990025_INSPECTIONS_20171231

Facility Number
Division of Water Qualit)j
Division of Soil and Water
O Other Agency
nservation
Type of Visit IC mpliance 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: 110 On AArrival Time: r
Farm Name: ----- .0 11
ro", i
Owner Name:
Mailing Address: ' re
Physical Address:
Facility Contact:Title:
Onsite Representative: 142,44
Certified Operator: TICS
Back-up Operator:
Location of Farm:
Swine
Wean to Finish
Wean to Feeder
Feeder to Finish
Farrow to Wean
LJ Farrow to Finish
❑ Gilts
❑ Boars
Other
❑ Other
re Time: County: Region:
tQSR>
CL,f r l Owner Email:
Phone:
AyiIle ,
10L a -)0."—
o
Latitude: =
Phone No: _A7_
Integrator:
Operator Certification Number:
Back-up Certification Number:
= « Longitude: = ° 0 ` = "
Design Current Design Current
Capacity Population Wet Poultry Capacity Population
❑ La er
❑ Non -La et
Dry Poultry
Layers
Non-L
Pullets
Poults
Discharees & 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
jDairy Cow
Dairy Calf
❑ Daia Heifei
❑ Dry Cow
❑ Non -Dairy
❑ Beef Stocker
❑ Beef Feeder
❑ Beef Brood Co
Number of Structures: FT
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 X`No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes
❑ No
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Yes
❑ No
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Yes
❑ No
El Yes
o
El NA
El NE
ElYes
No
❑ NA
❑ NE
12128104 Continued

Facility Number: — a5 • Date of Inspection
Waste Collection & Treatment
4. Is storage capacity (structural plus storm storage plus heavy rainfall) less than adequate? ❑ Yes o ❑ NA ❑ NE
a. If yes, is waste level into the structural freeboard? ❑ Yes ❑ No ❑ NA ❑ NE
Structure 1 Structure 2 Structure 3 Structure 4 Structure 5 Structure 6
Identifier:
Spillway?:
Designed Freeboard (in):
Observed Freeboard (in):
5. Are there any immediate threats to the integrity of any of the structures observed? ❑ Yes
�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
VNo
❑ NA ❑ NE
through a waste management or closure plan?
If any of questions 4-6 were answered yes, and the situation poses an immediate public health or environmental threat,
notify DWQ
7. Do any of the structures need maintenance or improvement? ❑ Yes
y o
❑ NA ❑ NE
8. Do any of the stuctures lack adequate markers as required by the permit'? ❑ Yes
CyNo
❑ 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
tyNo
❑ NA ❑ NE
maintenance or improvement?
Waste Application
10. Are there any required buffers, setbacks, or compliance alternatives that need ❑ Yes
VNo
❑ NA ❑ NE
maintenance/improvement?
11. Is there evidence of incorrect application? If yes, check the appropriate box below. ❑ Yes
YNo
❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Excessive Ponding ❑ Hydraulic Overload ❑ Frozen Ground ❑ Heavy Metals (Cu, Zn, etc.)
❑ PAN ❑ PAN > 10% or 10 Ibs ❑ Total Phosphorus ❑ Failure to Incorporate Manure/Sludge into Bare Soil
❑ Outside of Acceptable Crop Window ❑ Evidence of Wind Drift ❑ Application Outside of Area
12. Crop type(s)
13. Soil type(s)
14. Do the receiving crops differ from those designated in the CAWMP?
❑ Yes
No
❑ NA
❑ NE
15. Does the receiving crop and/or land application site need improvement?
❑ Yes
No
❑ NA
❑ NE
16. Did the facility fail to secure and/or operate per the irrigation design or wettable acre determination?❑ yes
❑ No
XNA
ElNE
17. Does the facility lack adequate acreage for land application?
ElYes
*o
❑NA
❑ NE
18. Is there a lack of properly operating waste application equipment?
❑ Yes
VNo
❑ 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):
30 d .�
yr e b��n , myvp ra red r rare- l e �a �
�
� o
S�en re- ue54
a par 4 Ires�i sto�
Reviewer/inspector Namejt] 15rock., Phone:
Reviewer/Inspector Signature: Date:
if L - 1
12128104 - Continued

�r
Facility Number: 619 — $ gate of Inspection 0 -
ReQuired Records & Documents
19. Did the facility fail to have Certificate of Coverage & Permit readily available? ❑ Yes jNo ❑ NA ❑ NE
20. Does the facility fail to have all components of the CAWMP readily available? If yes, check ❑ Yes �No ElNA ElNE
El❑ Design ❑Maps ❑Otherthe appropirate box. ❑ WUP Checklists
21. Does record keeping need improvement? If yes, check the appropriate box below. ❑ Yes No ❑ NA ❑ NE
[IWaste Application ❑ Weekly Freeboard ❑Waste Analysis ❑SoilAnalysispe
❑ Rainfall []Stocking ❑ Crop Yield ❑ t20 Minute Inspections ❑ Monthly and I" Rain Inspections ❑ Weather Code
22. Did the facility fail to install and maintain a rain gauge?
❑ Yes
VN o
❑ NA
❑ NE
23. If selected, did the facility fail to install and maintain rainbreakers on irrigation equipment?
❑ Yes
❑ No
YNA
❑ NE
24, Did the facility fail to calibrate waste application equipment as required by the permit?
❑ Yes
�fNo
❑ 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
t/No
❑ NA
❑ NE
27. Did the facility fail to secure a phosphorus loss assessment (PLAT) certification? ❑ Yes ❑ No �NA ❑ NE
Other Issues V
28.Were any additional problems noted which cause non-compliance of the permit or CAWMP? ElYes No El NA [I NE
29. Did the facility fail to properly dispose of dead animals within 24 hours and/or document ❑ Yes No [INA ❑ NE
and report the mortality rates that were higher than normal?
30. At the time of the inspection did the facility pose an odor or air quality concern?
❑ Yes
No
❑ NA
❑ NE
If yes, contact a regional Air Quality representative immediately
31. Did the facility fail to notify the regional office of emergency situations as required by
❑ Yes
No
❑ NA
❑ NE
General Permit? (ie/ discharge, freeboard problems, over application)
32. Did Reviewer/Inspector fail to discuss review/inspection with an on -site representative?
❑ Yes
No
❑ NA
❑ NE
33. Does facility require a follow-up visit by same agency?
❑ Yes
'P+ No
❑ NA
❑ NE
Additional Comments and/or Drawings:
"a
1)6 4ffb�_&� AAe'6� -A-"
f
12128104

Division of Water Quality
Division of Soil and Water Conservation
❑ Other Agency
Facility Number: 990025 Facility Status: Active Permit: AWC990025 ❑ Denied Access
Inspection Type: Compliance Inspection Inactive or Closers Date:
Reason for Visit: Routine County: Yadkin Region: Winston-Salem
Date of Visit: 02/14/2006 Entry Time:01:00 PM Exit Time: Q2:30 PM _ Incident #:
Farm Name: Cranfill Caudlg Dairy _ Owner Email:
Owner: Rex Cranfill
Phone: [phone]
Mailing Address: Yadkinville NC 27055
Physical Address:
Facility Status: ❑ Compliant ❑ Not Compliant Integrator:
Location of Farm:
Latitude:36°09'15" Longitude:80°41'39"
From WSRO: Hwy. 421 north to Hwy 601 north. Left onto Haire Rd. Farm is on both sides of the road.
Question Areas:
Discharges & Stream Impacts Waste Collection & Treatment Waste Application
Records and Documents Other Issues
Certified Operator: Darren T Caudle Operator Certification Number: 21389
Secondary OIC(s):
On -Site Representative(s): Name Title Phone
On -site representative Todd Caudle Phone: [phone]
24 hour contact name Todd Caudle Phone: [phone]
Primary Inspector: M lissa Rosebrock Phone: �1
PVut-�
Inspector Slgnature: Date:
Secondary Inspector(s):
Inspection Summary:
21. Operator has not applied waste since October 2006. No soil or waste application records required today.
Owner's Sost-Share contract is up in May 2007. Mr. Cranfill plans to close the WSP at that time.
Page: 1

0
Permit.AWC990025 Owner -Facility: Rex Cranfill
Facility Number: 990025
Inspection Date: 02/14/2008 Inspection Typo: Compliance Inspection Reason for Visit: Routine
Regulated Operations Design Capacity Current Population
Cattle
Cattle -Milk Cow 100 0
Total Design Capacity: 100
Total SSLW: 140.000
Waste Structures
Type Identifier Closed Date Start Date , Designed Freeboard Observed Freeboard
aste Pond WASTE POND 120.00
Page: 2

L�
Permit: AWC990025 Owner - Facility: Rex Cranfill Facility Number : 990025
Inspection Date: 02/14/2006 Inspection Type: Compliance Inspection Reason for Visit: Routine
Discharges §, Stream Impacts Yes No NA NE
1. Is any discharge observed from any part of the operation? ❑ ■ ❑ ❑
Discharge originated at:
Structure ❑
Application Field ❑
Other ❑
a. Was conveyance man-made? ❑ I ■ ❑ ❑
b. Did discharge reach Waters of the State? (if yes, notify DWQ) ❑ ■ ❑ ❑
c. Estimated volume reaching surface waters?
d. Does discharge bypass the waste management system? (if yes, notify DWQ)
❑
■ ❑
❑
2. Is there evidence of a past discharge from any part of the operation?
❑
■ ❑
❑
3. Were there any adverse impacts or potential adverse impacts to Waters of the State other than from a
❑
■ ❑
❑
discharge?
Waste Collection, Storage & Treatment
Yes
No NA
NE
4. Is storage capacity less than adequate?
❑
■ ❑
❑
If yes, is waste level into structural freeboard?
❑
5. Are there any immediate threats to the integrity of any of the structures observed (I.e./ large trees, severe
Cl
■
❑
❑
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 Appticatfon 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: AWC990025 Owner- Facility: Rex Cranfill
Inspection Date: 02/14/2006 Inspection Type: Compliance Inspection
Facility Number: 990025
Reason for Visit: Routine
Waste Ap hcp ation
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
Fescue
(Pasture)
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
❑
■
Cl
❑
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: AWC990025 Owner - Facility: Rex Cranfill Facility Number: 990025
Inspection Date: 02/14/2006 Inspection Type: Compliance Inspectlon Reason for Matt: Routine
Records and Documents
Yes
No NA
NE
Checklists?
❑
Design?
❑
Maps?
❑
Other?
❑
21. Does record keeping need improvement?
❑
■ ❑
❑
If yes, check the appropriate box below.
Waste Application?
❑
120 Minute inspections?
❑
Weather code?
❑
Weekly Freeboard?
❑
Transfers?
❑
Rainfall?
❑
Inspections after > 1 inch rainfall & monthly?
❑
Waste Analysis?
❑
Annual soil analysis?
❑
Crop yields?
❑
Stocking?
❑
Annual Certification Form (NPDES only)?
❑
22. Did the facility fail to install and maintain a rain gauge?
❑
■ ❑
❑
23. If selected, did the facility fail to install and maintain a rainbreaker on irrigation equipment (NPDES only)?
❑
❑ ■
❑
24. Did the facility fail to calibrate waste application equipment as required by the permit?
❑
■ ❑
❑
25, Did the facility fail to conduct a sludge survey as required by the permit?
❑
❑ ■
❑
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 property dispose of dead animals within 24 hours and/or document and report those
❑
■ ❑
❑
mortality rates that exceed normal rates?
30. At the time of the inspection did the facility pose an air quality concern? If yes, contact a regional Air
❑
■ ❑
Cl
Quality representative immediately.
Page: 5

