
14. Do the receiving crops differ from those designated in the Certified Animal Waste Management
❑ ■ Q ❑
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?
Cl ■ ❑ ❑
20. Does the facility fail to have all components of the CAWMP readily available?
❑ ■ ❑ ❑
If yes, check the appropriate box below.
WU P?
Q
Page: 4

Permit: AWC290020 Owner- Facility: Michael Palmer
Facility Number: 290020
Inspection Date: 11/22/2005 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 & 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 fall to calibrate waste application equipment as required by the permit?
❑ ■
❑
❑
25. Did the facility fail to conduct a sludge survey as required by the permit?
❑ ■
❑
❑
26. Did the facility fail to have an actively certified operator in charge?
❑ ■
❑
❑
27. Did the facility fail to secure a phosphorous loss assessment (PLAT) certification?
❑ ■
❑
❑
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 lhe'facility pose an air quality concern? If yes, contact a regional Air ❑ ■ ❑ ❑
Quality representative immediately.
Page: 5

•
0
Permit: AWC290020 Owner- Facility: Michael L Palmer
Facility Number: 290020
Inspection Date: 11/22/2005 Inspection Type: Compliance Inspection
Reason for VlsIt: 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 reviewlinspection with on -site representative?
❑ ■
❑
❑
33, Does facility require a follow-up visit by same agency?
❑ ■
❑
❑
Page: 6

IType of Visit Cgmpliance Inspection Q Operation Review Q Structure Evaluation Q Technical Assistance I
Reason for Visit Routine Q Complaint Q Follow up Q Referral Q Emergency Q Other ❑ Denied Access
Date of Visit: DU Arrival Time: ® Departure Time: L.� County:WIt�SoY� Region:lrl..�7t�-�
Farm Name: [ ool— H 0 154,6 hs Owner Email:
Owner Name: �`'►� r;i_i_ � Phone: 3.3cn •_i TT 01
`p P• �
Mailing Address: _L a w1 PJIr l� ' L PJ�(.i i�1 T�i �� a ���r
Physical Address:
Facility Contact: I n e Title: Phone No:
Onsite Representative:: I )(ap,_ i-_MWtAr I �iL'i _ �� n Integrator:
Certified Operator: 11 I I \Q �___ i� i r tCr Operator Certification Number: Oil
l —IT—
Back-up Operator: Back-up Certification Number:
Location or Farm: �y :Sep fl +O 0 C—Aa6lft - rEtl—" 2.2
Longitude• M°
1rJ� 1 Savt,*N from LeXI h o� �� • D t� «-4- V-5 � . 0 In-to
1 �-� F �s �ml I
Swine
Wean to Finish
Wean to Feeder
Feeder to Finish
Farrow to Wean
Farrow to Feeder
Farrow to Finish
Gilts
Boars
Other
❑ Other
Design Current Design Current
Capacity Population Wet Poultry Capacity Population
❑ La er
I' JEJ Non -Layer
Dry Poultry
❑ Layers
❑ Non-Laye
❑ Pullets
❑ Turkeys
❑ Turkey Pouets
❑ Other
Discharges & Stream Impacts
1. Is any discharge observed from any part of the operation?
Discharge originated at: ❑ Structure ❑ Application Field ❑ Other
a. Was the conveyance man-made?
Design Current
Cattle Capacity Population
Dairy Cow
Daia Calf
a
❑
Dairy Heifer
❑
Dry Cow
❑
Non -Dairy
❑
Beef Stocker
❑
Beef Feeder
❑
Beef Brood Cow
Number of Structures:
b. Did the discharge reach waters of the State? (If yes, notify DWQ)
c. What is the estimated volume that reached waters of the State (gallons)?
d. Does discharge bypass the waste management system? (If yes, notify DWQ)
2. Is there evidence of a past discharge from any part of the operation?
3. Were there any adverse impacts or potential adverse impacts to the Waters of the State
other than from a discharge?
❑ Yes �No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes
❑ No
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Yes
❑ No
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Yes
❑ No
❑ Yes �No ❑ NA ❑ NE
19 Yes ❑ No ❑ NA ❑ NE
12128104 Continued

Facility Number: a — aU • Date of Inspection a 0-0
Waste Collection & Treatment
4. Is storage capacity (structural plus storm storage plus heavy rainfall) less than adequate? ❑ Yes y No ❑ NA ❑ NE
a. If yes, is waste level into the structural frceboard? ❑ Yes ❑ No ❑ NA ❑ NE
Structure I Structure 2 Structure 3 Structure 4 Structure 5 Structure 6
Identifier: 5 0
Spillway?:
Designed Freeboard (in):
Observed Freeboard (in):
5. Are there any immediate threats to the integrity of any of the structures observed? ❑ Yes )0 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 *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 ❑ 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 Ani lication
10. Are there any required buffers, setbacks, or compliance alternatives that need ❑ Yes [(No ❑ NA ❑ NE
maintenance/improvement?
11. Is there evidence of incorrect application? If yes, check the appropriate box below. ❑ Yes �No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Excessive Ponding ❑ Hydraulic Overload ❑ Frozen Ground ❑ Heavy Metals (Cu, Zn, etc.)
❑ PAN ❑ PAN > 10% or 10 lbs ❑ Total Phosphorus ❑ Failure to Incorporate Manure/Sludge into Bare Soil
❑ Outside of Acceptable Crop Window ❑ Evidence of Wind 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?
15. Does the receiving crop and/or land application site need improvement?
❑ Yes
❑ Yes
16. Did the facility fail to secure and/or operate per the irrigation design or wettable acre determination',[] Yes
17. Does the facility lack adequate acreage for land application? ❑ Yes
18. Is there a lack of properly operating waste application equipment?
❑ Yes
No
No
❑ No
VN o
�No
❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ NA ❑ NE
D(NA ❑ NE
❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ NA ❑ NE
q �u t�.+- LlCro55` � rot &V I solid way f 5'ti i
or
e r
' C.t ViOs- Lo s�Yl r .. Ol i�Oc.J v� °� oin io 0 O 1r-
nS 9 X: ld ra-P �o tAr a Problew// m Lor re vF + f5er-F
Reviewer/Inspector Name ZQ' ('Q '' ` 4 z'' Phone:. ��
Reviewer/Inspector Signat Date: L o�
c_e i 5 sr ova [at� l S �Pa1 arseM8104e c�L h�k ' t e ( f

Facility Number: 94 — p o Daelnspection S
Required Records & Documents
19. Did the facility fail to have Certificate of Coverage & Permit readily available? ❑ Yes No ❑ NA ❑ NE
20. Does the facility fail to have all components of the CAWMP readily available? If yes, check ❑ Yes �No ❑ NA ❑ NE
the appropriate box. ❑ WUP ❑ Checklists ❑ Design ❑Maps El Other
21. Do record keeping need'rovement? If yes, check the appropriate box below. ElI
�No
❑ NA
ElYes NE
Waste Application Freeboard Er -Waste Analysis oil Analysis n Waste Transfers
E Stocking [1�Crop Yield Monthly I" Rain Inspections B? Weather Code
RRainfall and
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
"fA
❑ NE
24. Did the facilityfail to calibrate waste application equipment as required by the permit? pew' El 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 YNA ❑ NE
Other Issues
28.
Were any additional problems noted which cause non-compliance of the permit or CAWMP7
❑ Yes
No
❑ NA
❑ NE
29.
r
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
3 I.
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
No
❑ NA
❑ NE
Additional Comments and/or Drawings:
J f�
0
WLJ , �o (_57 Iq
rL? u P� t PA N
..'ooc q.e�l fo j 6 Sn
t3ra55.( l4hob "fbr i� Yr. purn hq �nlfvl
1
�1 �1 v� as S" le = S q lk5' ti� ld�
l UVa5to oa- &(,,f siS = (po? llay. 0WO
- I -I O's-_ o y 12128104
60't
0

Type of Visit 1x,C,jompliance Inspection O Operation Review O Structure Evaluation O Technical Assistance
Reason for Visit! �U(, Routine O Complaint O Follow up O Referral O Emergency Q Other ❑ Denied Access
Date of Visit: I'll Arrival Time: � Departure Time. County: o Region: ziis&6
Farm Name: -RBck 401 S �ej �_ _ _ Owner Email:
Owner Name: hA F I I te P&I rme— Phone: _ a 4 4
Mailing Address:._ LAI e h q {u r `•--i N)C—___�.,_,I_r��
Physical Address:
Facility Contact: POLADAR11— Title: Phone No:
Onsite Representative: Integrator:
Certified Operator: lE, LX F4— 30.I �i(42 Operator Certification Number:
Back-up Operator:
Back-up Certification Number:
Locationi h11 Cn i a ' ■!iI �_ j
o' • � � r� �J � 'a �L �� �1' •■ _� ��-� i.Li� � +�. Ire � f� �
Swine
Wean to Finish
Wean to Feeder
Feeder to Finish
Farrow to Wean
Farrow to Feeder
Gilts
Boars
VDesign Current Design Current
Capacity Population Wet Poultry Capacity Population
❑ Layer
❑ Non -La et
Other
❑ Other j__....__
Dry Poultry
❑ Layers
❑ Non -Layers
❑ Pullets
❑ Turkeys
❑ Turkey Poults
❑ Other
Discharges & Stream Impacts
1. Is any discharge observed from any part of the operation?
Design Current
Cattle Capacity Populatio,
M.Dairy
Cow
Dairy Calf
❑
Daia Heifer
❑
Da Cow
❑
Non -Dairy
❑
Beef Stocker
❑
Beef Feeder
❑
Beef Brood Cow
Number of Structures:
Discharge originated at: ❑ Structure ❑ Application Field ❑ Other
a. Was the conveyance man-made?
3 fl b. Did the discharge reach waters of the State? (If yes, notify DWQ)
a 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?kli
��
❑ Yes No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes
❑ No
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Yes
❑ No
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Yes
❑ No
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Yes
No
❑ NA
❑ NE
[Yes
!!!❑ No
❑ NA
❑ NE
12128104
Continued

Facility Number: Date of Inspection
Waste Collection & Treatment
4. Is storage capacity (structural plus storm storage plus heavy rainfall) less than adequate?
❑ Yes
No ❑ NA ❑ NE
a. If yes, is waste level into the structural freeboard?
❑ Yes
El No ❑ NA ❑ NE
Structure Structure 2 Structure 3 Structure 4
Structure
5 Structure 6
Identifier: \�Gi7TL
Spillway?:
Designed Freeboard (in):
Observed Freeboard (in):
5. Are there any immediate threats to the integrity of any of the structures observed?
❑ Yes
5No ❑ 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
XNo ❑ 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
WNo ❑ NA ❑ NE
maintenance or improvement?
Waste Application
10. Are there any required buffers, setbacks, or compliance alternatives that need
❑ Yes
A o ❑ 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 I0 lbs ❑ Total Phosphorus ❑ Failure to Incorporate Manure/Sludge
into Bare Soil
❑ Outside of Acceptable Crop Window ❑ idence of Wind Drift ❑ Application Outside of Area
a
_
12. Crop type(s)
13. Soil type(s)
14. Do the receiving crops differ from those designated in the CAWMP?
❑ Yes
No ❑ NA ❑ NE
15. Does the receiving crop and/or land application site need improvement?
❑ Yes
16. Did the facility fail to secure and/or operate per the irrigation design or wettable acre determination ? ❑ Yes
17. Does the facility lack adequate acreage for land application? ❑ Yes
18. Is there a lack of properly operating waste application equipment? ❑ Yes
No ❑ NA ❑ NE
No ❑ NA ❑ NE
Wo El NA El NE
No ❑ NA ❑ NE
Comments (refer to question #): Explain any VES answers and/or any recommendations or any other comments.
Use drawings of facility to better explain situations. (use additional pages as necessary):
�. �Qs�� pond hOS n �+V I�" Si nee- aoo _ Ta e inbito der
r
N1r . Cra_? 15So�
b sad edL,)u ?
Reviewer/Inspector Name Phone: r
Reviewer/Inspector Signature: Date:
Page 2 of 3 r- 4 V/ 12128104 Continued