CJ
•
Permit: AWC990025 Owner- Facility: Rex Cranfill
Facility Number: 990025
Inspection pate: 02/14/2006 Inspection Type: Compliance Inspection Reason for Visit: Routine
Other Issues Yes No NA NE
31. Did the facility fail to notify regional DWQ of emergency situations as required by Permit?
32. Did Reviewer/inspector 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 Compliance Inspection O Operation Review O Structure Evaluation O Technical Assistance
Reason for Vist4ftutlne O Complaint O Follow up O Referral O Emergency O Other ❑ Denied Access
Date of Visit: Arrival Time: 60 Departure Time: County:VO-41 ! Region: lit-.t71`��J
+ 1
Farm Name:t. jr I^ Owner Email:
owner Name: i� e-}. h1 Phone: 6i-- 3 9 3s ba $lo cai
Mailing Address: l r e , in VII jOF ► " C- b:: i
Physical Address:.
Facility Contact: T]f C,a tJd 1 Title: Pho
Onsite Representative: e_a VA 1 � - integrat6P: C q+ S t b
Certified Operator: ��tL4 C� �� Operator Certification Number; 3$
Back-up Operator:
Location of Farm:
Us 4
Back-up Certification Number:
Latitude: n ® Longitude: ®°
`dal Ivor vs ,j &4A- � ( I
m
11—esign Current
Swine C**opacity Population
Design Current Design
Wet Poultry Capacity Population Cattle Capacity
Current
Population
❑ Wean to Finish
❑ Wean to Feeder
❑ Layer
Daia Cow
I IE]Non-Layer I I El-DairyCalf
❑ Dairy Heifer
Dry Poultry E]Dry Cow
ElNon-Dairy
❑ La ers
❑ Beef Stocker
❑ Feeder to Finish
❑ Farrow to Wean
❑ Farrow to Feeder
❑ Farrow to Finish
❑ Non -Layers
El Beef Feeder
❑ Gilts
❑ Pullets
Beef Brood Cow
❑ Boars
❑ Turkeys e�
❑ Turkey Poults
❑ Other I u 11ber of Structures:
Other
❑ Other
Discharaes & Stream Impacts
1. Is any discharge observed from any part of the operation?
❑ Yes
�No
ElNA
❑ NE
Discharge originated at: ❑ Structure ❑ Application Field ElOther
a. Was the conveyance man-made?
❑ Yes
❑ No
❑ NA
❑ NE
b. Did the discharge reach waters of the State? (If yes, notify DWQ)
❑ Yes
❑ No
❑ NA
❑ NE
c. What is the estimated volume that reached waters of the State (gallons)?
d. Does discharge bypass the waste management system? (If yes, notify DWQ)
❑ Yes
❑ No
❑ NA
❑ NE
2. Is there evidence of a past discharge from any part of the operation?
❑ Yes
*o
[I NA
[I NE
3. Were there any adverse impacts or potential adverse impacts to the Waters of the State
❑ Yes
4(No
❑ NA
❑ NE
other than from a discharge?
Page I of 3
12128104
Continued

Facility Number: 93— �� • Date of Inspection
Waste Collection & Treatment
4. Is storage capacity (structural plus storm storage plus heavy rainfall) less than adequate?
a. If yes, is waste level into the structural freeboard?
Structure I Structure 2 Structure 3 Structure 4
` Identifier: W S jp
Spillway?:
Designed Freeboard (in):
Observed Freeboard (in):
5. Are there any immediate threats to the integrity of any of the structures observed?
(ie/ large trees, severe erosion, seepage, etc.)
6. Are there structures on -site which are not properly addressed and/or managed
through a waste management or closure plan?
❑ Yes )(No
❑ Yes ❑ No
Structure 5
❑NA El NE
[I NA ❑NE
Structure 6
❑ Yes PNo ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes VNo ❑ NA ❑ NE
If any of questions 4-6 were answered yes, and the situation poses an immediate public health or environmental threat, notify DWQ
7. Do any of the structures need maintenance or improvement? ❑ Yes ErNo ❑ NA ❑ NE
8. Do any of the stuctures lack adequate markers as required by the permit? ❑ Yes Vo ❑ 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 lo ❑ NA .❑ NE
maintenance or improvement?
Waste Application
10. Are there any required buffers, setbacks, or compliance alternatives that need ❑ Yes No ❑ NA ❑ NE
maintenance/improvement?
11. Is there evidence of incorrect application? If yes, check the appropriate. box below. ❑ Yes >(No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Excessive Ponding ❑ Hydraulic Overload ❑ Frozen Ground ❑ Heavy Metals (Cu, Zn, etc.)
❑ PAN ❑ PAN > 10% or I0 lbs ❑ Total Phosphorus ❑ Failure to Incorporate Manure/Sludge into Bare Soil
❑ Outside of Acceptable Crop Window ❑ Evidence of Wind Drift ❑ Application Outside of Area
12. Crop type(s)
13. Soil type(s) "
14. Do the receiving crops differ from those designated in the CAWMP? ❑ Yes *o ❑ NA ❑ NE
15. Does the receiving crop and/or land application site need improvement? ❑ Yes .,� No ❑ NA ❑ NE
16. Did the facility fail to secure and/or operate per the irrigation design or wettable acre determination ? ❑ Yes ❑ No * NA ❑ NE
17. Does the facility lack adequate acreage for land application? ❑ Yes NfNo ❑ NA ❑ NE
18. Is there a lack of properly operating waste application equipment?
❑ Yes R 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):
I +t
Reviewer/Inspector Name
ReviewerlInspector Sign
Page 2 of 3
re Cp rr�S ?
Phone:
Date:
12 8104 Continued

Facility Number: — ]Sate of Inspection 4 (p
Reauired Records & Documents
19. Did the facility fail to have Certificate of Coverage & Permit readily available? ❑ Yes �o ❑ NA ❑ NE
20. Does the facility fail to have all components of the CAWMP readily available? If yes, check ❑ Yes gNo ❑ NA ❑ NE
the appropriate box. ❑ WUP ❑ Checklists ❑ Design [I Maps ❑Other
21. Does record kKef ping need improve enV If yes, check the a ropriate box bel�ow�. ❑ Yes XNo ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Waste A anon ❑ Wee�eeboard ❑ Waste A Isis ❑ SoillAn lyyssis �e rs n
❑ Rai4ifalI ❑ gtodAng ❑ Cro ie d ❑ Monthly an 1" Rain Inspections ❑ Weather Code N1jr,
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 —1 No *A ❑ NE
24. Did the facility fail to calibrate waste application equipment as required by the permit? ❑ Yes XNo ❑ NA ❑ NE
25. Did the facility fail to conduct a sludge survey as required by the permit? ❑ Yes ❑ No �NA ElNE
26. Did the facility fail to have an actively certified operator in charge? ElYes �No ❑NA ❑ NE
27. Did the facility fail to secure a phosphorus loss assessment (PLAT) certification? ❑ Yes ❑ No �(NA ElNE
Other Issues
28. Were any additional problems noted which cause non-compliance of the permit or CAWMP? ❑ Yes ANo ❑ NA ❑ NE
29. Did the facility fail to properly dispose of dead animals within 24 hours and/or document ❑ Yes %No ❑ NA ❑ NE
and report the mortality rates that were higher than normal?
30. At the time of the inspection did the facility pose an odor or air quality concern? ❑ Yes No [INA ❑ 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 ;ANo ❑ NA ❑ NE
33. Does facility require a follow-up visit by same agency? ❑ Yes No ❑ NA ❑ NE
Additional Comments and/or Drawings:
00
8. P v' t o V'
�uE C)co �o no V--)
No R °V1 1I
Page 3 of 3 12128104

0 Division of Water Quality
❑ Division of Soil and Water Conservation
❑ Other Agency
Facility Number: 990025_ Facility Status: Active _ Permit: AWC990025 ❑ Denied Access
Inspection Type: Compliance Inspection _ Inactive or Closed Date:
Reason for Visit: Routine County: Yadkin Region: y-y(inston-Salem
Date of Visit: 10/04/2005 Entry Time:10:55 AM Exit Time: 12:00 PM Incident #:
Farm Name: Cranfill Caudle Dairy _ Owner Email:
Owner: )hex CranfllL-- _ Phone: [phone] _
Mailing Address: 1401 Haire -Rd ,--
Physical Address:
Facility Status: ❑ Compliant ❑ Not Compliant Integrator:
Location of Farm: Latitude: 36°09'15" Longitude: 80'41'39" _
From WSRO: Hwy. 421 north to Hwy 601 north. Left onto Haire Rd. Farm is on both sides of the road.
Question Areas:
Discharges & Stream Impacts Waste Collection & Treatment Waste Application
Records and Documents Other Issues
Certified Operator: Darren T Caudle Operator Certification Number: 21389
Secondary OIC(s):
On -Site Representative(s): Name Title Phone
On -site representative Todd Caudle Phone: [phone]
24 hour contact name Todd Caudle Phone: [phone]
Primary Inspector: Melissa Rosebrock Phone: [phone]
Ext.383
Inspector Signature:
Date:
Secondary Inspector(s):
Phone:
Phone:
Inspection Summary:
7. Continue efforts to control weeds on the WSP dam.
9. Small number of cattle were recently allowed in the fenced buffer area due to poor quality grass caused by the drought. Mr. Caudle
stated that the cattle would be moved in 2 weeks.
19. DWQ to send copy of permit and COC to Mr. Caudle at 1617 Shugart Mill Rd., Yadkinville.
21. Must check the freeboard weekly.
21, No waste has been applied since last year. No soil or waste application records are required at this time.
24. Calibration is not required until Oct. 2006 per the permit (or later, per DWQ, if the spreader nor honey wagon are not used until
after October 2006).
Page: 1

.r
Permit: AWC990025 Owner- Facility: Rex Cranflll Facility Number : 990025
Inspection Date: 10/04/2005 Inspection Type: Compliance Inspection Reason for Visit: Routine
Regulated Operations
Design Capacity
Current Population
Cattle
O Cattle -Milk Cow 100 0
Total Design Capacity: 100
Total SSLW: 140,000
Waste Structures
Type. Identifier Closed Date Start Date Designed Freeboard Observed Freeboard
k1ste Pond WASTE POND 96.00
Page: 2

•
•
Permit: AWC990025 Owner- Facility: Rex Cranfill
Facility Number : 990025
Inspection Date: 10/04/2005 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
Q
a. Was conveyance man-made?
❑
0
❑ ❑
b. Did discharge reach Waters of the State? (if yes, notify DWQ)
❑
0
❑ ❑
c. Estimated volume reaching surface waters?
d. Does discharge bypass the waste management system? (if yes, notify DWQ)
❑
■
❑ ❑
2. Is there evidence of a past discharge from any part of the operation?
❑
0
❑ ❑
3. Were there any adverse Impacts or potential adverse Impacts to Waters of the State other than from a discharge?
❑
0
❑ ❑
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 (Led large trees, severe erosion,
Cl
M
1) ❑
seepage, etc.)7
6. Are there structures on -site that are not properly addressed and/or managed through a waste management or
❑
0
❑ ❑
closure plan?
7. Do any of the structures need maintenance or Improvement?
Cl
■
❑ ❑
8. Do any of the structures lack adequate markers as required by the permit? (Not applicable to roofed pits, dry
❑
Q ❑
stacks and/or wet stacks)
9. Does any part of the waste management system other than the waste structures require maintenance or
❑
Q ❑
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?
❑
0
❑ ❑
If yes, check the appropriate box below.
Excessive Ponding?
❑
Hydraulic Overload?
❑
Frozen Ground?
❑
Heavy metals (Cu, Zn, etc)?
❑
PAN?
❑
Is PAN > 10%110 lbs.?
❑
Total P2O5?
Q
Failure to incorporate manurelsludge into bare soil?
❑
Outside of acceptable crop window?
❑
Evidence of wind drift?
❑
Application outside of application area?
❑
Crop Type 1
Fescue (Pasture)
Crop Type 2
Crop Type 3
Crop Type 4
Page: 3