Facility Number: — Ore of Inspection
Required Records & Documents
19. Did the facility fail to have Certificate of Coverage & Permit readily available?
❑ Yes XNo ❑ NA ❑ NE
20. Does the facility fail to have all components of the CAWMP readily available? If yes, check ❑ Yes (XNo ❑ NA ❑ NE
the appropirate box.
❑ WUP []Checklists ❑Design ❑Maps ❑Other
21. Does need impr ement? If yes, check the to box bet w, Kyes ❑ No ❑ NA ❑ NE
�ate Applic, ' n ❑ ekl Freeboard Waste Analysis ❑ SYral is ' s❑ Rfall ❑ eking ❑ p Yield ❑ 1 mute Inspections ❑ IVnthly and 1 " Rain Inspections Bather Code
22. Did the facility fail to install and maintain a rain gauge? ❑ Yes *o ❑ NA ❑ NE
23. If selected, did the facility fail to install and maintain rainbreakers on irrigation equipment? ❑ Yes //////❑ No XNA ❑ NE
24. Did the facility fail to calibrate waste application equipment as required by the permit? ❑ Yes No ❑ NA ❑ NE
25. Did the facility fail to conduct a sludge survey as required by the permit? ❑ Yes No ❑ NA ❑ NE
26. Did the facility fail to have an actively certified operator in charge? ❑ Yes No ❑ NA ❑ NE
27. Did the facility fail to secure a phosphorus loss assessment (PLAT) certification? ❑ Yes XNo ❑ 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
KNo
❑ NA
❑ NE
If yes, contact a regional Air Quality representative immediately
31.
Did the facilityfail to notify the regional office of emergency situations as required by
ElYes
No
X
❑ NA
❑ NE
General Permit? (ie/ discharge, freeboard problems, over application)
32.
Did Reviewerhnspector fail to discuss review/inspection with an on -site representative?
❑ Yes
XNo
❑ NA
❑ NE
33.
Does facility require a follow-up visit by same agency?
❑ Yes
VNo
❑ NA
❑ NE
Additionali Drawings:
1
1
0 0 �fiat � ► / � ; � a tF
A.
12128104

w ! 3ll€i� i i1`a3€+ a ' iVISiOIIOf Water/�ualtt ; # € II
E `a;1Fl fi.: I iQ > Y !� '� + t %�3i1� { ai,ll� i i
;€ 3 E ii-:�t
*i9i0u 6fI,SOII "`d Water C 6nsBMVatlon � I,' � ,'E j if
i t it I I A
I 1 O Uther a
�. 111 �� '..�uE1� IF a ula �. I� ��� E�..I.y l;.. },E E t�; i l . H 33.'r�;� � l a, �: z�4liti@ .. a l .n, t 1� . "EL< ..i.!,:I: I 1,i
Type of Visit *Compliance Inspection O Operation Review O Lagoon Evaluation
Reason for Visit OO Routine O Complaint O Follow up O Emergency Notification O Other ❑ Denied Access
Facility Number 29 20 Date of Visit: 3/29/2004 Time: I300
O Not O erational O Below Threshold
® Permitted ® Certified [3 Conditionally Certified [] Registered Date Last Operated or Above Threshold: . .. ...,
Farm Name: M-R.ock.liulsxeioa ............................................... ................. County: I?AXASPA................................ W.....
Owner Owner Name: Alils�------------------- P.allrt�r--------------------------- Phone No: 3�.�48=�Q29------------------•------- Mailing Address: �13fr.>'aAtlxer.. pas> .............................. ..... Luintu.N.C........................................................ ZU92 ..............
Facility Contact: Mikekalmeir......................................Title:............................................... Phone No:......................................
Onsite Representative: MikO.PACt!~C----------•------------_._............. Integrator:._.---------------------•----------------- .
Certified Operator:ljiishac].L........................... Ralmu.................................. ............ Operator Certification Number: 2.0.9.7.5 ............................
Location of Farm;
-1wy. 47 south of Lexington - take a right onto Parks Rd. - then take right onto Palmer Rd. - travel around I mile and the
qp
arm will be on the right.
❑ Swine ❑ Poultry ® Cattle ❑ Horse Latitude 35 a 41 ' 42 �r Longitude 80 • 13 G 33616
. Design : Current :-
Design
Current
Design Current
Swine Capacity Population
Poultry Capacity
Population Cattle
Capacity Population
❑ Wean to Feeder
JEI Layer
I
IN Dairy
210
305
❑ Feeder to Finish
10 Non -Layer
I
❑ Non -Dairy
❑ Farrow to Wean
❑ Farrow to Feeder
❑Other
❑ Farrow to Finish
Total Design Capacity
210
❑ Gilts
Total SSLW
294,000
❑ Boars
Number of Lagoons 0
Hnlrlinu Pnnrlc / Cnlid Trnnc . 1
Discharp-es & Stream Impacts
1. Is any discharge observed from any part of the operation? ❑ Yes OR No
Discharge originated at: ❑ Lagoon ❑ Spray Field ❑ Other
a. If discharge is observed, was the conveyance man-made? ❑ Yes ❑ No
b. If discharge is observed, did it reach Water of the State? (If yes, notify DWQ) ❑ Yes ❑ No
c. If discharge is observed, what is the estimated flow in gal/min?
d. Does discharge bypass a lagoon system? (If yes, notify DWQ) ❑ Yes ❑ No
2. Is there evidence of past discharge from any part of the operation? ❑ Yes ® No
3. Were there any adverse impacts or potential adverse impacts to the Waters of the State other than from a discharge? ❑ Yes % No
Waste Collection & Treatment
4. Is storage capacity (freeboard plus storm storage) less than adequate? ® Spillway ❑ Yes ® No
Structure 1 Structure 2 Structure 3 Structure 4 Structure 5 Structure 6
Identifier:--._1YutrP.ond_ .... ........................... .......................... ............................
Freeboard (inches):
12112103 i6o' 4?s�z / Continued

Facility Number: 29-20 Date of Inspection 3/29/2004 w '
5. Are there any immediate threats to the integrity of any of the structures observed? (ie/ trees, severe erosion, ❑ Yes ® No
seepage, etc.)
6. Are there structures on -site which are not properly addressed and/or managed through a waste management or ® Yes ❑ No
closure plan?
(If any of questions 4-6 was answered yes, and the situation poses an
immediate public health or environmental threat, notify DWQ)
7. Do any of the structures need maintenance/improvement? ® Yes ❑ No
8. Does any part of the waste management system other than waste structures require maintenance/improvement? ❑ Yes ® No
9. Do any stuctures lack adequate, gauged markers with required maximum and minimum liquid level ® Yes ❑ No
elevation markings?
Waste Anulication
10. Are there any buffers that need maintenance/improvement? ❑ Yes ® No
11. Is there evidence of over application? If yes, check the appropriate box below. ❑ Yes ® No
❑ Excessive Ponding ❑ PAN ❑ Hydraulic Overload ❑ Frozen Ground ❑ Copper and/or Zinc
12. Crop type Corn (Silage & Grain) Fescue (Hay) Small Grain (Wheat, Barley,
13. Do the receiving crops differ with those designated in the Certified Animal Waste Management Plan (CAWMP)? ❑ Yes ®No
14. a) Does the facility lack adequate acreage for land application? ❑ Yes ® No
b) Does the facility need a wettable acre determination? ❑ Yes ® No
c) This facility is pended for a wettable acre determination? ❑ Yes ® No
15. Does the receiving crop need improvement? ❑ Yes ® No
16. Is there a lack of adequate waste application equipment? ❑ Yes ® No
Odor Issues
17. Does the discharge pipe from the confinement building to the storage pond or lagoon fail to discharge at/or below ❑ Yes ❑ No
liquid level of lagoon or storage pond with no agitation?
18. Are there any dead animals not disposed of properly within 24 hours? ❑ Yes ® No
19. Is there any evidence of wind drift during land application? (i.e. residue on neighboring vegetation, asphalt, ❑ Yes ® No
roads, building structure, and/or public property)
20. At the time of the inspection did the facility pose an odor or air quality concern? If yes, contact a regional ❑ Yes ® No
Air Quality representative immediately.
(refer to question #) '` ; l 3 ,, .:. :,.::<<..
Corome`nts Explain any'YES answers and/or any recommendations or anyother comments �; , ' ! !
Use drawings of facility to better explain situations. (use additional pages as necessary). ❑Field Copy ®Final Notes
3. Need to continue to keep cattle out. Looks better.
#
6. Mr. Palmer enlarged the'existing waste pond last year without a certified design and installation. NOV sent 2/4/04 to require structure
o be re -certified for current installation and structural stability.
7. Need to establish permanent vegetation on embankment. One burrow hole observed.
9. Marker needs to be re -set after determining maximum liquid level, heavy rainfall, and 25 yr/24 hr. storm levels.
16. Southers to contract haul and apply the first of May 2004 per operator.
3. Copper levels in 2003 soil test results are around 1000 on several fields. Operator said that he change from copper sulfate bath to
formaldehyde the end of 2003.
9. The following fields are on maps in the WUP, but not listed in the charts in the WUP for small grain:
T-4046 F-1 (8 acres) and T-3827 F-7
9/17/03 waste analysis=3.2 lbs. N/1000 gal.
Reviewer/Inspector Name ;Meliss osebrock
Reviewer/Inspector Signature: A, 0 Date: 02
12112103 l 1 V Continued

Facility Number: Z9—ZO a of Inspection 3/29/2004 0
Required Records & Documents
21.
Fail to have Certificate of Coverage & General Permit or other Permit readily available?
❑ Yes
® No
22.
Does the facility fail to have all components of the Certified Animal Waste Management Plan readily available?
(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?
(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 noncompliance of the Certified AWMP?
❑ Yes
® No
NPDES Permitted Facilities
30.
Is the facility covered under a NPDES Permit? (If no, skip questions 31-35)
❑ Yes
® No
31.
If selected, did the facility fail to install and maintain rainbreakers on irrigation equipment?
❑ Yes
❑ No
32.
Did the facility fail to install and maintain a rain gauge?
❑ Yes
❑ No
33.
Did the facility fail to conduct an annual sludge survey?
❑ Yes
❑ No
34. Did the facility fail to calibrate waste application equipment? ❑ Yes ❑ No
35. Does record keeping for NPDES required forms need improvement? If yes, check the appropriate box below. ❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ Stocking Form ❑ Crop Yield Form ❑ Rainfall [:]Inspection After V Rain
❑ 120 Minute Inspections ❑ Annual Certification Form
No violations or deficiencies were noted during this visit. You will receive no further correspondence about this visit.
12112103

Type of Visit A Compliance Inspection O Operation Review O Lagoon Evaluation
Reason for Visit X
Routine O Complaint O Fallow up O Emergency Notification O Other ❑ Denied Access
Facility Number Date of Visit: Time: �oo
0 Not O erational Q Below Threshold
Permitted D Ce ed O Conditionallyjy Certified 0 Registered Date Last Operated or Ab ve Threshold:
Farm Name: .�t.C' C'...1...,.Tc�% ............................... Connty:.... V........... ....... .........................
..... ... .. ..�T - J
Owner Name: .......M�1J. i ..... Ct. l n&c......._.. ........... .......a.......... Phone No: .L .. ,t... o�..g.....................
Mailing Address:
Facility Contact:
Onsite Represent
Certified Operate
Location of Farm:
❑ Swine ❑ Poultry
Cattle ❑ Horse Latitude �j '�" Longitude' �«
on '+'Poultry
❑ Wean to Feeder
❑ Feeder to Finish
Farrow to Wean
❑ Farrow to Feeder
❑ Farrow to Finish
❑ Gilts
❑ Boars
] Non -Layer
Other p
:.,.i.'sr ..
f!1
0
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 *Sp
4. Is storage capacity (freeboard plus storm storage) less than adequate.)illway ❑ Yes No
Structure 1 n §tructure 2 Structure 3 Structure 4 Structure 5 Structure 6
Identifier: l` ..........................
Freeboard (inches):
12112103
.................................... ..... I ............................. ......................................................................
Continued
F•

Facility Number: — Date of Inspection
5. Are there any immediate threats to the Integrity of any of the structures observed? (ie/ trees, severe erosion,
[l Yes
)kNO
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?
Xyes
❑ No
8. Does any part of the waste management system other than waste structures require maintenancelimprovement?
❑ Yes
YNo
9. Do any stuctures lack adequate, gauged markers with required maximum and minimum liquid level
9Yes
❑ No
elevation markings?
Waste Anulication
10. Are there any buffers that need maintenance/improvement?
❑ Yes
11. Is there evidence of over application? If yes, check the appropriate box below.
❑ Yes
❑ Excessive Ponding ❑ PAN ❑ Hydrauli Overload ❑ Frozen Ground Copper and/ Zinc
12. Crop type
13. Do the receiving crops differ with ose designated in the Certified Animal rite Managem Pl ( P)?
[I YesjNo
o
14. a) Does the facility lack adequate acreage for land application?
❑ Yeso
b) Does the facility need a wettable acre determination?
❑ Yeso
c) This facility is pended for a wettable acre determination?
❑ Yeso
15. Does the receiving crop need improvement?
❑ Yes
16. is there a lack of adequate waste application equipment?
ElYeso
Odor l;sues
17. Does the discharge pipe from the confinement building to the storage pond or lagoon fail to discharge actor below
o
liquid level of lagoon or storage pond with no agitation?
18. Are there any dead animals not disposed of properly within 24 hours?
❑ Yes
o
PN
19. Is there any evidence of wind drift during land application? (i.e. residue on neighboring vegetation, asphalt,
❑ Yes
o
roads, building structure, and/or public property)
20. At the time of the inspection did the facility pose an odor or air quality concern? If yes, contact a regional
❑ Yes
No
Air Quality representative immediately.
4",Y_' .h w p
NoM'tfsei s
er to question;#) Explain y YE-nswers an(Vor any. recommeay,o
�,,�. tber commen
j 'Usediavdagsiofaditto,terexpntion. (ue`additidnapagesas.nez"r,*)* ieldCOPY Final
lI Notes
„sECommentsi(ce
..Y.
j �aPr
,,L.1,1 ..'"-S�a.as, k1....�. ►
s�
Pai rner .,e n to_ - -one � si�O\f
t�s p �a5f` w�ou+ c�
n a i 5f�lic�fra r Ufa
e��5 �- �a 1
S fir- � re. - d �$
JCA.Vai
ed por�on off' S�h-u��ivre S�11 Y�eedS � ��i' h� �S�f�r5�{abilid.�.
Mo_ryex- needs be re-se:f- a�'-I�- de-4eor M'I n rvi
'iVi� ;l e�rel, heav� rairr�ll, �► asyr/a�{ h�. s+arvv� Ie�re s
Reviewer/Inspector Name
Reviewer/Inspector Signal
Date:
12112103

P.
Facility Number: —�Lu 1 0 e of Inspection 0
Required Records & Documents
21. Fail to have Certificate of Coverage & General Permit or other Permit readily available?
❑ Yes
XNo
22. Does the facility fail to have all components of the Certified Animal Waste Management Plan readily available?
(ie/ WUP, checklists, design, maps, etc.)
❑ Yes
No
23. Does record keeping need improvement? If yes, check the appropriate box below.
❑ Yes
o
El Waste Application ❑ ree oard ❑ haste Analysis ❑J �S,oil' Sampling
24. Is facility not in compliance with any applicable setback critAeffect 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
X<
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
*0
29. Were any additional problems noted which cause noncompliance of the Certified AWMP?
❑ Yes
�o
NPDES Permitted Facilities
30. Is the facility covered under a NPDES Permit? (If no, skip questions 31-35)
❑ Yes
ANo
31. If selected, did the facility fail to install and maintain rainbreakers on irrigation equipment?
❑ Yes
❑ No
32. Did the facility fail to install and maintain a rain gauge?
❑ Yes
❑ No
33. Did the facility fail to conduct an annual sludge survey?
❑ Yes
❑ No
34. Did the facility fail to calibrate waste application equipment?
❑ Yes
❑ No
35. Does record keeping for NPDES required forms need improvement? If yes, check the appropriate box below.
❑ Yes
❑ No
❑ Stocking Form ❑ Crop Yield Form ❑ Rainfall ❑ Inspection After l " 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.
WO
r f
l
• +� fir• �� /.
� 1 • t r�
A
3�a7 r-7
12112103 ML,/ d Gt) 0 P.

nical Assistance Site Visit Re
DiMbn of Soil and Water Conservation''
Natural Resources Conservation Service
Soil and Water Conservation District
Other...
Facility Number 29 - 20 Date: $119/03 Time: 1 9:50 Time On Farm: $5 WSRO
Farm Name Hi -Rock Holsteins County Davidson Phone:
336-798-2099
Mailing Address 1136 Palmer Road Lexington NC 27292
Onsite
Representative Mike Palmer 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
Q Response to DWQIDENR referral
O Response to DSWC/SWCD referral
Q Response to complaint/local referral
O Requested by producer/integrator
O Follow-up
Q Emergency
O Other...
Design Current
Capacity Population
❑ Layer
❑ Non -Layer
® Dairy
❑ Non -Dairy
Q Response to DWQIDENR referral
O Response to DSWC/SWCD referral
Q Response to complaint/local referral
O Requested by producer/integrator
O Follow-up
Q Emergency
O Other...
Design Current
Capacity Population
❑ Layer
❑ Non -Layer
® Dairy
❑ Non -Dairy
® Dairy
❑ Non -Dairy
zzo
❑ Other
GENERALQUESTIONS:
1. Is waste discharging from any part of the operation and reaching surface waters Or wetlands? ❑ yes ® no
2. Is there evidence of a past waste discharge from any part of the operation that waste reached ❑ yes ® no
surface waters or wetlands?
3. Does any problem pose an immediate threat to the integrity of the waste structure (large trees, ❑ yes ® no
seepage, severe erosion, etc.)?
4. Is there evidence of nitrogen over application, hydraulic overloading or excessive ponding ❑ yes ® no
requiring DWQ notification?
5. Is there evidence of improper dead animal disposal that poses a threat to the environment ❑ yes ® no
and/or public health?
6. Is the waste level within the structural freeboard elevation range for any waste structure? ❑ yes ® no
Structurel Structure 2 Structure 3 Structure 4 Structure 5
Identifier WSP
Level (Inches) 24
CROP TYPES idorn, Silage Ismail grain silage Fescue -hay
SPRAYFIELD
SOIL TYPES Bab GeB KyB
7. What type of technical assistance does the onsite representative feel is needed? (list in comment section)
03/10/03

Facility Number 29 - 20 Date:
8/19/03
PARAMETER
p No assistance provided/requested
❑ 8. Waste spill leaving site
TECHNICAL ASSISTANCE Needed
Provided
❑ 9. Waste spill contained on site
25. Waste Plan Revision or Amendment '
❑
❑
[110. Level in structural freeboard
Waste Plan Conditional Amendment
❑
❑
[111. Level in Storm 5tiirage
26.
27. Review or Evaluate Waste Plan wlproducer
❑
❑
❑ 12. Waste structure integrity compromised
28. Forms Need (list in comment section)
El
❑
❑ 13. Waste structure needs maintenance
29. Missing Components (list in comments)
❑
❑
❑ 14. Over application >= 10% & 10 lbs.
❑
❑
❑ 15. Over application < 10% or < 10 lbs.
30.21-1.0200 re -certification
❑ 16. Hydraulic overloading
31. Five & Thirty day Plans of Action (PoA)
❑
❑
32. Irrigation record keeping assistance
❑
❑
[117. 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 removallclosure procedures
❑
❑
37. Waste Structure Evaluation
®
❑
❑ 23. Irrigation maintenance deficiency
❑ 24. Deficient sprayfield conditions
38. Structure Needs Improvement
®
❑
39. Operation & Maintenance Improvements
❑
❑
40. Marker check/calibration
❑
❑
Regulatory Referrals
41. Site evaluation
❑
❑
❑ Referred to DWQ Date:
42. Irrigation Calibration
❑
❑
❑ Referred to NCDA Date:
El Other...
43. Irrigation system deslgnlinstallatlon
El
El
Date:
44. Secure Irrigation information (maps, etc.)
❑
❑
LIST IMPROVEMENTS
45. Operating improvements (pull signs, etc.)
❑
❑
MADE BY OPERATION
46. Wettable Acre Determination11.
❑
❑
47. Evaluate WAD certificationlrechecks
❑
❑
48. Crop evaluationlrecommendatlons
❑
❑
2.
49. Drainage work/evaluation
❑
❑
13.
50. Land shaping, subsoiling, aeration, etc.
51. Runoff control, stormwater diversion, etc.
❑
❑
❑
❑
52. Buffer improvements
❑
❑
53. Field measurements(GPS, surveying, etc.)
❑
❑
4.
54. Mortality BMPs
❑
❑
55. Waste operator education (NPDES)
❑
❑
5.
56. Operation & maintenance education
❑
❑
57. Record keeping education
❑
❑
6
58. Cropfforage management education
❑
❑
59. Soil and/or waste sampling education
❑
❑
03/10/03

Facility Number 29 - 20 Date: 1 8/19/03
(COMMENTS:
Waste analysis: 4-10-03 LSB 4.6 Ibs.N/1000 gals. B, SSD 6.0 Ibs.N/ton B
The waste pond embankment needs to be mowed. May want to seed and mulch this Fall.
Mr. Palmer didn't want to spend a lot of money on the storage pond embankment until he finds out
chat he has to do to get the storage pond certified.
The waste storage pond was enlarged. The waste pond needs to be evaluated for stability and storage
apacity. * I will check with DWQ and engineer on status.
Fences have been repaired and cattle are out of the buffer area across the road.
TECHNICAL SPECIALIST lRocky Durham
SIGNATURE
Date Entered: 8/22/03 Entered By: lRocky Durham
3 03/10/03

Facility Number 29 20 Date of Visit: 03/12/2003 Time: 1220
0 Not Operational O Below Threshold
® Permitted ® Certified [3 Conditionally Certified 0 Registered Date Last Operated or Above Threshold
Farm Name: Ili-.RQd.H91ht.djXS............................................................ ........................... County: Dayid5m .......................................... WSRQ ........
OwnerName: Mike ........................................ halmr ........................................................ Phone No: ...........................................................
MailingAddress: 113.fi.Fa1m9zr..RQad.............................................................................. LuinwoXI.Tic ....................................................... '27.29.2 ..............
FacilityContact: Mli<e.l'alA[ 9r................................................... .Fitle:................................................................ Phone No:...................................................
Onsite Representative:`1!' jU..V.ajmer............................................................................... Integrator:......................................................................................
Certified Operator: MirhadI............................. Palmer............................................... Operator Certification Number:2,09.75 .............................
Location of Farm:
Hwy. 47 south of Lexington - take a right onto Parks Rd. - then take right onto Palmer Rd. - travel around 1 mile and the AL
'arm will be on the right. 1-17
❑ Swine ❑ Poultry IN Cattle ❑ Horse Latitude F 35 • Longitude 1 80 • 13 iF 33
Design Current
Swine Canacitv Ponulation
❑ Wean to Feeder
❑ Feeder to Finish
❑ Farrow to Wean
[-]Farrow to Feeder
❑ Farrow to Finish
❑ Gilts
❑ Boars
Design Current Design Current
Poultry Capacity Population' Cattle Capacity Population
❑ Layer ® Dairy 210 165
❑ Non -Layer ❑ Non -Dairy
❑ Other
Total Design Capacity 210
Total SSLW 294,000
Number of Lagoons 0 ❑ Subsurface Drains Present 110 Lagoon Area 10 Spray Field Area
Holding Ponds / Solid Traps 1 ❑ No Liquid Waste Management System
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) ❑ Yes ❑ No
c. If discharge is observed, what is the estimated flow in gal/min?
d. Does discharge bypass a lagoon system? (If yes, notify DWQ) ❑ Yes ❑ No
2. Is there evidence of past discharge from any part of the operation? ❑ Yes ® No
3. Were there any adverse impacts or potential adverse impacts to the Waters of the State other than from a discharge? ❑ Yes ® No
Waste Collection & Treatment
4. Is storage capacity (freeboard plus storm storage) less than adequate? ® Spillway ❑ Yes ® No
Structure 1 Structure 2 Structure 3 Structure 4 Structure 5 Structure 6
Identifier: ...... asi.e.Pnnd................................. ....................................................................................................................................................
Freeboard (inches): 36
05103101 Continued

1Facility Number: 29-20 . Date of Inspection 03/1212 003 •
5. Are there any immediate threats to the integrity of any of the structures observed? (ie/ trees, severe erosion, ❑ Yes ® No
seepage, etc.)
6. Are there structures on -site which are not properly addressed and/or managed through a waste management or
closure plan? ®Yes ❑ No
(If any of questions 4-6 was answered yes, and the situation poses an
immediate public health or environmental threat, notify DWQ)
7. Do any of the structures need maintenance/improvement? ® Yes ❑ No
8. Does any part of the waste management system other than waste structures require maintenance/improvement? ® Yes ❑ No
9. Do any stuctures lack adequate, gauged markers with required maximum and minimum liquid level
elevation markings? ❑ Yes ® No
Waste Aunlication
10. Are there any buffers that need maintenance/improvement? ❑ Yes ® No
11. Is there evidence of over application? ❑ Excessive Ponding ❑ PAN ❑ Hydraulic Overload ®Yes ❑ No
12. Crop type Corn (Silage & Grain) Fescue (Hay) Small Grain (Wheat, Barley,
13. Do the receiving crops differ with those designated in the Certified Animal Waste Management Plan (CAWMP)? ❑ Yes ® No
14. a) Does the facility lack adequate acreage for land application? ❑ Yes ® No
b) Does the facility need a wettable acre determination? ❑ Yes ® No
c) This facility is pended for a wettable acre determination? ❑ Yes ® No
15.
Does the receiving crop need improvement?
❑ 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? (iel irrigation, freeboard, waste analysis & soil sample reports)
® Yes
❑ No
20.
Is facility not in compliance with any applicable setback criteria in effect at the time of design?
❑ Yes
® No
21.
Did the facility fail to have a actively certified operator in charge?
❑ Yes
®No
22.
Fail to notify regional DWQ of emergency situations as required by General Permit?
(iel discharge, freeboard problems, over application)
❑ Yes
® No
23.
Did Reviewer/Inspector fail to discuss review/inspection with on -site representative?
❑ Yes
® No
24.
Does facility require a follow-up visit by same agency?
❑ Yes
® No
25.
Were any, additional problems noted which cause noncompliance of the Certified AWMP?
® Yes
❑ No
C] No violations or deficiencies were noted during this visit. You will receive no further correspondence about this visit.
(refer to question #):,Explain any. YES answers and/or>any recommendattons or any othencommen
C is
Comments
se drawings;of facility to better explain'situations. (use additional pag"es,as necessary).` ❑ Field Copy ® Final Notes
6. and 25. Original waste pond has been expanded by owner/operator. Davidson SWCD can certify volume. Need to have engineer
A.
certify the design and installation. New expansion looks good and the dam is wide and looks sound visually. Mr. Palmer has contacted
Larry Graham about certifying the new dam.
7. Waste pond dam is to be seeded as soon as the final grading is completed.
8. Eveidence of tun -off of sediment and lot waste from the lot near the the silos and from the lot across the road.Suggest fencing off
corner of the lot near the silos and allowing vegetation to establish. Cattle must be kept out of buffer area across the road.
9. Original waste pond had a max. liquid marker. Will need to check and re -set max. since the pond has been expanded.
16. Facility contracts with Southers for pump and haul application of waste.
#
Reviewer/Inspector Name Mel is osebrgck
Reviewer/Inspector Signature. Date: J
05103101 f J V Continued

Facility Number: 29-20 1 DO Inspection 03/12/2003 •
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? (Le, residue on neighboring vegetation, asphalt,
roads, building structure, and/or public property)
29. Is the land application spray system intake not located near the liquid surface of the lagoon?
30. Were any major maintenance problems with the ventilation fan(s) noted? (i.e. broken fan belts, missing or
or broken fan blade(s), inoperable shutters, etc.)
31. Do the animals feed storage bins fail to have appropriate cover?
32. Do the flush tanks lack a submerged fill pipe or a permanent/temporary cover?
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes ❑ No
Additional Comments and/orDrawings: " 1
19. Small grain PAN is 102 per CAWMP while operator's records utilize 120 (T-10732 F-1, T-3846 F-3). CAWMP lists the PAN
for T5012 F-8&9 and T-3827 F-6 as 72.
19. 2002 soil analysis results have been obtained. Several fields have a copper index around 900.
26. and 29.-32. Not applicable to this facility at this time.
3/02 waste analysis = 10.7 lbs. NI1000 gal.
J
05103101