0. 0
Permit: AWC990025 Owner -Facility: Rex Cranfill
Inspection Date:10104/2005 Inspection Type: Compliance Inspection
Facility Number: 990026
Reason for Visit: Routine
Waste Application
Yes
No
NA
NE
Crop Type 5
Crop Type 6
Soil Type 1
Soil Type 2
Soil Type 3
Soil Type 4
Soil Type 5
Soil Type 6
14. Do the receiving crops differ from those designated in the Certified Animal Waste Management Plan(CAWMP)? ❑
■
❑
❑
15. Does the receiving crop and/or land application site need improvement?
❑
■
❑
❑
16. Did the facility fail to secure and/or operate per the irrigation design or wettable acre determination?
❑
■
❑
❑
17. Does the facility lack adequate acreage for land application?
❑
■
❑
❑
18. Is there a lack of properly operating waste application equipment?
❑
■
❑
❑
Records and Documents
Yes
No
NA
NE
19. Did the facility fail to have Certificate of Coverage and Permit readily available?
■
❑
❑
❑
20. Does the facility fail to have all components of the CAWMP readily available?
❑
■
❑
❑
If yes, check the appropriate box below.
WUP?
❑
Checklists?
❑
Design?
❑
Maps?
❑
Other?
❑
21. Does record keeping need improvement?
Cl
■
❑
Cl
If yes, check the appropriate box below.
Waste Application?
❑
120 Minute inspections?
❑
Weather code?
❑
Weekly Freeboard?
❑
Transfers?
❑
Rainfall?
❑
Inspections after a 1 inch rainfall & monthly?
❑
Waste Analysis?
❑
Annual soil analysis?
❑
Crop yields?
❑
Stocking?
❑
Annual Certification Form (NPDES only)?
❑
22. Did the facility fail to Install and maintain a rain gauge?
❑
■
❑
❑
23. If selected, did the facility fail to install and maintain a rainbreaker on irrigation equipment (NPDES only)?
❑
■
❑
❑
24. Did the facility fail to calibrate waste application equipment as required by the permit?
❑
■
❑
❑
25. Did the facility fail to conduct a sludge survey as required by the permit?
❑
01111
26. Did the facility fail to have an actively certified operator in charge?
❑
■
❑
❑
Page: 4

•
•
Permit: AWC990025
owner -Facility: Rex Cranfill
Facility Number: 990025
Inspection Date: 10/04/2005 Inspection Type: Compliance Inspection Reason for Visit: Routine
Records and Documents Yes No NA NE
27. Did the facility fall to secure a phosphorous loss assessment (PLAT) certification? ❑ ■ ❑ ❑
Otherlssuss V.. u MA AIM
26. Were any additional problems noted which cause non-compllance of the Permit or CAWMP?
29. Did the facility fail to properly dispose of dead animals within 24 hours and/or document and report those
mortality rates that exceed normal rates?
30. At the time of the inspection did the facility pose an air quality concern? If yes, contact a regional Air Quality
-representative immediately.
31. Did the facility fail to notify regional DWQ of emergency situations as required by Permit?
32. Did Reviewer/Inspector fail to discuss review/Inspectlon with on -site representative?
33. Does facility require a follow-up visit by same agency?
❑ ■ ❑ ❑
❑ ■ ❑ ❑
❑ ■ ❑ ❑
Page: 5

Type of Visit kornpliance Inspection O Operation Review O Structure Evaluation O Technical Assistance
Reason for Visit *Routine 0 Complaint O Follow up O Referral O Emergency 0 Other ❑ Denied Access
Date of Visit:
0
Tr
Arrival Time:
Departure Time: � County:
w Region: sr�..o
Farm Name:
Ql p' Owner Email:
Owner Name:
C.4l-0-,A
Phone: _ 1aZq
— 338'-T aanr\
Mailing Address: f �d
�2-d •
yIoAlt 1 ji.V_i
7 d Sw­
Physical Address: _ l `o
1 1rP , t a •
_.
, VA 11nA t i
Facility Contact:
CQU� I�
Title:
Phon lie&
-
��
C). 2 4 _ S
Onsite Representative:gM
Integrator:
99 TcaA
Certified Operator: c213
Operator Certification
Number:
Back-up Operator:
Location of Farm:
US 14AA-) 14
Swine
Wean to Finish
Wean to Feeder
Feeder to Finish
LJ Farrow to Feeder
❑ Farrow to Finish
❑ Gilts
❑ Boars
Back-up Certification Number:
Latitude: [M c ` (!!I— Longitude: ® ° `
hn -wy &o i nor` (,N • Le-F+ oh t-6,Atrt Pd.
Design Current Design Current
Capacity Population Wet Poultry Capacity Population
❑ La er
1 I, 10 Non -Layer
Other
❑ Other I - T
Dry Poultry
❑ Layers
❑ Non -Layers
❑ Pullets
❑ Turkeys
❑ Turkey Poults
❑ Other
Discharp,es & Stream Impacts
1. Is any discharge observed from any part of the operation?
Discharge originated at: ❑ Structure ❑ Application Field ❑ Other
a. Was the conveyance man-made'?
Design Current
Cattle Capacity Population
Dairy Cow
Dairy Calf
❑
Dairy Heifei
❑
D Cow
❑
Non -Dairy
❑
Beef Stocker
❑
Beef Feeder
❑
Beef Brood Cow
Number of Structures: FT
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: qq— a Date of Inspection Q tj
Waste Collection & Treatment
4. Is storage capacity (structural plus storm storage plus heavy rainfall) less than adequate? ❑ Yes ANo ❑ NA ❑ NE
a. If yes, is waste level into the structural freeboard? ❑ Yes ❑ No ❑ NA ❑ NE
0 Structurej� Structure 2 Structure 3 Structure 4 Structure 5 Structure 6
/ lQ Identifier: w limie, t Alf�l�
Spillway?:
Designed Freeboard (in):
Observed Freeboard (in):
5. Are there any immediate threats to the integrity of any of the structures observed? ❑ Yes
)Q No ❑ NA ❑ NE
(ic/ large trees, severe erosion,' seepage, etc.)
6. Are there structures on -site which are not properly addressed and/or managed ❑ Yes
LVo ❑ 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
'0 No ❑ NA ❑ NE
(Not applicable to roofed pits, dry stacks and/or wet stacks)
9. Does any part of the waste management system other than the waste structures require ❑ Yes
�No ❑ NA ❑ NE
maintenance or improvement?
Waste Application
10. Are there any required buffers, setbacks, or compliance alternatives that need ❑ Yes
�No ElNA ElNE
maintenance/improvement?
11. Is there evidence of incorrect application? If yes, check the appropriate box below. ❑ Yes
No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Excessive Ponding ❑ Hydraulic Overload ❑ Frozen Ground ❑ Heavy Metals (Cu, Zn, etc.)
❑ PAN ❑ PAN > 10% or 10 lbs ❑ Total Phosphorus ❑ Failure to Incorporate Manure/Sludge into Bare Soil
❑ Outside of Acceptable Crop Window ❑ Evidence of Wind Drift ❑ Application Outside of Area
12. Crop type(s)
13. Soil type(s)
14. Do the receiving crops differ from those designated in the CAWMP?
❑ Yes
No
ElNA
ElNE
15. Does the receiving crop and/or land application site need improvement?
ElYes
jNo
❑ NA
❑ NE
16. Did the facility fail to secure and/or operate per the irrigation design or wettable acre determination:
❑ Yes
❑ No
XNA
❑ NE
17. Does the facility lack adequate acreage for land application?
❑ Yes
No
❑ NA
❑ NE
18. Is there a lack of properly operating waste application equipment?
❑ Yes
No
❑ NA
❑ NE
c ,� � � r ��.�'�- � ®?�9�. ��.` Sri'
Comments(referntonquestion#.)ExplaintanyYESansw ersrandloany recotta� en 10 or any other eomments.
llseYdrawrngsof�iaciLtytobetereaplain sttuahons(usepacitlitional pages as necessary
_.
Reviewer/InspectorL� `.�
GZ Iroal ; , -.w : �:. ,� s. Phone: Name
Reviewer/Inspector Signature: Date:
12/2&04 Continued

Facility Number: — Def Inspection
Required Records & Documents
19. Did the facility fail to have Certificate of Coverage & Permit readily available? XYes El No ❑ NA [I NE
20. Does the facility fail to have all components of the CAWMP readily available? If yes, check ❑ Yes t/No ❑ NA ❑ NE
the appropirate box. ❑ WUP ❑ Checklists ❑ Design El Maps El Other
21. Does record keeping need im 7 es, check ropriate box Yes No ❑ NA ❑ NE
eZ:Z�i�hWeek/ Freeboard ❑Waste Analysis So' Wa e Transfer �(((( al
❑ Rainfall ❑ StocicinL, ❑ G�p�l'ield ❑ Mont ly a d I" Rain Inspections ❑ Weathe
22. Did the facilityfail to install and maintain a rain gauge? ❑ Yes No ❑ NA ❑ NE
g g
23. If selected, did the facility fail to install and maintain rainbreakers on irrigation equipment'?
24. Did the facility fail to calibrate waste application equipment as required by the permit'?
25. Did the facility fail to conduct a sludge survey as required by the permit'?
26. Did the facility fail to have an actively certified operator in charge?
27. Did the facility fail to secure a phosphorus loss assessment (PLAT) certification'?
Other Issues
28., Were any additional problems noted which cause non-compliance of the permit or CAWMP?
29. Did the facility fail to properly dispose of dead animals within 24 hours and/or document
and report the mortality rates that were higher than normal?
30. At the time of the inspection did the facility pose an odor or air quality concern?
If yes, contact a regional Air Quality representative immediately
31. Did the facility fail to notify the regional office of emergency situations as required by
General Permit`? (ie/ discharge, freeboard problems, over application)
32. Did Reviewer/Inspector fail to discuss review/inspection with an on -site representative'?
33. Does facility require a follow-up visit by same agency?
❑ Yes
❑ Yes
❑ Yes
❑ Yes
❑ Yes
❑ No
o
P<N
No
�No
❑ No
INA
❑ NA
XNA
❑ NA
R
❑ NE
❑ NE
❑ NE
❑ NE
❑ NE
❑ Yes
*o
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Yes
No
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Yes
No
ElNA
ElNE
❑ Yes
jNo
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Yes
%No
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Yes
VNo
❑ NA
❑ NE
Additionali and/or Drawings:
I I
I
1 I
•1 � 1
�r
/ •'�
► l � r' � I r � � � l
v -- 12128104
m