Type of Visit IT Compliance Inspection 0 Operation Review 0 Lagoon Evaluation
Reason for Visit xRoutine 0 Complaint 0 Follow up 0 Emergency Notification 0 Other El Denied Access
Date of 'TVisit: 1-ri":
EFacility Number
�J Not O erati nal BelIQ ow Threshold
Permitted Ly Certified Conditionally Certified Registered Date Last Operated or Above Threshold:
Farm Name: amn4Q Fa1f m5 County: b/IU} SoQ
Owner Name: PQ iryw, r Phone No: 3 (• I gj . a
Mailing Address: I M h Lt' 'Tb F�1 N Cc, 1 `�— _ [ •—
Facility Contact: Q Title: Phone No:
Onsite Representative: Q Imor l Integrator: �]
Certified Operator: ' r + L' a I �!� Operator Certification Number: O9 !
Lo ation of Farm:
wY 4 So �- Ord U),i n�or� , ri -ova fpX La � riyh4 on `
❑ Swine ❑ Poultry Cattle ❑ Horse Latitude �' �• Longiude
,Design Current , gestgn Cerreot
Swine.. ae achy . CuCurrent_
p Ca acity.:'Po elation :.. Poultry C Pa 'elation Cattle Ce acttr:°''`t'a elation
❑ Wean to Feeder ❑ Laver IN Dairy
i0i'
❑ Feeder to Finish ff ❑ Non -Layer] ❑on -
❑ i" N Dat
Farrow to Wean:. .
�i ❑ Farrow to Feeder ❑ OtheI
❑ Farrow to Finish p I Tt}EA1eslpti
,IsI¢a+` E d i'-'�� + B �!
a: Gilts
�'� 3 1 3 ❑ tYJ • f Boars � � , k � ibT L
• F t1
Number, of+lagoons ® ' ❑Subsurface Drains Present ❑ Lagoon Area ❑ S rav Field Area
Holding Ponds /,Solid Traps JEJ No Liquid Waste Management System
Discharges & tream lmoacts
1. Is any discharge observed from any part of the operation?
Discharge originated at: ❑ Lagoon ❑ Spray Field ❑ Other
a. if discharge is observed, was the conveyance man-made?
b. if discharge is observed, did it reach Water of the State? (If yes, notify DWQ)
c. If discharge is observed, what is the estimated flow in gai/min?
d. Does discharge bypass a lagoon system? (If yes, notify DWQ)
2. is there evidence of past discharge from any part of the operation?
❑ Yes X'No
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes No
3. Were there any adverse impacts or potential adverse impacts to the Waters of the State other than from a discharge? ❑ Yes No
Waste Collection & Treatment
4. Is storage capacity (freeboard pius storm storage) less than adequate? Spillway ❑ Yes �No
Struc c I Structure 2 Structure 3 Structure 4 Structure 5 Structure 6
identifier:
Freeboard (inches): 3
05103101 a Continued
iq
plqN c�
r0� F16 rt�z zZ

. • •
Facility Number: — Date of Inspection
5. Are there any immediate threats to the integrity of any of the structures observed? (ie/ trees, severe erosion,
❑ Yes
XNo
seepage, etc.)
6. Are there structures on -site which are not properly addressed and/or managed through a waste management or
�<Ycs
❑ 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?
9Yes
❑ No
8. Does any part of the waste management system other than waste structures require maintenance/improvement?
XYes
❑ No
9. Do any stuctures lack adequate, gauged markers with required maximum and minimum liquid level
elevation markings?
El Yes
No
Waste Application
10. Are buffers
❑ Yes
XNo
there any that need maintenance/improvement?
11. Is there evidence of over application? , ❑ Excessive Po ding 0 PAN ❑ Hydraulic Overload
Yes
❑ No
I2. Crop type
13. Do the receiving crops differ with those desigigied in th ertified Animal Waste 14anagement Plan (CA P)?
❑ Yes XNo
14. a) Does the facility lack adequate acreage for land application?
❑ Yes
No
b) Does the facility need a wettable acre determination?
❑ Yes
o
c) This facility is pended for a wettable acre determination?
❑ Yes
tNo
15. Does the receiving crop need improvement?
[EllYeso
16; Is there a lack of adequate waste application equipment?
❑ Yes
N'0
Required Records & Documents
17. Fail to have Certificate of Coverage & General Permit or other Permit readily available?
❑ Yes
�l fNo
18. Does the facility fail to have ail components of the Certified Animal Waste Management Plan readily available?
(ie/ WUP, checklists d�esi , maps, etc.) y/ ,/ / ❑ Yes )<No
19. Does record keeping need improvement? (ie/ irrigation, freeboard, wastlranalysis & s�oi/l sample reports) Yes ❑ No
20. is facility not in compliance with any applicable setback criteria in effect at the time of design? ❑ Yes XNo
21. Did the facility fail to have a actively certified operator in charge? ❑ Yes WO
22. Fail to notify regional DWQ of emergency situations as required by General Permit?
(ie/ discharge, freeboard problems, over application) ❑ Yes >j No
23. Did Reviewer/Inspector fail to discuss review/inspection with on -site representative? ❑ Yes No
24. Does facility require a follow-up visit by same agency? ❑ Yes o
25. Were any additional problems noted which cause noncompliance of the Certified AWMP? 9Yes ❑ No
0 No violations or deficiencies were noted during this visit. You will receive no further correspondence about this visit.
`CamQients refer to # Ez' lain an YES;ansv►eis and/ni- asi recomtaenrlalions or an other cotomen#s. .., 3 " 'jj
_uestioii
Use drawings of facility to better explain situahon�s:l(use additional pages.ax aecessary) ; Field Conv
, ❑ Final Notes
4 M
" " �-/ C4 "f 4, �u
�Z� �-
1T
LO PJAA4.-'
j p"`
Reviewer/Inspector Neme
Reviewer/Inspector Signature: IWAdi 1A 4 k Date: 311,116

Facility Number: — a l bate of Inspection
Odor Issues
26. Does the discharge pipe from the confinement building to the storage pond or lagoon fail to discharge at/or below
liquid level of lagoon or storage pond with no agitation?
27. Are there any dead animals not disposed of properly within 24 hours?
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?
�O
❑ Yes ) No
❑ Yes 1G INO
❑ Yes >(No
L
32. Do the flush tanks lack a submerged fill pipe or a permanent/temporary cover?e
u,
Garr Co r4ha r>n .-
�'►S1$dttaPal Cor�my;aa4w��I/orri)raivingst � �°� � ,t •," <., � ". 0l C.0
silo 30 3a Ne
� U aOc>'a
5 T- 3-�41e �
t �
r
r
► 0
C
-L9
P
b*j

a i O f Sotl a
Rion of Water Quality
Q sion o rid Water Conservation
i' a �
H � i •I ;1 Y i� �1i� � .�, ' s-:3.�1�I � Other-.� enC i� ii Illt��f..i,>hI �iii� _ „'1�d I `� i ��r ..
Type of Visit O Compliance Inspection Q Operation Review O Lagoon Evaluation
Reason for Visit OO Routine O Complaint O Follow up O Emergency Notification O Other ❑ Denied Access
FFacility Number 29 2Q Date of Visit: 8/22/2002 'time: 8:50
0 Not Operational O Below Threshold
® Permitted ® Certified [3 Conditionally Certified 0 Registered Date Last Operated or Above Threshold: ................
Farm Name: kaxnollaXaxans...................... ......... County: Du s ll.......................................... W.S.RQ........
OwnerName: M.ilse........................................ PaIan.Cx........................................................ Phone No: M -.98:4099...........................................................I
MailingAddress: 113CFAI 9jr-ti,Rad.............................................................................. LPaAlaI[.0 ...................................... I................ Z7.292 ..............
FacilityContact: ..............................................................................Title:................................................... ...... Phone No: ..........I
Onsite Representative: Millekalmer............................................................................... Integrator:......................................................................................
Certified Operator: Micbaell............................. Ralmcr .............................................. Operator Certification Number:ZQ9.7$..............................
Location of Farm:
wy. 47 south of Lexington - take a right onto Parks Rd. - then take right onto Palmer Rd. - travel around 1 mile and the
farm will be on the right. qr
❑ Swine ❑ Poultry ® Cattle ❑ Horse Latitude 35 - 41 42 Longitude 80 • 13 33
Design Current
Swine Canacitv Ponulation
❑ Wean to Feeder
❑ Feeder to Finish
❑ Farrow to Wean
❑ Farrow to Feeder
❑ Farrow to Finish
❑ Gilts
❑ Boars
Design Current Design Current
Poultry Capacity Po ulation Cattle Capacity Population
❑ Layer ® Dairy 120 164
❑ Non -Layer ❑ Non -Dairy
❑ Other
Total Design Capacity 120
Total SSLW 168,000
Number of Lagoons ❑Subsurface Drains Present ❑ Lagoon Area ❑ Spray Field Area
Holding Ponds 1 Solid Traps 1 ❑ No Liquid Waste Management System
Discharges & Stream Impacts
1. Is any discharge observed from any part of the operation?
Discharge originated at: ❑ Lagoon ❑ Spray Field ❑ Other
a. If discharge is observed, was the conveyance man-made?
b. If discharge is observed, did it reach Water of the State'? (If yes, notify DWQ)
c. If discharge is observed, what is the estimated flow in gal/min?
d. Does discharge bypass a lagoon system? (If yes, notify DWQ)
2. Is there evidence of past discharge from any part of the operation'?
3. Were there any adverse impacts or potential adverse impacts to the Waters of the State other than from a discharge?
Waste Collection & Treatment
4. Is storage capacity (freeboard plus storm storage) less than adequate? ❑ Spillway
Structure 1 Structure 2 Stricture 3 Structure 4 Structure 5
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes ® No
Stricture G
Identifier: ............................................................................................................. ...... .........
Freeboard (inches): 24
05103101
Continues!

Facility Number: 29-20 Date of Inspection 1 8/22/2002
5. Are there any immediate threats to the inCegrity of any of the structures observed? (ie/ tre ss, 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 ADnlication
R-
❑ Yes
® No
❑ Yes
® No
❑ Yes
® No
❑ Yes
® No
❑ Yes
® No
10.
Are there any buffers that need maintenance/improvement?
❑ Yes
® No
11.
Is there evidence of over application? ❑ Excessive Pending ❑ PAN ❑ Hydraulic Overload
❑ Yes
® No
12.
Crop type Fescue (Hay) 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
© No violations or deficiencies were noted during this visit. You will receive no further correspondence about this visit.
Comments (refer to question #): Explain any -YES answers and/or any recommendations or any other comments.
Use drawings of facility to better explain situations. (use additional pages as necessary):El Meld Copy ®Final Notes
Facility and records are in compliance.
+
Has not applied waste since March. Planning on applying waste as soon as the corn is cut.
Mr. Palmer was having his silage cut today. Mr. Palmer has a certification and COC for 310 head.
# 25. After checking with the technical specialist, Tract 3846field # 3 and Tract 3849 f eld # 2 were not in the waste plan.
Mr. Palmer still needs to get his 2002 soil analysis.
R
Reviewer/Inspector Name Rocky Durham
Reviewer/Inspector Signature: Date:
05103101 Continued

Facility Number: 29-20 Datjinspection 8/22/2002
Odor Issues 1
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
[AdditionaUlComments an or: raw ngs:, r° ' 1
• i 1 �i l ; ,.V � P � �.I V € €. i;�.4n r i€�-...r ! i � . L. :9� ,i , pia ..ilVr�_ , i, i � �i, V
Waste analysis: 3-26-02 LSD 14.3 lbs.N11000 gals. $
J
05103101

i I!j I H ' I:.a . •'' I &,#,,: i'i`ii?', F#.•a ,Y '€{1E1i1a'.••II lI €Il 1�1.�.:IIM r I € p'l€tIl,l, f I ,
I I I 441
1 ion of Water Qualtty
I€I,lil ill, iIIlV°!I� Ijl, 4 {�a it il:j,.
13h o 1'.•.I I I €I Vi ihQ 1>sion:gfSoil)andWaterC6nservation
li A. 1 b rq I . €E , u.lzl: '•Ir_.ul I: I I { I . 1 I I E I tail, , '€&€hI 111+ IIlia p': i I ;;'. •;.ICI € ``IP':'r r!s §!
g•If3 €. r I I !, J I _! , iilf
i. p' d.11i�1!#III _ iOther: A CnC f;: iillal�ii�i�l ( ll�lu�� V I,(1 It ! r €;?;` ! !- ;i; 1 i €' # ,ll' {.
r I, i •i,,, . I , 1 lam,_ 9, . yllI,I 'l.l ., •, r, . i ,I I�E,I II; .lid Ihfl �IE �lai,# = 191 �f� ! { �[rc iClll ll:lli Ill
I
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 29 20 Date of Visit: 3/14/2D02 Time: t3tr0
O Not Operational O Below Threshold
® Permitted ® Certified 13 Conditionally Certified [3 Registered Date Last Operated or Above. Threshold: .........................
Farm Name: haarrcallaYar:........................................................................................ .. County: VAyj4j5jQIX .......................................... W.SRQ.......
OwnerName: Mike ........................................ kalawx........................................................ Phone No: 33f2-291-7.09.9...........................................................
Mailing Address: ll �.Palrxl x.�ioad.............................................................................. Lui aMOXI.N.C....................................................... 2.729.2 ..............
Facility Contact: 11'114TAIMU.................................................. Title:.....
Onsite Representative: MjU.2.altrier..........................................................
Certified Operator: MichadI............................. kalmcr.....................
Location of Farm:
Phone No:........
Integrator: ............
Operator Certification Number:AO9.ZS .............................
Iwy. 47 south of Lexington - take a right onto Parks Rd. - then take right onto Palmer Rd. - travel.around 1 mile and the___A
arm will be on the right.
❑ Swine ❑ Poultry ® Cattle ❑ Horse Latitude 35 • 41 42 if Longitude 80 • 13 33 �
Design Current
Swine Cinncity 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 120
❑ Non -Layer 10Non-Dairy
❑ Other
Total Design Capacity 120
Total SSLW 168,000
Number of Lagoons 0 ❑ Subsurface Drains Present ❑ Lagoon Area ❑ Spray Field Area
Holding Ponds I Solid Traps 1 ❑ No Liquid Waste Management System
Discharges & Stream Impacts
1. Is any discharge observed from any part of the operation? ❑ Yes ® No
Discharge originated at: ❑ Lagoon ❑ Spray Field ❑ Other
a. if discharge is observed, was the conveyance man-made? ❑ Yes ❑ No
b. If discharge is observed, did it reach Water of the State'? (if yes, notify DWQ) ❑ Yes ❑ No
c. If discharge is observed, what is the estimated flow in gal/min?
d. Does discharge bypass a lagoon system? (If yes, notify DWQ) ❑ Yes ❑ No
2. Is there evidence of past discharge from any part of the operation? ❑ Yes ® No
3. Were there any adverse impacts or potential adverse impacts to the Waters of the State other than from a discharge? ❑ Yes ® No
Waste Collection & Treatment
4. Is storage capacity (freeboard plus storm storage) less than adequate? ® SpilIway ❑ Yes ® No
Structure 1 Structure 2 Structure 3 Structure 4 Structure 5 Structure 6
Identifier: ......Wasie.Pand .....................................................................................................................................................................................
Freeboard (inches): 72
05103101 Continued

Facility Number: 29-20 . Date of Inspection 3/14/2002
S � Are there any immediate threats to the integrity of any of the structures observed? (ie/ trees re 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? El Yes ®No
(If any of questions 4-6 was answered yes, and the situation poses an
immediate public health or environmental threat, notify DWQ)
7. Do any of the structures need maintenance/improvement? ❑ Yes ® No
8. Does any part of the waste management system other than waste structures require maintenance/improvement? ❑ Yes ® No
9. Do any stuctures lack adequate, gauged markers with required maximum and minimum liquid level
elevation markings? ❑ Yes ® No
Waste Application
10. Are there any buffers that need maintenance/improvement? ❑ Yes ® No
11, Is there evidence of over application? ❑ Excessive Ponding ❑ PAN ❑ Hydraulic Overload ❑ Yes ®No
12. Crop type Fescue (Hay) 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 Iand 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?
(iel discharge, freeboard problems, over application)
23. Did Reviewer/Inspector fail to discuss review/inspection with on -site representative?
24. Does facility require a follow-up visit by same agency?
25. Were any additional problems noted which cause noncompliance of the Certified AWMP?
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes ® No
113 No violations or deficiencies were noted during this visit. You will receive no further correspondence about this visit.
� - .., �I. Irl{!.. Il.:: l ., "I'; it I.I '.. f ll'.Ilfi'i"i .I� 11 ", I<<€,Es{..:I,.I11r1 .:II u.1 I I " 11.1...1'i 111Y. €.;',,,,.f'# [ ':'�I If1f'I.I ;{ k I I 1 I;,.if I { I. I ['1` {II".�`
Comments {refer to question #) Ezplam any'YES answers andlor anyi recommendations or'any other' comments:
- �I
'i.L�L:L
.� ' III .:
''.
f11Il';€!I :1 { ! _t'��� afa f . ,.�E . •. EIS
Use drawings of facmty4o better explain situations I{use additional) pages as necessary). py ®
}jar Field Co Final Notes
{ i
l.ti��S!'11i1P.?f�4&T€°-.'.CP,"^PYRF7�1!!ItlRYFfS�"�TiaE<�atfiifRri'Si'T
19. Southers land applied waste from storage structure on 3/8/02 and 3/11/02. No record of the number of loads and fields was written
i
down yet. Per operator, when Southers sends bill they will send list of fields receiving waste and volumes. Told operator that he needed
to at least keep a record of the date and fields receiving waste prior to getting his bill. Will need to check application and waste
analyses records next visit.
19. Soil samples for 2002 not taken yet.
25. Tract 3848 is listed as 72 lbs. PAN (and zero commercial) in the CAWMP. Operator to contact technical specialist to see if the PAN
number can be increased.
27. Amy burial of mortality is greater than 300 feet to flowing water.
+
Reviewer/Inspector Name Melissa Rosebrock
Reviewer/Inspector Signature: Date:
05103101 r Continued

Facility Number: 29-20 Da nspection 3/14/2442
r
Odor Issues
26. Does the discharge pipe from the confinement building to the storage pond or Iagoon 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)
24. 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
05103101

Division of Water Quality
• Division of Soil and Water Conservation
Other A envy
Type of Visit Compliance Inspection 0 Operation Review Lagoon Evaluation
Reason for Visit Routine 0 Complaint 0 Follow up 0 Emergency Notification 0 Other ❑ Denied Access
Date of Visit: 10% - , 11-me:
Facility Number.. . '^ - . - . .. I
IR Permitted�}.ertiifed [3 Conditionally Certified 13 Registered Date Last Operated or Above Threshold:
Farm Name: 1'�h�jl�Gl �G21'j]Q 5 County: V iCL{7ph�p
Owner Name: I (L� ea I of t?— Phone No: 33 • �_ 1 _y . a o q __
Mailing Address: _ 3 Palmer Pm3 , Lex+ ra+d n + ! )C,
Facility Contact:
Onsite Representative:
(M�f�
Certified Operator: 111 i p l L
Title:
Phone No:
Integrator:
Operator Certification Number: 2 0 q 7S
f;
Location of Farm:
Hwy Lf 7
Fa aQXr' j n` , h�- on a ILS i�c aH 6 .
I-1 o. Rl h_u�_ ii u_-__ Latitude I J� I• � �� Lonvitude �• I /_"i I6 I -7. "S 64
Design Current
Design Current
Design Current.
Swine Capacity Population
Poultry
Capacity Population Cattle "
Capacity Population
❑ Wean to Feeder
I
JE1 Layer
I
I
Dai
❑ Feeder to Finish
❑ Non -Layer
Non -Dairy
❑ Farrow to Wean
❑ Farrow to Feeder
❑ Other
❑ Farrow to Finish
Total Design Capacity
a,
❑ Gilts
='
❑ Boars
Total SSLW
JEJ�Number.of,Lagoons _ Subsurface Drains PresentJill Lagoon Area 10 Spray Field Area
Hording Ponds /`Solid yTaps - ❑ No Li uid Waste Mana ement S stem I
Discharags & Stream impacts
1. Is any discharge observed from any part of the operation?
Discharge originated at: ❑ Lagoon ❑ Spray Field ❑ Other
a. If discharge is observed, was the conveyance man-made?
b. If discharge is observed, did it reach Water of the State? (If yes, notify DWQ)
c. if discharge is observed, what is the estimated flow in gal/min?
d. Does discharge bypass a lagoon system'? (If yes, notify DWQ)
2. Is there evidence of past discharge from any part of the operation?
3. Were there any adverse impacts or potential adverse impacts to the Waters of the State other than from a discharge?
a to Collection & Treatment
4. Is storage capacity (freeboard plus storm storage) less than adequate? USpiltwav
Struct re 1 Structure 2 Structure 3 Structure 4 Structure 5
Identifier; W-i&
Freeboard (inches):
05103101
❑ Yes XNo
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes d No
❑ Yes No
❑ Yes No
❑ Yes x
No
Structure 6
Continued

0 1,
_ �
Facility Number: Date of Inspection
5. Are there any immediate threats to the integrity of any of the structures observed? (ie/ trees, severe erosion,
❑ Yes
O(No
seepage, etc.)
6. Are there structures on -site which are not properly addressed and/or managed through a waste management or
closure plan?
(if any of questions 4-6 was answered yes, and the situation poses an
El 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
11?No
9. Do any stuctures lack adequate, gauged markers with required maximum and minimum liquid level
❑
)VO
elevation markings?
Yes
Waste Application
10. Are there any buffers that need maintenance/improvement?
❑ Yes
No
lk
11. Is there evidence of over application? ❑ Excessive Ponding ❑ PAN ❑ Hydraulic Overload
❑ Yes
ko
12. Crop type
13. Do the receiving c ps differ with those d9signated in the Certified Animal Waste Management Plan (CAWMP)?
❑ Yes
o
tNo
14. a) Does the facility lack adequate acreage for land application?
ElYes
b) Does the facility need a wettable acre determination?
❑ Yes
c) This facility is pended for a wettable acre determination?ElYeso
tNo
15. Does the receiving crop need improvement?
ElYeso
16. Is there a lack of adequate waste application equipment?
❑ Yes
*o
Required Records & Documents
17. & Permit -nit
eNo
Fail to have Certificate of Coverage General or other Pen readily available?
❑ Yes
18. Does the facility fail to have all components of the Certified Animal Waste Management Plan readily available?
(ie/ WUP, checklists, design, maps, etc.) 'analysis
❑ Yes9No
No
19. Does record keeping need improvement? (iel irrigation, freeboard, waste/analysis &soil sample reports)
❑Yes
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?
❑ Yes
No
(ie/ discharge, freeboard problems, over application)
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
o
25. Were any additional problems noted which cause noncompliance of the Certified AWMP?
❑ Yes
o
0 No violations or deficiencies were noted during this visit. You will receive no further correspondence about this visit.
Cani rents (refer°ta question #): Explain any YE5 answers.and/or ony�recotnmendations.or any „other comments.' x-
`Use drawings of facility to better explain:situetid s. (use, pages as necessary): Field Copy ❑Final Notes
3111 /b a
TT- 3X q9 oo
,7 a t o in
e w c® U .
LZ
PAN
Reviewer/Inspector Name
d
4.
Signature:
A4d L&
r Date: d�-
05103101
Continued

9 .,1 0 •
1 Facility Number: J�C(—Ro Date of Inspection
Nk
MO
7
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
Additional Comments and/or Drawings:
i�? od PAN -r- 3 P7 f=-- 7<v,/
`
/ham 4A P _ N
_I y
L
05103101

Type of Visit Q Compliance Inspection O Operation Review O Lagoon Evaluation
(Reason far Visit *Routine O Complaint O Follow up O Emergency Notification O Other ❑ Denied Access
Gate of Visit: 1II14/2001 Time: 134o Printed on: 11/14/2001
Facility Number 29 20 Q Not O erational Q Below Threshold
a Permitted E Certified 0 Conditionally Certified 0 Registered Date last Operated or Above Threshold. .
Farm Name:]?stutAIYArtotls............................................................................
Owner Name: lY116........................................ RAID l r.......................
Mailing Address: 113.6.Upttf ir-Rand............................................................
Facility Contact: 10.1 �.. ex .................................................. Title: .......
Onsite Representative: MU. iAbua:.............................
Certified Operator: Mjdwj:jL ............................ Pf tl0tex..................... ...
Location of Farm:
County: DAxatisatx.......................................... i? 5RQ........
Phone No: 33.{-29i nZ099............
LuiWo.u.NC....................................................... 2.7292 ..............
Phone No:
........................................
Integrator:. .....................................
... Operator Certification Number:MIS .............................
Hwy. 47 south of Lexington - take a right onto Parks Rd. - then take right onto Palmer Rd. - travel around I mile and the A
farm will be on the right.
❑ Swine ❑ Poultry ® Cattle ❑ Horse Latitude Longitude F 80 • 13 33 ♦f
Discharges & Stream jffljjact�
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 IN 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][reatWeUt
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 iNato Panel
s.......................................................................................................................................................................................
Freeboard (inches): 96
05103101 Continued

Facility Number: 29-20 Date of Inspection R-1/51-4/20-011
idi Printed on: 11/14/2001
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
Application
10.
Are there any buffers that need maintenance/improvement?
❑ Yes
® No
11.
1s there evidence of over application? ❑ Excessive Ponding ❑ PAN ❑ Hydraulic Overload
❑ Yes
® No
12.
Crop type Small Grain (Wheat, Barley,
13.
Do the receiving crops differ with those designated in the Certified Animal Waste Management Plan (CAWMP)?
❑ Yes
® No
14.
a) Does the facility lack adequate acreage for land application?
❑ Yes
® No
b) Does the facility need a wettable acre determination?
❑ Yes
® No
c) This facility is pended for a wettable acre determination?
❑ Yes
® No
15.
Does the receiving crop need improvement?
❑ Yes
® No
16.
Is there a lack of adequate waste application equipment?
❑ Yes
® No
Required
Records & Documents
17.
Fail to have Certificate of Coverage & General Permit or other Permit readily available?
❑ Yes
® No
18.
Does the facility fail to have all components of the Certified Animal Waste Management Plan readily available?
(ie/ WUP, checklists, design, maps, etc.)
❑ Yes
® No
19.
Does record keeping need improvement? (iel irrigation, freeboard, waste analysis & soil sample reports)
® Yes
❑ No
20.
Is facility not in compliance with any applicable setback criteria in effect at the time of design?
❑ Yes
® No
21.
Did the facility fail to have a actively certified operator in charge?
❑ Yes
® No
22.
Fail to notify regional DWQ of emergency situations as required by General Permit?
(ie/ discharge, freeboard problems, over application)
❑ Yes
® No
23.
Did Reviewer/Inspector fail to discuss review/inspection with on -site representative?
❑ Yes
® No
24.
Does facility require a follow-up visit by same agency?
❑ Yes
® No
25.
Were any additional problems noted which cause noncompliance of the Certified AWMP?
❑ Yes
® No
[]
No violations or deficiencies were noted during this visit. You will receive no further correspondence about this visit.
❑ Field Copy ® Final Notes
16.Facility uses custom applicator -Grassy Knob Farms of Statesville 704,873.7467
19. Freeboard is the distance in inches from waste to top of marker. Approx. 8 feet measured today. Left new form for operator.
Fields #7 and #1 of Tract 3827 are on maps but not listed in chart in WUP. Need to add these to revised WUP. PAN for these fields is
72 # per the WUP but operator is using 120 # PAN in his calculations because he said that's what the SWCD told him to use. Need to
amend WUP to 120 if this is correct. Waste applications from pond should go on SLR forms and waste from the heavy use lot should go
on SLD forms. Left forms with operator.
25. CAWMP and permit are for 275. This needs to be revised on the database in Raleigh.
27. Per operator, anv mortality is buried in woods across the road at least 1/4 mile from surface water. Need to check next time.
Reviewer/Inspector Name FMe1' a Rosebrock
Reviewer/Inspector Signature Date: U
05103101 jContinued