Type of Visit Qa Compliance Inspection O Operation Review O Structure Evaluation O Technical Assistance
Reason for Visit Routine O Complaint O Follow up O Referral O Emergency O Other ❑ Denied Access
Facility Number 99 25 Date of visit: 11/25/2004 Time; 1235
Not Operational O Below Threshold
® Permitted ® Certified [3 Conditionally Certified 13 Registered Date Last Operated or Above Threshold:
Farm Name: Cxa>u>"iIA.lCslaslle.11airy............................................................................ .. County: yAdUtl................................ ............... !' 5R.0........
OwnerName: pex........................................... CxUrIill....................................................... Phone No:,AtM>x...........................................
Mailing Address: 1�11k.1�aAKR.tiO.(1................................................................................. YAdkjikyj11r,..NJC .................................................... 27"055 ..............
Facility Contact: TAdd.Cauft..................................................Title:................................................................ Phone No: 4.68,.16.61H.144., WAC...
Onsite Representative: lilatl>xuiu.Cai11d1e.aAfl.Rex.Cx�m lil.................................. Integrator:..........................................................................
Certified Operator: JKieAlac1k.&.Cxalulill..................................................................... Operator Certification Number:..........................................
Location of Farm:
rom WSRO: Hwy. 421 north to Hwy 601 north, Left onto Haire Rd. Farm is on both sides of the road. A
❑ Swine ❑ Poultry ® Cattle ❑ Horse Latitude F 367 OF 09 15L6 Longitude 80 ' 41 39
Design Current Design. llDesign
?oulation ClSwine. Caact! 1?aultry CaaitPonation Cattle aaia o uation
❑ Wean to Feeder ❑ Layer ❑Dairy L00 0
❑ Feeder to Finish I[] Non -Layer ❑ Non -Dairy
❑ Farrow to Wean "❑
❑ Farrow to Feeder Other
❑ Farrow to Finish Total Design Capacity To
❑ Gilts
❑Boars Total SSLW 140,000
Number of Lagoons ' 0
Hnldino Pnniir 1 Cnlid Trans
Dischar es & Stream Imaacts
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? (Ifyes, notify DWQ) ❑ Yes ❑ No
2. Is there evidence of past discharge from any part of the operation? ❑ Yes ® No
3. Were there any adverse impacts or potential adverse impacts to the Waters of the State other than from a discharge? ❑ Yes ® No
Waste Collection & Treatment
4. Is storage capacity (freeboard plus storm storage) less than adequate? ® Spillway ❑ Yes ® No
Structure I Structure 2 Structure 3 Structure 4 Structure 5 Structure 6
Identifier: ......Waste.Faud,........................ ................ .................................... ................................... ........................................................ I.............
Freeboard (inches): 102
12112103 Continued

Facility Number: 99-25 . Date of Inspection 11/25/2004 • ,
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 Application
10. Are there any buffers that need maintenance/improvement?
❑ Yes
IN 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 > 3000
12. Crop type Fescue (Graze)
13. Do the receiving crops differ with those designated in the Certified Animal Waste Management Plan (CAWMP)?
❑ Yes
®No
14. a) Does the facility lack adequate acreage for land application?
❑ Yes
®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 OR No
Air Quality representative immediately.
Com`Irtents'(refer to question #)-Explain'any YES answers artd/o'r any'reeom`mendations°or anyother com' ments: n'
Use"..drawings of facility to. better'explam situations. (use addithon4pages as necessary) Field eld Copy ®Final Notes
Hf !G }
��j
} h �
3. Buffer and creek areas look great. A,
16. Need to calibrate within two yrs.
3. Don't forget to take soil samples on those fields that received animal waste this year.
15/04 waste analysis= 0.72 lbs. N/1000 gal.
Reviewer/inspector Name IMelissa`�Rosebrock l t a 3 ,'3 ��' ; ;'! ,' 7.
' - '��,•, "
Reviewer/Inspector Signature: Date:
12112103 Continued

Facility Number: , 99-25 Df Inspection
�o11/25/2444
Reauired Records & Documents
21. Fail to have Certificate of Coverage & General Permit or other Permit readily available? ❑ Yes ® No
22. Does the facility fail to have all components of the Certified Animal Waste Management Plan readily available?
(ie/ WUP, checklists, design, maps, etc.) ❑ Yes ® No
23. Does record keeping need improvement? If yes, check the appropriate box below. ❑ Yes ® No
❑ Waste Application ❑ Freeboard ❑ Waste Analysis ❑ Soil Sampling
24.
Is facility not in compliance with any applicable setback criteria in effect at the time of design?
❑ Yes
® No
25.
Did the facility fail to have a actively certified operator in charge?
❑ Yes
® No
26.
Fail to notify regional DWQ of emergency situations as required by General Permit?
(ie/ discharge, freeboard problems, over application)
❑ Yes
®No
27.
Did Reviewer/Inspector fail to discuss review/inspection with on -site representative?
❑ Yes
® No
28.
Does facility require a follow-up visit by same agency?
❑ Yes
® No
24.
Were any additional problems noted which cause noncompliance of the Certified AWMP?
❑ Yes
®No
NPDES Permitted Facilities
30.
Is the facility covered under aNPDES 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
113
No violations or deficiencies were noted during this visit. You will receive no further correspondence about this visit.
s ,e < 0 3 �;€ ! € aye -€s>. s - r i arl¢.--@ -,'@- Id, -.:€@ a @ ,a s ,<¢,a era-° ;; ;. 'i
.ti,; - € ..;,{.i {! :.E,€.tlEili:�€.;,�:!'.�'( !@-',_I::1l�isdiE3.11���r� '-t-.�:;"�Ef'�'JA€jEF,a j �€li��r t�i ':i. midi: ,fl,.�s� ' 1.;-:,
@a;.,�. !n. ' ,1s.E E.,,,.a andlordDrawmgs ! , €a @ E �� r i_d�ti r, t. ,€€ €@ + l € @, € ddit�onal Comments €
c �.. u.i 3 7 ,1.-- ,.i La. , ad+i iP , _.,,>r:, 1
7
12112103

Type of Visit ?,0 Compliance Inspection O Operation Review O Lagoon Evaluation I
Reason for visit OkRoutine O Complaint O Follow up O Emergency [notification O Other ❑ Denied Access
Facility Number aS Date of Visit: I5 0 Time:
O Not O erational 0 Below Threshold
Permitted 0 C�erdfiied� 13 Conditionally Certified 0 Registered Date Last Operated or Above Threshold: ........ _.__.
Farm Name : .....1..�{{!:��.aYiT..!.��....... County: _..�C t.. __......__w.._ ....__
Owner Name: _._ !`�..._aI .!!. ........»._.. .. ........ »»... Phone No: ...�P.-.a:. nl „? 0 n rat
.Mailing Address:.. ...� �7 ��.� . .� � 06 i� (� _!�-c'� °_ ��a . �_i 11 V •I � l �� i� L- _....»» R 7 0 M
Facility contact: .� .... ��� `' Title:... ------ Phone No:+'{,'�
Onsite Represeataiive:..„.,�Iegraitor:
Certified Operator:.— „ .. : Operator Certification Number:
Location of Farm:
us 14w4 V-) nor4,h qw� tool no",) Lt� f - o rT+o Ha; re— rqr
IV
❑ Swine [3Poultry Cattle ❑ Horse Latitude �• ®' �" Longitude
. 1'r�lrCDesign t nGlt '!
Swine :, , CapacityPo" elation PoWtry t :' " .. " Ca ad r ' , Po alat<on:_: Cattle aci r Po" 'elation
Wean to er ❑ Laver .�', Dairy Feed1 D
U feeder to t�uush j]U.yon-Layer I I I ,'u'jU.y0n-1Ja1ry l_ i
Farrow to Wean Other
;
C f i
f
Farrow to Feeder:
Farrow to Finish
GiltsEl Design �paClty 0 C
soars �' 9C Tot��ssLw 10
,..ml
Number of Lagoons
Hnldn►�.PendS'1:1idTra�ns
Discharges 8 Stream Impacts
1. Is any discharge observed from any part of the operation?
Discharge originated at: ❑ Lagoon ❑ Spray Field ❑ Other
a. If discharge is observed, was the conveyance man-made?
b. If discharge is observed, did it reach Water of the State? (If yes, notify DWQ)
c. If discharge is observed, what is the estimated flow in gal/min?
d. Does discharge bypass a lagoon system? (If yes, notify DWQ)
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
❑ Yes �No
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes
❑ No
❑ Yes
�(No
❑ Yes
ANo
❑ Yes x No
.structure4 Structure 2 Structure 3 Structure 4 Structure 5 Structure
Identifier: ........ .......... ........ ..... _........
_._. ...._.... _...
Freeboard (inches):
12112103 Continued

Facility Number: — _j Date of Inspection I 11 •
Pgrity
5. Are there any immediate threats to the 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 maintenancelimprovement?
❑ Yes
No
9. Do any stuctures lack adequate, gauged markers with required maximum and minimum liquid level
❑ Yes
No
elevation markings?
Waste Application
10. Are there any buffers that need maintenancelimprovement?
❑ Yes
No
11. Is there evidence of over application? If yes, check the appropriate box below.
❑ Yes
KNo
❑ Excessive Ponding ❑ PAN ❑ Hydraulic Overload ❑ Frozen Ground ❑ Copper and/or Zinc
12. Crop type Y`
13. Do the receiving crops differ A 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
16. Is there a lack of adequate waste application equipment?
❑ Yes
� fNo
f�No
Odor Issues
17. Does the discharge pipe from the confinement building to the storage pond or lagoon fail to discharge at/or below �o
liquid level of lagoon or storage pond with no agitation?
18. Are there any dead animals not disposed of properly within 24 hours? ❑ Yes fN0
o
19. Is there any evidence of wind drift during land application? (i.e. residue on neighboring vegetation, asphalt, ❑ Yes
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 XNo
Air Quality representative immediately.
Field Copy ❑ Final Notes
06:7;1- wasfie RnaYis 9 j1s/off
@0 f I
tilt
Reviewer/Iospector Name
ReviewerAampector Signal
Date:
12112103 Continued