Facility Number: 29-20 16of Inspection 11/14/2001 0 Printed on: 11/14/2001
War 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?
Nitrogen = 3.0 lbs./1000 gal. 9/17/01
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes ❑ No
soil test results for fields PF2, PF3, PR report copper to be around 1000 units or more. Suggest using other fields for heavy
e applications.
AA
J
05103101

of Visit 'ACompliance Inspection 0 Operation Review 0 Lagoon Evaluation
Reason for Visit IQ Routine 0 Complaint. 0 Follow up 0 Emergency Notification 0 Other
1 0 Denied Access
Facility Number Date of Visit; UUiq& I Time:
I J0 Not Operational 0 Below Threshold
# Permitted Certified [3 Conditionally Certified 0 Registered Date Last Operated or Above Threshold: .........................
FarmName: ..... Pwnzi.k ...... Farm-s .......................................................... county: ....... bavijson ............... .......................
OwnerName: ...... fti ... IL& ..... Palme..f . . ........................................................ Phone No: J....................
FacilityContact: ...... .......... P-4.1-m-Jur ....... Title . ................. I ............................................... Phone No:...................................................
Mailing Address:.....}... P.4 rxi ..... ...... ... Lain . ............ 2.. .. 7.2a.l. ... ;k ..........................
Onsite Representative:.....
... . .... .................. Integrator: ...... ........................... 4 ........ ............................
Certified Operator: ... michae-A L. PaIrmc ........................... .. Operator Certification Number: ........ 1;) 09
Location of Farm:
0%43 IvtFj+o�
I
Lew 'nq4�n,
Tak-e-
ri oryto v
eIn.
P rher U,
raro
Is o ri:M�•
[3 Swine [3 Poultry b(Cattle [3 Horse Latitude V 0 9 66 Longitude 0 4 46
Swwine
Wean to
Design - Current
ri ImIkeitv Pnnillatinxi
❑ Feeder
0 Feeder to Finish
0 Farrow to Wean
[] Farrow to Feeder
0 Farrow to Finish
❑ Gilts
0 Boars
,Design Current
Poultry_Cioaii . ty Population Cattle
I[] Layer ❑ Dairy
LQ Non -Layer ❑ Non -Dairy
❑ Other
Total Msign Capacity; .
`X&RI SSE
Design '
R P,
l Ntttnb�er of Lagoons10subsurface Drains Present 110 Lagoon ❑Arc; JE3 Spray Field Area
I $bUdl T' r
ji6ildihe 6 No Liquid Waste Management System I;,;,! P,
Discharges & Stream Impacts
I. Is any discharge observed from any part of the operation? ❑ Yes �No
Discharge originated at: [3 Lagoon [I Spray Field El Other
a. If discharge is observed, was the conveyance man-made?
b. If discharge is observed, did it reach Water of the State? (If yes, notify DWQ)
c. li'dischpirge 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? WSpillway
-ructurr, I Structure 2 Structure 3 Structure 4 Structure 5
Identifier: .................................... I ................................... .................................... .............................
Freeboard (inches):
5/00
D Yes 0 No
0 Yes 0 No
D Yes
[I No
• Yes
XNo
• Yes
XNo
0 Yes 0
Structure 6y
Continued on back

Facility Number: oZ — o2Q Date of Inspection
5. Are there any immediate threats to the Sity of any of the structures observed? (ie/ trees, severe erosion, ❑ Yes XNo
seepage, etc.)
6. Are there structures on -site which are not properly addressed and/or managed through a waste management or
closure plan? ❑Yes XNo
(If any of questions 4-6 was answered yes, and the situation poses an
immediate public health or environmental threat, notify DWQ)
7. Do any of the structures need maintenance/improvement? ❑ Yes �No
8. Does any part of the waste management system other than waste structures require maintenance/improvement? ❑ Yes KNO
9. Do any stuctures lack adequate, gauged markers with required maximum and minimum liquid level
elevation markings? ❑ Yes )d 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 _ <mA11/ IMAJA.,, :S1 OJTAD
13. Do the receiving crops differ with those designated in thLfCerti
14. a) Does the facility lack adequate acreage for land application?
b) Does the facility need a wettable acre determination?
c) This facility is pended for a wettable acre determination?
15. Does the receiving crop need improvement?
16. Is there a lack of adequate waste application equipment?
Animal Waste Management Plan (CAWMP)?
Re uired 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.) _ / �� 1
19. Does record keeping need improvement? (ie/ irrigation, freeboard, wasty analysis & soil ample 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?
�. iQ fiQl ti��is.o� �l��eA eS vv re P • 0(H`ir)g 01s'visllt; • ;Y;oo wAII-t e$iye 4 rot ho
corres�o deh& ahvuti this visit..
1
❑ Yes No
❑ Yes
❑ Yes I'No
❑ Yes o
❑ Yes No
❑ Yes )(No
❑ Yes XNO
❑ Yes 9No
'Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes ,too
❑ Yes X No
❑ Yes XNo
❑ Yes )*No
❑ Yes A No
❑ Yes WNo
MY 1 .9 YK /- , - - , i
i
l
1 I � , +,
a., � Reviewer/Ins ector Name ,wrs$, it 'I iij� 3 ...s
Reviewer/Inspector Signature:J., " Date: 1111gl6l 5/00

. Facility Number: — of Inspection
Odor Issues
26. Does the discharge pipe from the confinement building to the storage pond or lagoon fail to discharge at/or below des --[.ATE
liquid level of lagoon or storage pond with no agitation?
27. Are there any`dead animals not disposed of properly within 24 hours? ❑ Yes No
28. Is there any evidence of wind drift during land application? (i.e. residue on neighboring vegetation, asphalt, ❑ Yes XNO
roads, building structure, and/or public property)
29. Is the land application spray system intake not located near the liquid surface of the lagoon?
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 ANo
31. Do the animals feed storage bins fail to have appropriate cover? {� es--E
32. Do the flush tanks lack a submerged fill pipe or a permanent/temporary cover? —B v__ ^ *'--
Additional UornmenMandlor'Urawrnpbs:, a �a i
t
- Oe
L S,D Iv = 3 , b Ibs��000 917 6
u-
7 acry
• � cam.. A
ioU �a
� 1 '

�ivision of Water Quality •
ivision of Soil and Water Conservation
Q Other Agency
Type of Visit O Compliance Inspection Q Operation Review O Lagoon Evaluation
Reason for Visit O Routine O Complaint O Follow up O Emergency Notification O Other ❑ Denied Access
Facility Number
Date of Visit: G/S/2001 Time: 10:35 Printed on: 10/2/2001
29 20
O Not Operational O Below Threshold
Permitted a Certified ❑ Conditionally Certified 0 Registered Date Last Operated or Above Threshold: .............
Farm Name: FatqQUaXerum....................................................................
Owner Name:
Mailing Address: 1136.Ptlpll ir-RRad....................................................
Facility Contact: ..............................................................................Title:
Onsite Representative: Mike-PaLmer.....................................................
County: Raxxd"lx.......................................... W
..
Phone No: 336-79.&20Q9...........................................................
LuintWP C....................................................... 27292 .............
Phone No:
Integrator: .................
Certified Operator:J,l'iidiad................................. Falmu ............................................. Operator Certification Number: Z09.7.5..............................
Location of Farm:
Hwy. 47 south of Lexington - take a right onto Parks Rd. - then take right onto Palmer Rd. - travel around l mile and the +
farm will be on the right. w
❑ Swine ❑ Poultry ® Cattle ❑ Horse Latitude 35 • 41 42 Longitude SO • 13 33
Design Current
Swine C.nnneity Pnnidation
❑ Wean to Feeder
❑ Feeder to Finish
❑ Farrow to Wean
❑ Farrow to Feeder
❑ Farrow to Finish
❑ Gilts
❑ Boars
Design Current
Design Current
Poultry
Capacity Population Cattle
Capacity Population
❑ Layer
10 Dairy
120
163
❑ Non -Layer
❑ Non -Dairy
❑ Other
Total Design Capacity
120
Total SSLW
168,000
Number of Lagoons I I ❑ Subsurface Drains Present 110 Lagw)n Area 10 Spray Field Area
Holding Ponds / Solid Traps 11 ❑ No Liquid Waste Management System
Discharges .i tre.-Im lm ac
1. Is any discharge observed from any part of the operation?
Discharge originated at: ❑ Lagoon ❑ Spray Field ❑ Other
a. If discharge is observed, was the conveyance man-made?
b. If discharge is observed, did it reach Water of the State? ( If yes, notify DWQ)
c. If discharge is observed, what is the estimated flow in gal/min?
d. Does discharge bypass a lagoon system? (If yes, notify DWQ)
2. Is there evidence of past discharge from any part of the operation?
3. Were there any adverse impacts or potential adverse impacts to the Waters of the State other than from a discharge.
Waste Collection & Treatment
4. Is storage capacity (freeboard plus storm storage) less than adequate? ® Spillway
Structure 1 Structure 2 Structure 3 Structure 4 Structure 5
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes
❑ No
❑ Yes
® No
❑ Yes
® No
❑ Yes
®No
Structure 6
Identifier: ............................................................................................................................................. .......................
Freeboard (inches): 87
05103101
Continued

Facility Number: 29-20 • Date 411' Inspection F 6/5/2001 1, inted un: 10/2/2001 c
!i
5. Are there any immediate threats to the integrity of any of the structures observed? (ie/ tree , 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 ®Na
(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?
9. Do any stuctures lack adequate, gauged markers with required maximum and minimum liquid level
elevation markings?
Waste Application
10. Are there any buffers that need maintenance/improvement?
11. Is there evidence of over application? ❑ Excessive Ponding ❑ PAN ❑ Hydraulic Overload
12, Crop type Corn (Silage & Grain) Small Grain (Wheat, Barley, Fescue (Hay)
13. Do the receiving crops differ with those designated in the Certified Animal Waste Management Plan (CAWMP)?
14. a) Does the facility lack adequate acreage for land application?
b) Does the facility need a wettable acre determination?
c) This facility is pended for a wettable acre determination?
15. Does the receiving crop need improvement?
16. Is there a lack of adequate waste application equipment?
Required Records & Documents
17. Fail to have Certificate of Coverage & General Permit or other Permit readily available?
18. Does the facility fail to have all components of the Certified Animal Waste Management Plan readily available?
(iel WUP, checklists, design, maps, etc.)
19. Does record keeping need improvement? (ie/ irrigation, freeboard, waste analysis & soil sample reports)
20. Is facility not in compliance with any applicable setback criteria in effect at the time of design?
21. Did the facility fail to have a actively certified operator in charge?
22. Fail to notify regional DWQ of emergency situations as required by General Permit?
(ie/ discharge, freeboard problems, over application)
23. Did Reviewer/Inspector fail to discuss review/inspection with on -site representative'?
24. Does facility require a follow-up visit by same agency?
25. Were any additional problems noted which cause noncompliance of the Certified AWMP?
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes ® No
113 No violations or deficiencies were noted during this visit. You will receive no further correspondence about this visit.
mments refer to io # : Ix lain any an and/o an recommendations or any other Comm
resin of rc. a ditionalpa asnecessas. ry : ❑ Field Copy ® Final Notes e
7. Need to mow around the waste pond when you get a chance and remove solids from the heifer feeding/heavy use area.
_
Mr. Palmer stated that he had been giving the solids from the heavy use area to a neighbor. I recommended that he keep a record of
the amount (tons, loads, etc.) the neighbor took and furnish him a waste analysis.
This facility is permitted for 275 milkers and 35 heifers ?for 310 total. The certification form at the farm has 120 and the database still
shows 120 head.
# 16. Mr. Palmer contracted a custom applicator to apply his waste this year and plans on doing so for next year.
Overall records and facility look good.
w
wer/Inspector Name Rocky Durham
E
wer/lnspector Signature: Date:
05103101 Continued

Facility Number: 29-20 1) c of lnspection F 6/5/2001 • Printed on: 10/2/2001
r�
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 0 No
analysis: 3/19/01 LSD 8.3 lbs.N/1000 gals. B, 11.6 lbs.N11000 gals. SI
J
05103101

*vision of Water Quality 0
*vision of Soil and Water Conservation
Other Agency
Type of Visit O Compliance Inspection O Operation Review O Lagoon Evaluation
Reason for Vlslt O Routine O Complaint O Follow up O Emergency Notification O Other ❑ Denied Access
Facility Number
Date of Visit: t312412000 Time: 0850 Prinled on: 8/24/2000
29 20
Not Operational C Below Threshold
S Permitted ■ Certified ❑ Conditionally Certified 0 Registered Date Last Operated or Above Threshold:.. .......................
Farm Name: 1'armOU4.19M .................................................. .... County: Vuld5an .......................................... WSRQ........
OwnerName: lY. kc.......................................• Unwr......................................................... Phone No: 33.6,-.79,&ZQ9.9 ...........................................................
Facility Contact: HiM.Umu.................................................. Title:....
Mailing Address: 113.6.UIltttxAmd.......................................................
........................................I.... Phone No:............................
........ tamiingtoaM....................................................... 2,7292 .............
Onsite Representative: Mitp.1.01tntett ............................. ... Integrator:
...............................................
Certified Operator:Midwd.L. ........................... P41MCIC.............................................. Operator Certification Number:,ZQQ7.S..............................
Location of Farm: _
Hwy. 47 south of Lexington - take a right onto Parks Rd. - then take right onto Palmer Rd. - travel around 1 mile and the
farm will be on the right. qr
❑ Swine ❑ Poultry ® Cattle ❑ Horse Latitude 35 • 41 42 {{ Longitude 13Q ` 13 33 it
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 Po ulation Cattle Capacity Population
❑ Layer I I ® Dairy 1 120 1 128
❑ Non -Layer ❑ Non -Dairy
❑ Other
Total Design Capacity 120
Total SSLW 168,000
Number of Lagoons 0 ❑ Subsurface Drains Present 110 Lagoon Area ❑ Spray Field Area
Holding Ponds / Solid Trapsi ❑ No Liquid Waste Management System
Discharees j& 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? Not measurable
d. Does discharge bypass a lagoon system? (If yes, notify DWQ) ® Yes []No
2. Is there evidence of past discharge from any part of the operation? ® 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: ......Write.P.oad...... ..................................... ....................... :........... ........................ ...................................... ......... ..........................
.
Freeboard (inches): 54
5100 Continued on back

Facility Number: 29-20 Date of Inspection 8/24/2000 in Printed on: 8/24/2000 -
5. Are there any immediate threats to the i rity of any of the structures observed? (ie/ tre vere erosion, ❑ Yes ® No
seepage, etc.)
6. Are there structures on -site which are not properly addressed and/or managed through a waste management or
closure plan? ❑ Yes ® No
(If any of questions 4-6 was answered yes, and the situation poses an
immediate public health or environmental threat, notify DWQ)
7. Do any of the structures need maintenance/improvement? ❑ Yes ® No
8. Does any part of the waste management system other than waste structures require maintenance/improvement? ® Yes ❑ No
9. Do any stuctures lack adequate, gauged markers with required maximum and minimum liquid level
elevation markings? ❑ Yes ® No
Waste Application
10. Are there any buffers that need maintenance/improvement? ❑ Yes ® No
11. Is there evidence of over application? ❑ Excessive Ponding ❑ PAN ❑ Hydraulic Overload ❑ Yes ® No
12. Crop type Corn (Silage & Grain) Fescue (Hay)
13. Do the receiving crops differ with those designated in the Certified Animal Waste Management Plan (CAWMP)? ❑ Yes ® No
14. a) Does the facility lack adequate acreage for land application? ❑ Yes ® No
b) Does the facility need a wettable acre determination? ❑ Yes ® No
c) This facility is pended for a wettable acre determination? ❑ Yes ® No
15. Does the receiving crop need improvement?
16. Is there a lack of adequate waste application equipment?
Required Records &,Documents
17. Fail to have Certificate of Coverage & General Permit readily available?
18. Does the facility fail to have all components of the Certified Animal Waste Management Plan readily available?
(ie/ WUP, checklists, design, maps, etc.)
19. Does record keeping need improvement? (ie/ irrigation, freeboard, waste analysis & soil sample reports)
20. Is facility not in compliance with any applicable setback criteria in effect at the time of design?
21, Did the facility fail to have a actively certified operator in charge?
22. Fail to notify regional DWQ of emergency situations as required by General Permit?
(ie/ discharge, freeboard problems, over application)
23. Did Reviewertinspector fail to discuss review/inspection with on -site representative?
24. Does facility require a follow-up visit by same agency?
25. Were any additional problems noted which cause noncompliance of the Certified AWMP?
0: PVo yiolatioris:or deficiencies were:n...:during this. visit..You.will .receive l.. further . .
corresuoricience: about this :visit:
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes ® No
IN Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes ® No
® Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes ® No
01. and #8. Discharge off lower paved barn lot which disperses into corn field and does not reach creek. SWCD has already begun AL
designing and laying out design for catch basin.
17. Call permit unit to request copy of permit. Mike has all other records.
19. Keep weekly rather than twice monthly readings.
an eye on PF4 field as Cu and Zn levels are around 700.
Reviewer/Inspector Name
Reviewer/Inspector Signature:`JjV 1111jJA.&, I kjjW y, y A7 A / Date: 5/00

Facility Number: 29-20 lof Inspection 8/24/2000 • Printed on: 8/24/2000
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
► • t bna +omirientis an or ra rigs:
i
5/00

of Soil and Water Conservation' A. *ivisionofWater ualit
ivtsion
6 Closer Avenry ,. E ,.:
'type of Visit ACompliance Inspection O Operation Review O Lagoon Evaluation
Reason for Visit _ArRoutine O Complaint O Follow up O Emergency Notification O Other ❑ Denied Access
Daty: of Visit: Tilne: Printed on: 7/21/2000
Facility Numher
0 Not Operational 0 Below Threshold
�j Permitted$Cerlified [3Conditionally Certified 0 Registered Date Last Operated or Above Threshold:
Farm Name: .L�`1.......1..�.r..t• ............................ .......................... County: ... Y,r�l�.�.�O.................. .......................
Owner Name:....1.[.1......� .......Pat mt� ........ Phone No. 31.6.'...74.�'.....� L �..... ........................................... ..
Facility Contact: ..t.:..l... .......k,�..►.....zJ....................."I'itle:......................................................... Phone No:...................................................
..
Mailing Address: ... ..m........' I.fr^'..r l,i..1... r `� o�.,1.4�!�
�. ... o .. ...............................I..
OnsiteRepresentative: ..... lY�....Ie...... tP.G..t........ Integrator:......................................................................................
Certified Operator: ....m....Ch(�. rl............'............ r� ........... Operator Certification Numher:...... .�i y .......
a
Location of Farm:
wy 7 60 o ex1 n z
`T-a11[.e rf h on a o�.r- 5
r on rroX ,
Cal Cam] [3 Swine ❑Poultry Cattle ❑Horse Latitude l • r Longitude • �° ���
Design Current
Swine Canacity Ponnlation
❑ Wean to Feeder
❑ Feeder to Finish
❑ Farrow to Wean
❑ Farrow to Feeder
❑ Farrow to Finish
❑ Gilts
❑ Boars
Design Current
Poultry Capacity Population
❑ Layer
❑ Non -Layer
❑ Other
Design Current
Cattle Capacity Population
Dairy
n Non -Dairy
Total Design Capacity 0
Total SSLW /„ �' . 66n
Number of Lagoons" J❑ Subsurface Drains Present jl❑ Lagoon Area J❑ Spray Field Area I
Holding Ponds I Solid Traps ❑ No Liquid Waste Management System
Discharges & Stream Impacts
1. Is any discharge observed from any part of the operation?
Discharge originated at: ❑ Lagoon ❑ Spray Field Other
a. If discharge is observed, was the conveyance man-made'?
b. If discharge is observed, did it reach Water of the State'? (If yes, notify DWQ)
c, If discharge is observed. what is the cstimatcd [low in galhnin?
d. Does discharge bypass a lagoon system? (If yes, notify DWQ)
AYes ❑ No
❑ Yes XNo
❑ Yes I F{
�b^�' Nn�nCurn�nl�.
Yes ❑ No
2. Is there evidence of past discharge from any part of the operation. 99 Yes ❑ No.
3. Were there any adverse impacts or potential adverse impacts to the Waters of the State other than from a discharge? ❑ Yes *0
Waste Collection & Treatment
4. Is storage capacity (freeboard plus storm storage) less than adequate? Xpillway ❑ Yes A No
SLruarre II Structure 2 Structure 3 Structure 4 Structure 5 Structure 6
[dcntifict: [.U-l!.�1-Q ........I ................. ...............................................................................................................................................
Freeboard (inches): 5
5100 Continued on back

EE(cility Number: — Date of Inspection 06 1 q),
Printed on: 7/21/2000
5. Are there any immediate threats to the i!l srity of any of the structures observed? (iel *tre,,evere erosion, ❑ Yes VNo
seepage, etc.)
6. Are there structures on -site which are not properly addressed and/or managed through a waste management or
closure plan? ❑ Yes V'No
(If any of questions 4-6 was answered yes, and the situation poses an
immediate public health or environmental threat, notify DWQ)
7. Do any of the structures need maintenance/improvement!
8. Does any part of the waste management system other than waste structures require maintenance/improvement?
9. Do any stuctures lack adequate, gauged markers with required maximum and minimum liquid level
elevation markings?
Waste Apelication
10. Are there any buffers that need maintenance/improvement?
11. Is there evidence of over application`? ❑ Excessive Ponding ❑ PAN ❑ Hydraulic Overload
12. Crop type (Iirn 4:� % ka.qe,
13. Do the receiving crops differ with 4se designated in the Certified Agmal Waste Management Plan (CAWMP)?
14. a) Does the facility lack adequate acreage for land application'?
b) Does the facility need a wettable acre determination'?
c) This facility is pended for a wettable acre determination'?
15. Does the receiving crop need improvement?
16. Is there a lack of adequate waste application equipment?
Required Records &_Documents
17. Fail to have Certificate of Coverage & General Permit readily available'?
18. Does the facility fail to have all components of the Certified Animal Waste Management Plan readily available?
(ie/ WUP, checklists, design, maps, etc.)
19, Does record keeping need improvement'? (ie/ irrigation, freeboard, waste analysis & soil sample reports)
20. Is facility not in compliance with any applicahle setback criteria in effect at the time or design'?
21. Did the facility fail to have a actively certified operator in charge'?
22. Fail to notify regional DWQ of emergency situations as required by General Permit?
(ie/ discharge, freeboard problems, over application)
23. Did Reviewer/Inspector fail to discuss review/inspection with on -site representative'?
24, Does facility require a follow-up visit by same agency'?
25. Were any additional problems noted which cause noncompliance of the Certified AWMP?
10 yiolaifcjris;or lief ciertcies were noted tlurtng {h4s;vis. t. - Ya4 will i•eetive do futthte
canes' oric�ence:au. LSvisit.':':':':':':':':':':':':':':':':':':':':':':':':':':':':':':':':':':':'
�❑ Yes VNo
�1 Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes KNo
❑ Yes 1VNo
❑ Yes �(No
❑ Yes VD
❑ Yes
❑ Yes r No
❑ Yes No
❑ Yes No
❑ Yes �No
Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes XNo
9 Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes No
❑ Yes No
❑ Yes No
❑ Yes )(No
❑ Yes hdNo
❑ 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):
of owedo�rn 1 al,a�.r ou--�a 15 5 ti
P
CAr � do�S ►r�o r t� e� creed . s w _ has I o ut- 4
11, Coat h 6 re v .arm.\-4- - KI lLe hAs all 29.4
rn v �� g�PY __.
Mar
0 e. on e Biel C'P a5 Cu 4- Z.n lweb are a-rourj
1-M. S,
1 �l. h i.,o,1D 6, t-ton l na c lLt��2.r2 do I rn4 +vj%l ce- milyl f-,, ► 1A,
5r
Reviewer/Inspector Name
Reviewer/Inspector Signature: J / YMA�-. j -00 !�, A? Date: D 914 sloo

Facilfty Number: — of Inspection Printed on: 7/21/2000
Odor Issues 0'
26. Does the discharge pipe from the confinement building to the storage pond or lagoon fail to discharge m/or hplow
Mu —
liquid level of lagoon or storage pond with no agitation?
27. Are there any dead animals not disposed of properly within 24 hours? ❑ Yes KNO
28. Is there any evidence of wind drift during land application? (i.e. residue on neighboring vegetation, asphalt, ElYes XNo
roads, building structure, and/or public property)
29. Is the land application spray system intake not located near the liquid surface of the lagoon? ❑ Yes XNO
30. Were any major maintenance problems with the ventilation fan(s) noted? (i.e. broken fan belts, missing or
or broken fan blade(s), inoperable shutters, etc.) ❑ Yes )(No
31. Do the animals feed storage bins fail to have appropriate cover? de0
om rTa.�
32. Do the flush tanks lack a submerged fill pipe or a permanent/temporary cover? *es--9 Nrr
Additional Comments and/orDrawings:
P+�e 'ors p� c�idr h cs��s
Paso- d i 5 e V)o.-r4 f— Off e-m e vv- I o+ l bLj:Pt - corn 7
Cu s- b t n c rr) end e c] ?
s/00

vision of Water Quality .
vision of Soil and Water Conservation
to Other Agency
Type of Visit O Compliance Inspection *Operation Review O Lagoon Evaluation
Reason for Visit *Routine O Complaint O Fallow up O Emergency Notification O Other ❑ Denied Access
Date of Visit: 5/30/2000 Time: 15:50 Printed on: 8/21/2000
Facility Number 29 20
tD Not Operational Q Below Threshold
■ Permitted ■ Certified ❑ Conditionally Certified [3 Registered Date Last Operated or Above Threshold:.......................
Farm Name: Paxna118.1.01 als.............................................................................................. County:Daxxdsaat.......................................... WISRO........
OwnerName: Me ........................................ Ratllp=........................................................ Phone No: 316:196.-M.9 ...........................................................
FacilityContact:.............................................................................. Title:................................................................ Phone No:...................................................
MailingAddress: 1136.1'a mein Rand.............................................................................. Uxiiaglts nN.C....................................................... 2.7292 .............
OnsiteRepresentative: M&C.R.41mr.................................... ........................................... Integrator:......................................................................................
Certified Operator: J,!'1i.C11atr1.>a............................. )'ob=......
Location of Farm:
Operator Certification Number:, 7,Q975...............
]wy. 47 south of Lexington - take a right onto Parks Rd. - then take right onto Palmer Rd. - travel around 1 mile and the AL
arm will be on the right. .r
❑ Swine ❑ poultry ® Cattle ❑ Morse Latitude Longitude F 80
Design Current
Swine Canacitv Ponulation
to Feeder
Feeder to Finish
rWean
Farrow to Wean
Farrow to Feeder
❑ Farrow to Finish
❑ Gilts
❑ Boars
Design Current
Design Current
Poultry
Capacity Population Cattle
Capacity Population
❑ Layer I
®Dairy
120
128
❑ Non -Layer
❑ Non -Dairy
❑ Other
Total Design Capacity
120
Total SSLW
168,000
Number of Lagoons I I ❑ Subsurface Drains Present ❑ Lagoon Area 10 Spray Field Area
Holding Ponds / Solid Traps 1 ❑ No Liquid Waste Management System
Discharees I 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 I@ 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: .............:...........................................I.................................................. .................................... .............................. ...... .............................. .......
Freeboard. (inches): 36
5/00 Continued on back