Facility Number: 00-. D to of Inspection n24 Ogi
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 16No
23. Doerc I card keeping need ' rovement? I es, check the app at ❑ Yes No
aste Application Freeboard Waste Analysis Soil Samplin �,�,,{
24. Is facility not in compliance with any applicable setback criteria in effect at the time of design? ❑ Yes j No
25. Did the facility fail to have a actively certified operator in charge? ❑ Yes X No
26. Fail to notify regional DWQ of emergency situations as required by General Permit?
(ie/ discharge, freeboard problems, over application) ❑ Yes No
27. Did Reviewer/Inspector fail to discuss review/inspection with on -site representative? ❑ Yes No
28. Does facility require a follow-up visit by same agency? ❑ Yes No
29. Were any additional problems noted which cause noncompliance of the Certified AWMP? ❑ Yes No
NPDES Permitted Facilities
30. Is the facility covered under a NPDES Permit? (If no, skip questions 31-35) ❑ Yes P�No
31. If selected, did the facility fail to install and maintain rainbreakers on irrigation equipment? ❑ Yes ❑ No
32. Did the facility fail to install and maintain a rain gauge? ❑ Yes ❑ No
33. Did the facility fail to conduct an annual sludge survey? ❑ Yes ❑ No
34. Did the facility fail to calibrate waste application equipment? ❑ Yes ❑ No
35. Does record keeping for NPDES required forms need improvement? If yes, check the appropriate box below. ❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ Stocking Form ❑ Crop Yield Form ❑ Rainfall ❑ Inspection After 1" Rain
❑ 120 Minute Inspections ❑ Annual Certification Form
0 No violations or deficiencies were noted during this visit. You will receive no farther correspondence about this visit.
12112103

hnical Assistance Site Visit
• Wion of Soil and Water Conservatiol?v
O Natural Resources Conservation Service
O Soil and Water Conservation District
O Other...
Facility Number 99 - 25 Date: 919104 Time: I ' 11:00 1 Time On Farm: 30 WSRO
Farm Name Cranfill Caudle Dairy County Yadkin Phone:
Mailing Address 1401 Haire Road Yadkinville NC
Onsite
Representative Todd Caudle 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
QQ Routine
O Response to DWQ/DENR referral
O Response to DSWC/SWCD referral
Q Response to complaint/local referral
O Requested by producer/integrator
Q Follow-up
O Emergency
Q Other...
Design Current
Capacity Population
❑ Layer
❑ Non -Layer
® Dairy 0
® Non -Dairy 7
❑ Other
336-679-3385
27055
GENERAL QUESTIONS:
1. Is waste discharging from any part of the operation and reaching surface waters or wetlands? ❑ yes ® no
2. Is there evidence of a past waste discharge from any part of the operation that waste reached ❑ yes ® no
surface waters or wetlands?
3. Does any problem pose an immediate threat to the integrity of the waste structure (large trees, ❑ yes OR 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) 84
CROP TYPES Fescue -graze
5PRAYFIELD
SOIL TYPE5
7. What type of technical assistance does the onsite representative feel is needed? (list in comment section)
03/10/03
QQ Routine
O Response to DWQ/DENR referral
O Response to DSWC/SWCD referral
Q Response to complaint/local referral
O Requested by producer/integrator
Q Follow-up
O Emergency
Q Other...
Design Current
Capacity Population
❑ Layer
❑ Non -Layer
® Dairy 0
® Non -Dairy 7
❑ Other
336-679-3385
27055
GENERAL QUESTIONS:
1. Is waste discharging from any part of the operation and reaching surface waters or wetlands? ❑ yes ® no
2. Is there evidence of a past waste discharge from any part of the operation that waste reached ❑ yes ® no
surface waters or wetlands?
3. Does any problem pose an immediate threat to the integrity of the waste structure (large trees, ❑ yes OR 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) 84
CROP TYPES Fescue -graze
5PRAYFIELD
SOIL TYPE5
7. What type of technical assistance does the onsite representative feel is needed? (list in comment section)
03/10/03
® Dairy 0
® Non -Dairy 7
❑ Other
336-679-3385
27055
GENERAL QUESTIONS:
1. Is waste discharging from any part of the operation and reaching surface waters or wetlands? ❑ yes ® no
2. Is there evidence of a past waste discharge from any part of the operation that waste reached ❑ yes ® no
surface waters or wetlands?
3. Does any problem pose an immediate threat to the integrity of the waste structure (large trees, ❑ yes OR 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) 84
CROP TYPES Fescue -graze
5PRAYFIELD
SOIL TYPE5
7. What type of technical assistance does the onsite representative feel is needed? (list in comment section)
03/10/03

Ll
Facility Number 99 - 25 Date:
9/9/04
PARAMETER
O No assistance provided/requested
❑ 8. Waste spill leaving site
TECHNICAL ASSISTANCE Needed
Provided
❑ 9. Waste spill contained on site
El 10. Level in structural freeboard
5. Waste Plan Revision or Amendment
2
❑
❑
❑ 11. Level in storm storage
26. Waste Plan Conditional Amendment
❑
❑
27. Review or Evaluate Waste Plan wlproducer
❑
❑
❑ 12. Waste structure integrity compromised
El13. Waste structure needs maintenance
28. Forms Need (list in comment section)
❑
❑
29. Missing Components (list in comments)
❑
❑
❑ 14. Over application >= 10% & 10 lbs.
❑
❑
❑ 15. Over application < 10% or < 10 lbs.
30. 21-1.0200 re -certification
❑ 16. Hydraulic overloading
31. Five & Thirty day Plans of Action (PoA)
❑
❑
32. Irrigation record keeping assistance
❑
❑
❑ 17. Deficient irrigation records
❑ 18. Late/missing waste analysis
33.Organize/computerization of records
❑
❑
❑ 19. Latelmissing lagoon level records
34. Sludge Evaluation
❑
❑
❑ 20. Late/missing soils analysis
❑ 21. Crop needs improvement
35. Sludge or Closure Plan
❑
❑
❑ 22. Crop inconsistent with waste plan
36. Sludge removal/closure procedures
❑
❑
37. Waste Structure Evaluation
❑
❑
❑ 23. Irrigation maintenance deficiency
❑ 24. Deficient sprayfield conditions
38. Structure Needs improvement
❑
❑
39. Operation & Maintenance Improvements
❑
❑
40. Marker check/calibration
❑
❑
Regulatory Referrals
41. Site evaluation
❑
❑
❑ Referred to DWQ Date:
42. Irrigation Calibration
❑
❑
❑ Referred to NCDA Date
43. Irrigation deslgnlinstallation
El
❑
El Other...
system
Date:
44. Secure irrigation information (maps, etc.)
❑
❑
LIST IMPROVEMENTS
45. Operating improvements (pull signs, etc.)
❑
❑
MADE BY OPERATION
46. Wettable Acre Determination
❑
❑
1
47. Evaluate WAD certificationtrechecks
❑
❑
48. Crop evaluation/recommendations
❑
❑
2.
49. Drainage worklevaluation
❑
❑
50. Land shaping, subsoiiing, aeration, etc.
51. Runoff control, stormwater diversion, etc.
❑
❑
❑
❑
3
52. Buffer improvements
❑
❑
53. Field measurements(GPS, surveying, etc.)
El❑
4'
54. Mortality BMPs
❑
❑
55. Waste operator education (NPDES)
❑
❑
5'
56. Operation & maintenance education
❑
❑
57. Record keeping education
❑
❑
6.
58. Cropiforage management education
❑
❑
59. Soil andlor waste sampling education
❑
❑
03/10/03

•
Facility Number 98 - 25 Date: 9/9/04 '
COMMENTS:
Waste analysis: 12-03-03 LSD 0.43 lbs.N11000 gals. B
The dairy cattle were sold in October 2003 according to Mr. Caudle. Mr. Caudle is raising beef cattle
ow. No cattle are confined on the lot. There are currently seven head of cattle that come on the lot to
nd get water.
Mr. Caudle is still keeping records and maintaining the waste storage pond in accordance with his
Peneral Permit.
Good farm.
1 informed Mr. Caudle that this review would serve as a confirmation that the cattle numbers were
elow threshold.
TECHNICAL SPECIALIST lRocky Durham
SIGNATURE
Date Entered: 9/10/04 1 Entered By: lRocky Durham
3 03/10/03

vision of Water Quality •
vision of Soil and Water Conservation
Other Agency
(Type of Visit OO Compliance Inspection O Operation Review O Lagoon Evaluation
(Reason for Visit *Routine O Complaint O Follow up O Emergency Notification O Other ❑ Denied Access
Date of Visit: t2/01l2003 Time: 1045
Facility Number 99 25
Q lot Operational 0 Below Threshold
Permitted O Certified 0 Conditionally Certified [r Registered Date Last Operated or Above Threshold: IPM/.209.1.
Farm Name: c[:atlllll.Ca.udle..ttail',X.......................................................................... ..... County: X'S .................................... y!`5RR......
Owner fame: llxac........-.-..................... 0180311........................................ Phone No: 336:it72:�3 �.pRgriu..............-.................
Facility Contact: Title: - -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- - Phone ,No: JJ_4fzUJ56J.QA44.5Jft4_
Flailing Address: J.401..kluIr.c.AioAd ............................... ... Xaftinville.1 C............................
Onsite Representative: NQng............................ ........................................... Integrator:
Certified Operator:Kggpjth ��_ �xaJni�ll Operator Certification Number:��3.43 _-
Location of Farm:
From WSRO: Hwy. 421 north to Hwy 601 north. Left onto Haire Rd. Farm is on both sides of the road. +
❑ Swine ❑ Poultry ® Cattle ❑ Horse Latitude 36 • 09 a 15 14 Longitude =
a 41 4 39
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 100 19
❑ Non -Layer I I JE] Non -Dairy
❑ Other
Total Design Capacity 100
Total SSLW 140,000
Number of Lagoons 0 ❑ Subsurface Drains Present 110 Lagoon Area 111 Spray Field Area
Holding Ponds / Solid Traps II JE1 No Liquid Waste Management System
Dischai:=& Stream Imnacts
1. Is any discharge observed from any part of the operation? ❑ Yes ® No
Discharge originated at: ❑ Lagoon ❑ Spray Field ❑ Other
a. If discharge is observed, was the conveyance man-made'? ❑ Yes ❑ No
b. If discharge is observed, did it reach Water of the State'? (If yes, notify DWQ) ❑ Yes ❑ No
c. If discharge is observed, what is the estimated flow in gal/min?
d. Does discharge bypass a lagoon system? (If yes, notify DWQ) []Yes ❑ No
2. Is there evidence of past discharge from any part of the operation? ❑ Yes ® No
3. Were there any adverse impacts or potential adverse impacts to the Waters of the State other than from a discharge? % Yes ❑ No
Waste Collection & Treatment
4. Is storage capacity (freeboard plus storm storage) less than adequate? ® Spillway ❑ Yes ® No
Structure I Structure 2 Structure 3 Structure 4 Structure 5 Structure 6
Identifier: ...... Waste.P.ond.................................................................................................................................................
Freeboard (inches): 102 �r0
05100 '�'- Continued on bark

Facility Number: 99-25 Date of Inspeclion 12/01/2003 Printed on: 01/12/2004
5. Are there any immediate threats to the Ority of any of the structures observed? (ie/ treovere erosion, ❑ Yes ® No
seepage, etc.)
6. Are there structures on -site which are not properly addressed and/or managed through a waste management or
closure plan? ❑ Yes ® No
(If any of questions 4-6 was answered yes, and the situation poses an
immediate public health or environmental threat, notify DWQ)
7. Do any of the structures need maintenance/improvement? ® Yes ❑ No
8. Does any part of the waste management system other than waste structures require maintenance/improvement? ❑ Yes ® No
9. Do any stuctures lack adequate, gauged markers with required maximum and minimum liquid level
elevation markings? ❑ Yes ® No
Waste Application
10. Are there any buffers that need maintenance/improvement? ❑ Yes ® No
11. Is there evidence of over application? ❑ Excessive Ponding ❑ PAN ❑ Hydraulic Overload [ ❑ Yes ® No
12. Crop type Fescue (Hay)
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?
Rec aired 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' No•yiolatioris:ot def ciencies •yrwere;noted :during•this:visit.• :You:rvill ;reeeiventifurther• : • ; •
: corresuondence. abouf this :visit. ...: :
El Yes ®No
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes IN No
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes ® No
® Yes ❑ No
® Yes ❑ No
[]Yes ® No
3. Cattle have impacted several feet of stream below waste pond. Fencing has been removed from around the buffered area around the
draw. Need to re -install fencing or move cattle out of the area.
7. Need to keep cattle off the dam of the waste pond to maintain vegetation and prevent damage to structure. Cattle have been
moved now.
19. Don't forget that, per the Permit, even when there are no cattle onsite, the operator must still maintain records (SLUR-1 and 2,
weekly freeboard, soil and waste analyses, etc.) until the waste pond is closed out per NRCS standards. Could not locate these on the
Jay of the inspection. Received all requested documentation from operator the next week. Paperwork looks good.
23. No one was on site. Spoke with Donna Cranfill today prior to arriving for inspection.
Reviewer/Inspector Dame 4Mells a,Rosebrock
Reviewerlinspector Signature 4D / ,f Date: 03 5100