Facility Number: 29-20 Date of inspection Printed on- 8/21/2000
5/30/2000
0 Overe
'
5. Are there any immediate threats to the intrity of any of the structures observed? (ie/ tre erosion, ❑ Yes ® No
seepage, etc.)
6. Are there structures on -site which are not properly addressed and/or managed through a waste management or
closure plan? ❑ Yes ® No
(If any of questions 4-6 was answered yes, and the situation poses an
immediate public health or environmental threat, notify DWQ)
7. Do any of the structures need maintenance/improvement? ❑ Yes ® No
8. Does any part of the waste management system other than waste structures require maintenance/improvement? ® Yes ❑ No
9. Do any stuctures lack adequate, gauged markers with required maximum and minimum liquid level
elevation markings? ❑ Yes ® No
Waste Application
10. Are there any buffers that need maintenance/improvement? ❑ Yes ® No
11. Is there evidence of over application? ❑ Excessive Ponding ❑ PAN ❑ Hydraulic Overload ❑ Yes IN No
12. Crop type Small Grain (Wheat, Barley, Corn (Silage & Grain) Fescue (Hay)
13. Do the receiving crops differ with those designated in the Certified Animal Waste Management Plan (CAWMP)? ❑ Yes ® No
14. a) Does the facility lack adequate acreage for land application? ❑ Yes ® No
b) Does the facility need a wettable acre determination? ❑ Yes ❑ No
c) This facility is pended fora 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 yi.. 0.... deficiencie$were; .. .i dining this visit.... .....receive nq ft�;rther ;
correspondence. about this .visit, • . . . • .. . . .
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes ® No
® Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes ® No
2. Evidence of past discharge off the concrete lot lower corner, between old barn and new free stall barn. Need to install curbing, dr(
)x and pipe to holding pond if elevation allows. Could also gutter new barn and possibly existing barn to eliminate some fresh water.
7. Need to mow around holding pond for easy visual inspection.
8. Refer to # 2 above.
Reviewer/Inspector Name lRocky Durham
Reviewer/Inspector Signature: Date: 5/00

Facility Number: 29-2U I0of Inspection FT3672666 1
40 Printed on: 8/21/2000
1 r Issues
26.
Does the discharge pipe from the confinement building to the storage pond or lagoon fail to discharge at/or below
❑ Yes
❑ No
liquid level of lagoon or storage pond with no agitation?
27.
Are there any dead animals not disposed of properly within 24 hours?
❑ Yes
IN No
28.
Is there any evidence of wind drift during land application? (i.e. residue on neighboring vegetation, asphalt,
❑ Yes
® No
roads, building structure, and/or public property)
29.
Is the land application spray system intake not located near the liquid surface of the lagoon?
❑ Yes
❑ No
30.
Were any major maintenance problems with the ventilation fan(s) noted? (i.e. broken fan belts, missing or
or broken fan blade(s), inoperable shutters, etc.)
❑ Yes
® No
31,
Do the animals feed storage bins fail to have appropriate cover?
❑ Yes
® No
32. Do the flush tanks lack a submerged fill pipe or a permanent/temporary cover? ❑ Yes ❑ No
ALI
J
5100

Facility Number 29 20 Date of Inspection 9129/99
Time of Inspection 1400 24 hr. (hh:mm)
© Permitted ® Certified [3 Conditionally Certified 0 Registered JE3 Not Operational Date Last Operated: ..........................
Farm Name: Famda.Faru*............................................................................................ .. County.. DR Ads.Qu..........................................WSRQ........
OwnerName: Mike ........................................ RAImi........................................................ Phone No: 33.6!!79Z09.9.............................................
Facility Contact:.............................................................................. Title:................................................................ Phone No:
......................................
Mailing Address: 11 Ct. atlnn�x..da d............................................ . Wingtox.N.C....................................................... 2.7292 ..............
OnsiteRepresentative:...........................................................................................................Integrator:......................................................................................
Certified Operator: Mkdwd.L............................. r9 mv:............................................. Operator Certification Number: Z99.7.S..............................
Location of Farm:
rxx..�7.samtAt.a .Ls�zciml ton.:..t�l�t�.>t.xi�b�t..t?m>a.��xi�s.�dh.-.. heat.t l��.xi�iat.Q�txu.��lxn�r. sA..-.kraY 1.axau�txd..l.anile.a�ud.ttte........ !A�
Latitude 35 • 41 i 42 f{ Longitude $0 ' 13 L 3349
Discharees.& Stream Imp
I. Is any discharge observed from any part of the operation? ❑ Yes ® No
Discharge originated at: ❑ Lagoon ❑ Spray Field ❑ Other
a. If discharge is observed, was the conveyance man-made? ❑ Yes ❑ No
b. If discharge is observed, did it reach Water of the State? (If yes, notify DWQ) ❑ Yes ❑ No
c, If discharge is observed, what is the estimated flow in gal/min?
d. Does discharge bypass a lagoon system? (If yes, notify DWQ) ❑ Yes ❑ No
2. Is there evidence of past discharge from any part of the operation? ❑ Yes ® No
3. Were there any adverse impacts or potential adverse impacts to the Waters of the State other than from a discharge? ❑ Yes ® No
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:
Freeboard(inches) ............... �.6............... .................................... ................................... ..... ...........................................................
5. Are there any immediate threats to the integrity of any of the structures observed? (ie/ trees, severe erosion,
seepage, etc.)
3/23/99
....................................
❑ Yes ® No
Continued on back

(Facility+Number: 29-20 of Inspection
6. Are there structures on -site which are nooperly addressed and/or managed through a Oe management or
closure plan?
(If any of questions 4-6 was answered yes, and the situation poses an
immediate public health or environmental threat, notify DWQ)
7. Do any of the structures need maintenance/improvement?
8. Does any part of the waste management system other than waste structures require maintenance/improvement?
9. Do any stuctures lack adequate, gauged markers with required maximum and minimum liquid level
elevation markings?
Waste Application
10. Are there any buffers that need maintenance/improvement?
11. Is there evidence of over application? ❑ Excessive Ponding ❑ PAN
12. Crop type Fescue (Graze)
9/29/99
❑ Yes
® No
❑ Yes
® No
❑ Yes
® No
❑ Yes
® No
❑ Yes
® No
❑ Yes
® No
13. Do the receiving crops differ with those designated in the Certified Animal Waste Management Plan (CAWMP)? ❑ 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 Record5 & D cum n
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?
®: N'b•yiol'ations:or deticienetes.were:noted:during•thig,#isit::You:wili reeeive•nti•ft;rfl er•
: correspondence. about this .visit. • :: :::: :::::::: :: : : :
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes ® No
17, 18, 19, 20, 23. Onsite representative unavailable at the time of the inspection. Unable to inspect documents and records.
Reviewer/Inspector Name lJennifer
Reviewer/Inspector Signature: ���,�� Date: GI 1 3o f 9

+ Facility Number: 29-20 of Inspection 9/29/99
Odor Issues 0
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
' t ona oiriments uri o`r ew ngs:
A

, e ,. • : € •
>�❑Division of Sot and Water Conservation ❑Other ncy
Routine O Complaint O Follow-up of 2112ins crtion O Follow-up of DS%VC review O Other
Date of Inspection
Facility Number
Time of Inspection tjtw 24 hr. (hlumm)
© Registered Certified d Applied for Permit © Permitted 10 Not Operational Date L�a,/st O terated:
Farm Name:......�e} �..��. i fil.l./%i. County:.......1.41. c1.....................................
Owner Name:....,,.1..f.1.°.................................. �..LL. Phone No:.I?...r....0(.1�..qq....,,........,.......,....
FacilityContact: Title" Phone 1�'a:.......................................................................................................................................................
Mailing Address: .... ....�.........1►n.Pr'.......... .......... ........... Ge,..n..�:..'..................7...�
Onsite Representative: ............. Ad.! /J/� ! ... Integrator:......................................................................................
Certified Uperator;..('l.L.�ll. .L. �.x..............R.,l .f .......................... Operator Certification Number ;.......?Y. ....
Lovatioh of Farm:
G. .. � .a'..�.......,�rre.{. ,. ....,rr......;... .:f:..eh.r.,t�t. �/.�1....'.Q........, .. >o ,t.��. .u.�,;i.�...�...... . a..... �.22...� .rx1x�.►'..
.' � r
x..�..�.....h7.i1 c........5..d.r.."h....a:!?......�^.r..-..�1A.. r..........,c....o�... . .
Latitude • [�° ITZI" Longitude [�• ®° ux"
Deign Current•
_ i}esigti
CurrentDesigrtt Current
Swine. A r<Capacity Population
Poultry Capacity Population Cattle }Capacity ,Pppulatrgn
ff Wean to Feeder
I0 Layer
-A Dairy IQ
❑ Feeder to Finish
I0 Non -Layer I
I Non -Dairy
❑ Farrow to Wean,
:,. •
❑ Other
a'
❑ Farrow to Feeder
❑ to Finish
F
Total Design Cao*jtyg`
(F'arrow
ilts
❑ Boars
Total .SSLW`
C
Subsurface Drains Present JI❑ Lagoon Area Io Spray Field Area
No Liquid Waste Management System h
General
1. Are there any buffers that need maintenancelimprovement?
❑ Yes
No
2. Is any discharge observed from any part of the operation?
❑ Yes
No
Discharge originated at: ❑ Lagoon ❑ Spray Field ❑ Other
a. If discharge is observed, was the conveyance man-made?
❑ Yes
❑ No
b. If discharge is observed, did it reach Surface Water? (If yes, notify DWQ)
❑ Yes
❑ No
c. If discharge is observed, what is the estimated flow in gal/min?
-d. Does discharge bypass a lagoon system? (If yes, notify DWQ)
❑ Yes
❑ No
3. Is there evidence of past discharge from any part of the operation?
❑ Yes
No
4. Were there any adverse impacts to the waters of the State other than from a discharge?
❑ Yes
No
5. Does any part of the waste management system (other than lagoons/holding ponds) require
❑ Yes
No
maintenance/improvement?
6. Is facility not in compliance with any applicable setback criteria in effect at the time of design?
❑ Yes
No
7. Did the facility fail to have a certified operator in responsible charge?
❑ Yes
ko
7/25/97 •
Continued on back R

Facility Number: — OZ(9
8. Are there lagoons or storage ponds on site which need to be properly closed?
Structures (Lagoons,11olding Ponds, Flush Pits, etc.)
9. Is storage capacity (freeboard plus storm storage) less than adequate?
•
Structure I Structure 2 Structure 3 Structure 4
Identifier:
7................ .........
Freeboard(t�t):........,..1.......... .................................................................
10. Is seepage observed from any of the structures?
1 I. 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 A 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 .............a7 ....... ��r../.R. � ....9�A..11.�% ,�! �•�� t�:........
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/[nspector fail to discuss review/inspection with on -site representative?
22. Does record keeping need improvement?
For Certified or Permitted Facilities Only
23. Does the facility fail to have a copy of the Animal Waste Management Plan readily available?
24. Were any additional problems noted which cause noncompliance of the Certified AWMP?
25, Were any additional problems noted which cause noncompliance of the Permit?
No.vitilatiohs•or defidencies4ere.noted during this. visit., You.rvill ieceive il6ltirther`
corres''pbndehce about this:visit. ;
❑ Yes XNo
❑ Yes kNo
❑ Yes �No
❑ Yes No
❑ Yes KNO
❑ Yes A(No
❑ Yes gNo
❑ Yes tNo
o
❑ Yes
❑ Yeso
❑ Yes YNo
❑ Yes XNo
❑ Yes lNo
❑ Yes Na
❑ Yes No
.f.�Y Fd �„. . - g -L" ag 4#3 yw '3.�'s
Cnm»►ents (refer to:quest]on #) ,Explain3any YES answers{and/or any recamniendattons or any nth r cpmxnents � .
Use drawings of fuctltty,to better eyxpla� si tuattUns (use addtitonal puges�as;naecessary) � x
„ ..
MN r tt ,, •
7/25/97
Reviewer/Inspector Name
Reviewer/Inspector Signature: Date:

L ,
OPERATIONS BRA NCH - WQ F-919-715--604S Ju 1 19 "D5 , 10 :17 P. 03/13
40
SITE V7S(rA!1't0N PW---'ORn
tLkx,z: 7— -1. 7
4 -
/r
Agent Virl"a Situ J C kc: -.. fit1�LsoPhoric, 70 ` Rom ,.?.
00 Sits Aept=vatWd-Yct ---
My31oAf A46W31 .,&lrn a �, ...�....
Mulling Addmu.-
Tyro of Orcratiao: SwLne P0,31try Calve �
Design C"un��*
Number of Animals w Site;
i.�lthattet 3 .—Y/• � - Lvn 31u[iss: _ d ._,0 ---e -
Type of In tlem-, Grituad
QN16 Y�* o: we
cc3 the Alunlw WUM Lagc haYe r•';Z9vicrt frrxiurrd of i rvct r 13 Yax:1.` i7U sl7t{zr eve -it
(apprQx!rMlcly f Faot -� 7 JrCMA)(Yo)cr Na Actual r'r=+ card. -2- Peat
r'o: facillu"N with Moro'.!W4 0W.N8000, ijiwt ad'rlcess the :Uc "nocni, rxc., t�,j gndc: tk
CVtrttf dfl5 Watlrin.
Wz1a any Y4i. o fa Wa ljlcM ctv.;on of ►ha dam • 6a N1,
Ix adLcgaatz Land avZabia far land ac�lo:vi~:it� . cs : i'ia 4a ch �: •c� crop zdtgvl�7 'Id or No
,4dc3iliUnr.1 Cnn,rnt=tc�r• C �,a•r�
or
O Ag G .... G--i°.e2, . d u 7�• —
FLX to (9191 715-3�39 ry of As�gg
4