Facility Number: 99-25 lac of Inspection 12/01/2003 • Printed on: 01/12/2004
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
Need to re -check within 30 days to document that fencing has been installed or cattle pulled off areas with access to creek/draw. I "I?ived call from operator that cattle had been moved. Confirmed by SWCD.
J
5/00

i j4.36AN
Type of Visit Compliance Inspection 0 Operation Review 0 Lagoon Evaluation
Reason for Visit Routine 0 Complaint O Follow up 0 Emergency Notification 0 Other El Denied Access
0 Permitted fA Certified O Cjonditionally Certified OR egistered
Farm Name: „ ,�j"f,•�.i�—t-t-1 �.._...0 U 1
Mailing Address:
Facility Contact:
Onsite Representative:
Certified Operator:
Location of Farm-
5-
Date Last Operated or bow Threshold: _
County: r
Title: Phone No#
te I
Integrator: �^~
Operator Certification Number:
lb y
❑ Swine ❑ Poultry KCattle
❑ Horse Latitude �'
�� Longitude'•
Design
Current
Design Current
Design Current
Swine Capacity
Population PoultryCapacity
Population C the
Capacity Po ulation
❑ Wean to Feeder
10 Layer A
'airy
❑ Feeder to Finish
ILI Non -Layer
Non-Dai
Cl Farrow to Wean
'
El Farrow to Feeder
10Other
❑ Farrow to Finish
Total Design Capacity
O
❑ Gilts::;::
❑ Boars
Total SSLW
Number of Lagoons ❑ Subsurface Drains Present
iR
Holdmg';Ponds./,Solid Traps ❑ No Liquid Waste Manager
Dischartws & 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? 1KJ Spillway
Structure 2 Structure 3 / ` Stricture 4 Structure 5
Spray Field Area I�
❑ Yes KN 0
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes
❑ No
❑ Yes
No
Yes
aN0rvf—
❑ Yes
1,L9.No
Stricture 6
Identifier:l ZL.lr' tiL
Frccboard
Continued
1no ccuteI '
MM+�

1 • :1 •
Facility Number: -- IQ S Date of Inspection [J�
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?
(If any of questions 4-6 was answered yes, and the situation poses an
❑ Yes
No
' `
immediate public health or environmental threat, notify DWQ)
7. Do any of the structures need maintenance/improvement?
Yes
( No
8. Does any part of the waste management system other than waste structures require maintenance/improvement?
❑ Yes
KNo
9. Do any stuctures lack adequate, gauged markers with required maximum and minimum liquid level
elevation markings?
❑ Yes
XNo
Waste Aimlication
10. Are there any buffers that need maintenance/improvement?
❑ Yes
9No
11. is there evidence of over application? Excessive Ponding [PAN El Hydraulic Overload
YesXNOAAA—
�j12. Crop type Awl] A
13, Do the receiving crop iffer with those designateda the Certified Animal Waste Management Plan (CAWMP)?
❑ Yes
No
N
14. a) Does the facility lack adequate acreage for land application?
❑ Yes
04 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
1
16. Is there a lack of adequate waste application equipment?
❑ Yes
ANo
Required Records & Documents
17. Fail to have Certificate of Coverage & General Permit or other Permit readily available?
❑ Yes
P(No
18. Does the facility fail to have all components of the Certified Animal Waste Management Plan readily available?
(W IVUP, checklists, design, maps. etc.) �" J
❑ Yes
4 No
19. Does record keeping need improvement? (ie/ freeboard, waste analysis & soil sample reports)
Yes
❑ No
20. Is facility not in compliance with any applicabl�3e pack 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 noti%, regional DWQ of emergency situations as required by General Permit?
(ie.- discharge. freeboard problems. over application)
❑ Yes
XNo
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 anv additional problems noted which cause noncompliance of the Certified AWMP?
❑ Yes
;KNo
10 No violations or deficiencies were noted during this visit. You will receive no further correspondence about this visit. •
. ,'((u"S f�W .. �. • ., r.. ., 'F,r � _. i r`r'x fir b .,'�Siu:L F+VeS��i � Y&ixr ¢� ' INY di jh Li& A1L 4^ f Cas6�Am°° i"}.. Hi�Ff%2fl 1` 1 ,�? r` B� �31 7 � lift i; .b y ��jIJ
Coutmea'is ;(refer fo question::Ezp]am.any YES saswets'andlor any recoinmendkstians or,aayEoffier�,comments;� ;�p ,
w'„Miw
Use drawings of facility to better explain situations.; {use additional pages as necessary) ' a '�:
y ,- x ,�, m+..„�, ,>,.1 ,[.�, - ., Field Copy ❑ Final Notes ,,
,
4�r...L �. r.S •:1' ...:dnnr=ef. hl7rMln.. ."$ F- .�4 �r;S. Ys w: .rl ..kr.�.'.�II4:"J�I'...Y.IFiW3i Nu.f�..a. ..1e ..2 'v. YFi NY»w �'�'r. Ni�Y'� .rFir.-.�.-_9k IJ
C
C&tt �&-4 / 'W�/Awn
T
_
L
I P
Q re -
a ,- as ,�, 3o
;�wl
er pee or ait.�Ga..ttW. '' w"!k " ''`
LRev"le
wer/Inspectar Signature:
Date:
05103101
II ����nn����u.�- 7- 2Zbl
ca rno ko haomd
IN
40 uuu
FF- I Lai
7 6 �3s d- ( � 3q (F- I ?� ,

Facility Dumber: — Date of Inspection
Odor Issues
26. Does the discharge pipe from the confinement building to the storage pond or lagoon fail to discharge at/or below o
liquid level of lagoon or storage pond with no agitation?
27, Are there any dead animals not disposed of properly within 24 hours? ❑ Yes No
28. is there any evidence of wind drift during land application? (i.e. residue on neighboring vegetation, asphalt, ❑ Yes No
roads, building structure. and/or public property)
29. Is the land application spray system intake not located near the liquid surface of the lagoon?�
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? E5 TUS ff INU
32, Do the flush tanks lack a submerged fill pipe or a permanent/temporary cover?
29
05103101
1 o� I s/Q 31
a6o3 17 .

0,�
tr-�gR.MIs031 Slurry and Sludge Application Field Record
For Recording Slurry Applicaton Events on Different Fields
Z Facility Number 99 2
Farm Owner REX CRANFILL
Spreader Operator TODD CAUDLE
Tract#
Field #
Date
mmidd r
Crop Type
Field Size
acres
Application
Method"
Number Volume
of Loads of Loads'°"
per Field(gallons)
2201
1
92003
FESCUE
23
BR
68 3300
6435
1;'2
92103
FESCUE
2
EIR
9 3300
6434
ill
92103
FESCUE
1.5
BR
6 3300
D.R. 11/97
SI = soil incorporated (disked); BR = broadcast (surface applied).
f
0

POmin operator's manual for the spre rryCon4dWIdgel C4 id ra is manual.
For Recording Slurry Applicaton Events on Different Fields
Farm Owner REX CRANFILL Facility Number SS 25
Spreader Operator TODD CAUDLE
Tract#
Field #
Date
mm/dd r
Crop Type
Field Size
acres
Application
Method"
Number Volume
of Loads of Loads!
per Field(gallons
2 01
1
92003
FESCUE
23
BR
'$0 3300
6435
1 ti , 92103
FESCUE
2
BR
9 3300
6434
ki i ? 92103
FESCUE
1.5
BR
6 3300
D.R. 11197
SI = soil incorporated (disked); BR = broadcast (surface applied).
0
•

FORM Slur-2
Tract #
Field -Size (Acres) = (A)
Farm Owner
Owners Address
Owner's Phone #
Slurry and Sludge Application Field Records
One Form for Each Field per Crop Cycle
6434
Rex Cranfill
1401 Haire Rd
Yadkinville, N.C. 27055
336-679-2708
Field #
Facility Number
Spreader Operator
and Address
Operators Phone #
f
1/1
IV
g9
IF 25
Todd Caudle
1817 Shugart Mill Rd
Yadkinville, N.C.27055
3364B& 1661
From Animal Waste Management Plan ` /
Crop T�e FESCUE Recommended PAN 191 V
Loading (Ib/acre)= (B)
(1) f21 (3) (4) f31 (6) M s
Date
(mmlddlyr)
Number
of Loads
per Field
volume
of Loads"
(gallons)
Total Wume
(gallons)
(2) x (3)
Wume per Acre
(gallonslacre)
(4)1(A)
Waste Analysis
PAN"x
Obli ODD gal)
PAN Applied
Qbtacr+e)
(6) x (5)1 1000
NIT. BAL.
ib/acre
Bf7
191
317AD3
8
3300
26400
17600
8.9
119.68
71.32
13 525 l3
4
3300
13200
8800
0.8 V
59.84
11.48
temod-%
D.R. 11197
Owners Signature
Crop Cycle Totals: I .. I
Spreader Operators Signature
Certified Operator (print) Operator Certification No.
" Can be found in operator's manual for the spreader. Contact a local dealer if you do not have your owner's manual.
See yourwaste management plan forsampling frequency. At a minimum, waste analysis is required within 60 days of land application event
"'Enterthe value received bysubtracting column (7)from (B). Continue subtracting column (7)from column (8)following each application eve
.7
W� Omo,
r]

FORM Slur-2 Slurry and Sludge Application Field Records
One Form for Each Field per Crop Cycle
Tract # 6435
Field Size (Acres)= (A) 2
Farm Owner Rex Cranfill
Owners Address 1401 Haire Rd
Yadkinville, N.C. 27055
Owners Phone # [phone]
Field #
Facility Number
Spreader Operator
and Address
Operator's Phone #
N
12
99
25
Todd Caudle
1617 Shugart Mill Rd
Yadkinville, N.C. 27056
336-488-1851
From Animal Waste Management Plan
Crop Type FESCUE Recommended PAN 186
Loading (Iblaere) = (13)
ftl 0) f31 (4) (d) (8) M S
Date
(mmlddlyr)
Number
of Loads
per Field
Wlume
of Loads"
(gallons)
Total WIume
(gallons)
(2) x (3)
lrblume per Acre
(gallons/acre)
(4)1(A)
Waste Analysis
PANxx
(Ib11000 gal)
PAN Applied
(Ib/acre)
(6) x (5) / 1000
NIT. BAL.
ib/acre
B/i
186
3171133
8
3300
26400
13200
6.8
89.76
96.24
3l28;<03
7
3300
23100
11550
6.8
78.54
17.7
9120103
9
3300
29700
14850
0.43
6.3855
11.3145
D.R. 11A7 Crop Cycle Totals: !
Owners Signature Spreader Operator's Signature
Certified Operator(print)
Operator Certification No.
Can be found in operator's manual for the spreader. Contact a local dealer if you do not have your owner's manual.
See yoururraste management plan forsamp!ing frequency. At a minimum, waste analysis is required within 60 days of land application event
""Enter the value received bysubtracting column (T)from (8). Continue subtracting column (7)from column (8)following each application eve
n
�J

FORM Slur-2
Slurry and Sludge Application Field Records
One Form for Each Field per Crop Cycle
Tract # 6435
Field Size (Acres)= (A) 2
Farm Owner Rex Cranfili
Owners Address 1401 Haire Rd
Yadkinville, N.C. 27066
Owner's Phone #
Field #
Facility Number
Spreader Operator
and Address
Operato's Phone #
1i2
�
9B
25
Todd Caudle
1817 Shugart Mill Rd
Yadkinville. N.C.27065
336-468-1661
From Animal baste Management Plan
Crop Type FESCUE Recommended PAN 186 1/
Loading (lblaore)= (8)
f11 (2) (3) (4) f51 (8) f7ti S
Date
(mmdddlyr)
Number
of Loads
per Field
1'blume
of Loads"
(gallons)
Total %fume
(gallons)
(2) x (3)
%lame per Acre
(gallonslacre)
(4)1(A)
Waste Analysis
FAN""
Qb11000 gal)
PAN Applied
Qbtacre)
0) x (5) 11009
NIT. BAL.
Wacre
B17
186
3J17J03
8
3300
26400
13200
6.6
89.76
96.24
W5M3
7
3360
23100
11550
B.s
78.54
17.7
7 0
7
D.R. 11197 Crop Cycle Totals: I I I
Owners Signature Spreader Operator's Signature
Certified Operator(print)
Operator Certification No.
Can be found in operator`s manual for the spreader. Contact a local dealer if you do not have your owner's manual.
See your waste management plan for sampling frequency. At a minimum, waste analysis is required within 60 days of land application event
"""Enter the value received by subtracting column (()from (B). Continue subtracting column (7)from column (8)following each application eve
•
54Lme 12.Mo.
•

FORM Slur-2
Slurry and Sludge Application Field Records
One Form for Each Field per Crop Cycle
Tract # 2201
Field Size (Acres)= (A) 23
Farm Owner Rex Cranfill
Owners Address 1401 Haire Rd
Yadkinville, N.C. 27056
Owners Phone #
Field #
Facility Number
Spreader Operator
and Address
Operators Phone #
f
1 J1
S9
25
Todd Caudle
1617 Shugart Mill Rd
Yadkinville, N.C. 27055
338-468-1651
From Animal Waste Management Plan
Crap Type FESCUE Recommended PAN 140
Loading (lbfacre) = (8)
rtl ral f"�1 (4) rril 01) M R
Date
(mmlddlyr)
Number
of Loads
per Field
Wume
of Loads"
(gallons)
Total Wume
(gallons)
(3) x (3)
Wume per Acre
(gallons/acre)
(4) J (A)
Waste Analysis
PAN""
(115l1000 gal)
PAN Applied
Obtacre)
(B) x (6)1 1000
NIT. BAL.
iblacre
B17
140
3A 7103
92
3300
303600
13200
6.8
89.76
50.24
3MJ03
43
3300
141900
6169.565217
6.8
41.95304348
8.286956522
920103
88
3300
290400
12626.08696
0.43
5.429217391
2.85773913
D.R. 11M7 Crop Cymle Totals:
Owners Signature Spreader Operators Signature
Certified Operator(print) Operator Certification No.
Can be found in operators manual for the spreader. Contact a local dealer if you do not have your owners manual.
See your waste management plan for sampling frequency. At a minimum, waste analysis is required within 00 days of land application event
"""Enter the value received by subtracting column (7)from (B). Continue subtracting column (7) from column (8) following each application eve
•
0-

FORM Slur-2
Slurry and Sludge Application Field Records
One Form for Each Field per Crap Cycle
Tract # 2201
Field Size (Acres)= (A) 23
Farm Owner Rex Cranfill
Owners Address 1401 Haire Rd
Yadkinville, N.C. 27055
Owners Phone #
Field #
Facility Number
Spreader Operator
and Address
Operatoes Phone #
11
99
F 25
Todd Caudle
1617 Shugart Mill Rd
Yadkinville, N.C. 27055
336-488-1861
From Animal Waste Management Plan /
Crop Type FESCUE Recommended PAN 140 ✓
Loading (Ibdacre) = (B)
ftl r21 M r4) (5) M) (7) s
Date
(mm/ddlrr)
Number
of Loads
per Field
Wume
of Loads"
(gallons)
Total Wume
(gallons)
(2) x (3)
lrblume per Acre
(gallonsfacre)
(4) ! (A)
Waste Analysis
PAN""
(Ib11000 gal)
PAN Applied
Obtacre)
(6) x (5) i 1000
NIT. BAL.
ibt`acre
199
140
3A 7A03
92
3300
303600
13200
6.8
89.76
50.24
3f28/03
43
3300
141900
6169.565217
6.8
41.95304348
8.286956522
20 to3
�43
7
D.R. 11/97
Owners Signature
Certified Operator(print)
Crap Cycle Totals: I _ I
Spreader Operatoes Signature
Operator Certification No.
Can be found in operatods manual forthe spreader. Contact a local dealer if you do not have your owneds manual.
xx See yourwaste management plan forsampling frequency. At a minimum, waste analysis is required within 00 days of land application event
...Enter the value received by subtracting column (7) from (8). Continue subtracting column (7)from column (8) following each application eve
f
0

WASTE POND/LAGUON FREEBOARD AND AVAILABLE STORAGE CAPA
Permit Number: Farm Name:
Owner: Number of Pond/Lagoon Structures:
Operator in Responsible Charge: Phone:
Date Structure Structure Rainfall Initials of person Date Structure Structure Rainfall Initials of person
(in rn/dd/vv1 # it rPcnrclino data hnm/dd/vvl # it rrnnrdina data
STMFFAM
_
WIN :■■�■■�■■
■■�■■��■■■■r■■■
1. Freeboard plus available storage capacity is the difference between the lowest point of a lagoon/storage pond
embankment and the level of liquid. For lagoons/storage ponds with spillways, the difference between the
level of liquid and the bottom of the spillway should be recorded.
2. Freeboard plus available storage capacity must be recorded weekly in inches.
3. Recording rainfall in inches is highly recommended but not required unless specifically required as a
condition of the facility's animal waste management plan or permit.
4. Optional: Sketch your lagoon(s)Istorage pond(s) and the direction the wastewater flows from the houses to
the lagoons on the back.
NCDENRIDWQ: Fb02 form

NCDA Agronomic Division 4300 Reedy Creek Road Ralei h, NC 27607-6465 919 733-2655
Re orl No: W04479 W
Grower: Caudle, Todd
Copies 70:
'
1617 Shugart Mill Rd.
-
Ci• :•
Yadkinville, NC 27055
Waste A nalysis Rehort
Fann:99-25
..,
12/ 4/03
Yadkin County
Sample info.
Laboratory Results arts er million unless otherwise noted
Sample ID:
N
P K Ca ilk S
Fe Mn Zn
Cu B Ma Cl C
Total 119
55.4 894 214 108 31.0
10.9 1.68 2.12
0.45 0.52
001.
IN -N
Waste Cole:
-NI14
Na Ni Cr( A Al
.Se Li II
SS C:N DM% CCF.% ALE(IT
1.SD
-NO3
259
7.62
Description:
OR-N
Dairy Lic . Slurry
Greg
Recommendations:
Nutrients Available for First Crop
lbs/1000 allows
Other Elements lbs/1000 allows
.41)pNcalionMclhod
N P205 K20 Ca mg S Fe AM Zn Cu
F Mo CI
Na Ni Of A At Se Li
Broadcast
0.43,,, 0.74 7.2 , 1.3 0.63 0.18 0.06 0.01 0.01 T
T
2.2

hnical Assistance Site Visit
DPWn of Soil and Water Conservatiorlq
Natural Resources Conservation Service
Soil and Water Conservation District
Other...
Facility Number 99 -
25
Date: 122/03
Time: 1 9:30
Time On Farm: 70 WSRO
Farm Name Cranfill Caudle Dairy
County Yadkin
Phone: [phone]
Mailing Address 1401 Haire Road Yadkinville NC 27055
Onsite
Representative Todd Caudle, Rex Cranfill
Type Of Visit
Operation Review
Compliance Inspection (pilot only)
Technical Assistance
Confirmation for Removal
❑ No Animals -Date Last Operated:
❑ Operating below threshold
❑ Swine ❑ Poultry ® Cattle ❑ Horse
Integrator
Purpose Of Visit
0 Routine
O Response to DWQIDENR referral
O Response to DSWCISWCD referral
O Response to complaint/local referral
O Requested by prod ucerlintegrator
O Follow-up
O Emergency
O Other...
Design Current Design Current
Capacity - Population Capacity Population
El Layer
❑
Non -Layer
❑ Wean to Feeder
❑ Feeder to Finish
❑ Farrow to Wean
❑ Farrow to Feeder
❑ Farrow to Finish
❑ Gilts
❑ Boars
® Dairy iao 70
❑ Non -Dairy
❑ Other
GENERAL QUESTIONS:
1. Is waste discharging from any part of the operation and reaching surface waters or wetlands? ❑ yes ® no
2. Is there evidence of a past waste discharge from any part of the operation that waste reached ❑ yes- Ono
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 Ono
Structurel Structure 2 Structure 3 Structure 4 Structure 5
Identifier WSP
Level (Inches) 1 60
CROP TYPES Ismail grain I IMillet I iFescue-graze
SPRAYFIELD
SOIL TYPES CfB2 ApB2
7. What type of technical assistance does the onsite representative feel is needed? (list in comment section)
03/10/03
® Dairy iao 70
❑ Non -Dairy
❑ Other
GENERAL QUESTIONS:
1. Is waste discharging from any part of the operation and reaching surface waters or wetlands? ❑ yes ® no
2. Is there evidence of a past waste discharge from any part of the operation that waste reached ❑ yes- Ono
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 Ono
Structurel Structure 2 Structure 3 Structure 4 Structure 5
Identifier WSP
Level (Inches) 1 60
CROP TYPES Ismail grain I IMillet I iFescue-graze
SPRAYFIELD
SOIL TYPES CfB2 ApB2
7. What type of technical assistance does the onsite representative feel is needed? (list in comment section)
03/10/03

r-1
Facility Number 99 - 25 Date:
4/22103
PARAMETER
© 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
26. Waste Plan Conditional Amendment
❑
❑
❑ 11. Level in storm storage
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.
❑
❑
[115. Over application < 10% or < 10 lbs.
30. 21-1.0200 re -certification
❑ 16. Hydraulic overloading
31. Five & Thirty day Plans of Action (PoA)
❑
❑
32. Irrigation record keeping assistance
❑
❑
❑ 17. Deficient irrigation records
❑ 18. Late/missing waste analysis
33. Organizelcomputerization of records
❑
❑
❑ 19. Late/missing lagoon level records
34. Sludge Evaluation
❑
❑
❑ 20. Late/missing soils analysis
❑ 21. Crop needs improvement
35. Sludge or Closure Plan
❑
❑
❑ 22. Crop inconsistent with waste plan
36. Sludge removallclosure procedures
❑
❑
37. Waste Structure Evaluation
❑
❑
❑ 23. Irrigation maintenance deficiency
❑ 24. Deficient sprayfield conditions
38. Structure Needs Improvement
❑
❑
39. Operation & Maintenance Improvements
❑
❑
40. Marker checkicalibration
❑
❑
Regulatory Referrals
41. Site evaluation
❑
❑
❑ Referred to DWQ Date:
42. Irrigation Calibration
❑
❑
❑ Referred to NCDA Date:
43. Irrigation designlinstallation
El❑
Other... ❑
system
Date:
44. Secure irrigation information (maps, etc.)
❑
❑
LIST IMPROVEMENTS
45. Operating improvements (pull signs, etc.)
❑
❑
MADE BY OPERATION
❑
❑
46. Wettable Acre Determination
1 • The WUP was revised for crop and field
47. Evaluate WAD certificationlrechecks
❑
❑
48. Crop evaluation/recommendations
❑
❑
changes.
2.
49. Drainage worklevaluation
❑
❑
50. Land shaping, subsoiling, aeration, etc.
51. Runoff control, stormwater diversion, etc.
❑
❑
❑
❑
3
52. Buffer improvements
❑
❑
53. Field measurements(GPS, surveying, etc.)
❑
❑
4.
54. Mortality BMPs
❑
❑
55. Waste operator education (NPDES)
❑
5•
56. Operation & maintenance education
❑
❑
57. Record keeping education
❑
❑
6.
58. Croplforage management education
❑
❑
59. Soil and/or waste sampling education
❑
❑
03/10/03

IFacility Number 99 - 25 Date: 1 4122103 I
COMMENTS:
aste analysis: 11-15-02 LSD 3.8 Ibs.N11000 gals.
Facility and records appeared to be in compliance.
TECHNICAL SPECIALIST lRocky Durham
SIGNATURE
Date Entered: 125103 I Entered By: lRocky Durham
3 03/10/03

[Type of Visit O Compliance Inspection O Operation Review O Lagoon Evaluation
IReason for Visit O Routine O Complaint O Follow up O Emergency Notification O Other ❑ Denied Access
Date or visit: 11/13/2002 'Time: 0905
Facility Number 99 2S
Not Operational 0 Below Threshold
■ Permitted a Certified 0 Conditionally Certified 0 Registered Date Last Operated or Above Threshold: ...........
.... County: YAAd.k7u1.................................. .... [',SIRS?........
Farm Name: Gjr�ala�ilt.C.alArty.�)ai�rx.......................................................................... .........
OwnerName: tietc........................................... UWWA1....................................................... Phone No: 6.7.942IQ.lt?antral.................................................
Mailing Address: I40J.11tt C.A.9.0................................................................................. YAAdtuiay0Jg.lVG.............................. . 27.05.5 .............
.....................
Facility Contact: TO.M.0 uldle...................................................Title:................................................................ Phone No: R416 A661..C.244.516.4...
Onsite Representative:;).W.CmiadiR..........................
Integrator:
Certified Operator:l';Pnmckh.Pm.......................... Ci eutfAll............................................ Operator Certification Number: 7.t393.............................
Location of Farm:
From WSRO: Hwy. 421 north to Hwy 601 north. Left onto Haire Rd. Farm is on both sides of the road. IA
❑ Swine ❑ Poultry ® Cattle ❑ Horse Latitude F 367 ' 09 1S Longitude F 80 " F41 39 66
Design
Swine Ca acit
Current
P,o ulation
Design Current Design Current
Poultry Ca acit P,o ulation Cattle Ca acit P,o ulation
❑ Wean to Feeder
❑ Layer
®Dairy
l00
65
❑ Feeder to Finish
❑ Farrow to Wean
❑ Non -Layer ❑Non -Dairy
❑Other
k; Total Design Capacity 100
e. Total SSLVV 140,000
❑ Farrow to Feeder
❑ Farrow to Finish
Rl
❑ Gilts
`
❑ Boars
Number of Lagoons
Holding Ponds 1 Solid Traps
® surface Drains Present ❑ Lagoon Area 10 Spray Field Area
I 1 .J ❑ 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?
to Collection R Treatment
4. Is storage capacity (freeboard plus storm storage) less than adequate?. ® Spillway
Structure l Structure 2 Structure 3 Structure 4 Structure 5
Identifier: ....... asle.Ptand.....
Freeboard (inches): 60
05103101
ram---�-
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes ® No
Structure 6
Continued

Facility Number: 99-25 0 Date of Inspection 11/13/2002 •
5. Are there any immediate threats to the integrity of any of the structures observed? (ie/ trees, severe erosion,
seepage, etc.)
6. Are there structures on -site which are not properly addressed and/or managed through a waste management or
closure plan?
(If any of questions 4-6 was answered yes, and the situation poses an
immediate public health or environmental threat, notify DWQ)
7. Do any of the structures need maintenance/improvement?
8. Does any part of the waste management system other than waste structures require maintenance/improvement?
9. Do any stuctures lack adequate, gauged markers with required maximum and minimum liquid level
elevation markings?
❑ Yes
r
® No
❑ Yes
® No
❑ Yes
® No
❑ Yes
® No
❑ Yes
® No
Waste Application
10. Are there any buffers that need maintenance/improvement? ❑ Yes ® No
11. Is there evidence of over application? ❑ Excessive Ponding ❑ PAN ❑ Hydraulic Overload ❑ Yes ®No
12. Crop type Fescue (Hay) Small Grain (Wheat, Barley, Pearl Millet Hay
13. Do the receiving crops differ with those designated in the Certified Animal Waste Management Plan (CAWMP)? ® Yes ❑ No
14. a) Does the facility lack adequate acreage for land application? ❑ Yes ® No
b) Does the facility need a wettable acre determination? ❑ Yes ® No
c) This facility is pended for a wettable acre determination? ❑ Yes ® No
15.
Does the receiving crop need improvement?
❑ Yes
® No
16.
Is there a lack of adequate waste application equipment?
❑ Yes
® No
Required Recgrd5 & Do ument
17.
Fail to have Certificate of Coverage & General Permit or other Permit readily available?
❑ Yes
® No
18.
Does the facility fail to have all components of the Certified Animal Waste Management Plan readily available?
(ie/ WUP, checklists, design, maps, etc.)
❑ Yes
® No
19.
Does record keeping need improvement? (ie/ irrigation, freeboard, waste analysis & soil sample reports)
❑ Yes
® No
20.
Is facility not in compliance with any applicable setback criteria in effect at the time of design?
❑ Yes
® No
21.
Did the facility fail to have a actively certified operator in charge?
❑ Yes
IN 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
13 No violations or deficiencies were noted during this visit. You will receive no further correspondence about this visit.
*om ents refer to ion Explain any Y San we . and/o any ecommendations or any other comments.
e d swings of facilit- better explain situatio us additional pages as necessary : ®Field Copy ❑Final Notes
13. Millet still needs to be added to CAWMP since this was also mentioned last year. Need to contact technical specialist for assistance.
13. Tract 2201 Field 1 needs to have fescue added to the CAWMP since operator has applied waste here already.
19. Operator reports that waste sample was sent 11/12/02. Still need to take soil samples by the end of the year. Check on both these
items next visit.
19. Operator has recorded Fall applications onto SLUR-1 forms. He plans on completing SLUR II forms when waste analysis result has
been received.
* May want to revise CAWMP to year-round waste application. See technical specialist.
z
Reviewer/Inspector Name �Meli s Rosebrock
Reviewer/Inspector Signature. Date: oZ
05103101 j Continued

Facility Number: 99_25 of Inspection 11/13/2002
Odor Issues
26, Does the discharge pipe from the confinement building to the storage pond or lagoon fail to discharge at/or below
liquid level of lagoon or storage pond with no agitation?
27. Are there any dead animals not disposed of properly within 24 hours?
28. Is there any evidence of wind drift during land application? (i.e. residue on neighboring vegetation, asphalt,
roads, building structure, and/or public property)
29. Is the land application spray system intake not located near the liquid surface of the lagoon?
30. Were any major maintenance problems with the ventilation fan(s) noted? (i.e. broken fan belts, missing or
or broken fan blade(s), inoperable shutters, etc.)
31. Do the animals feed storage bins fail to have appropriate cover?
32. Do the flush tanks lack a submerged fill pipe or a permanent/temporary cover?
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes ❑ No
,&I
J
05103101

Type of Visit bb Compliance Inspection 0 Operation Review 0 Lagoon Evaluation
Reason for Visit Routine 0 Complaint 0 Follow up 0 Emergency Notif�icationn 0 Other ❑ Denied Access
Facility Number
Date of Visit: '-'-`�` °'y=� Time.
rO S
Not O erational Below Threshold
Permitted 0 Certified 0 Conditionally (Certified 0 Registered Date Last Operated or Above -Threshold: W l j - 00
Farm Name: LJirar)- 1 ll d�.axA le, t)lI� r\j County: _. Vad K4 n
Owner Name: _
Mailing Address:
Facility Contact: I D(J
Onsite Representative:
Certified Operator:
Location of Farm: t
-From " RV 1 1'
Title:
. dP one No: 33&' 67g. "t,216 KbpnnG,J
V 11 e- G a 70 S S"
Phone No. 1 a 4-
Integrator 106 It
Operator Certification Number: oZ 3
61 < ,us *'Y 061 norms .
EWF
❑ Swine ❑ Poultry Cattle ❑ Horse Latitude a I u Longitude • 197 - f "
I' �'iaiCSlgn.Current eF. De5I�,R Current " e' ''�`� (`DeSlgn IEr tCitrrCnt
: �r t., " �`aaCity'.'PO 618tlon
Swine' Ca acth .Po ulation ! .°Poultry Ca achy . Po ulation . Cattle
❑ Wean to Feeder 10 Layer Dairy
❑ Feeder to Finish ❑ Non La er iIJU. Non -Dairy ,
N.
Farrow t0 Wean
El to Feeder ❑Other i
❑ Farrow to Finish Total'I)esi_gn Capa ity,; (�
❑ Gilts
i i 1
❑ soars �Total'SSLW14101l'
. l Number' ofLagoo1is �' El�', ,Ei; Subsurface Drains Present ❑ Lagoon Area 10 Spray F�e1d Area i
Holding',Poeds i Solid Traps ? ❑ No Li uid Waste Adana ement System
Discharges & Stream impacts
1. Is any discharge observed from any part of the operation? ❑ Yes No
Discharge originated at: ❑ Lagoon ❑ Spray Field ❑ Other
a. If discharge is observed, was the conveyance man-made? ❑ Yes ❑ No
b. if discharge is observed, did it reach Water of the State? (If yes, notify DWQ) ❑ Yes ❑ No
c. if discharge is observed, what is the estimated flow in gal/min?
d. Does discharge bypass a lagoon system? (If yes, notify DWQ) ❑ Yes ❑ No
2. Is there evidence of past discharge from any part of the operation? ❑ Yes No
3. Were there any adverse impacts or potential adverse impacts to the Waters of the State other than from a discharge? ❑ Yes �(No
Waste Collection & Treatment
4. Is storage capacity (freeboard plus storm storage) less than adequate? Spillway ❑ Yes KNo
,,$tructVre l Structure 2 Structure 3 fJ Structure 4 Structure 5 Structure 6
Identifier:
Freeboard (inches):
05103101 Continued
1 t,

Facility Number: S Date of Inspection
5. Are there any immediate threats to the integrity of any of the structures observed? (ie/ trees, severe erosion, ❑ Yes ANo
seepage, etc.)
6. Are there structures on -site which are not properly addressed and/or managed through a waste management or
closure plan? ❑ Yes 0
(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 X11�0
elevation markings? ❑ Yes
Waste Application
10. Are there any buffers that need maintenance/improvement? ❑ Yes No
11. Is there evidence of over applicatin? �� 1❑ Excessive Ponding ❑ PANH,7 1ydraulic Qverload w ❑ Yes No
.. .
12. Crop type
/
13.
Do the receiving lops -differ -with those d ated in the Certified Ajimal Waste Management P an ( AWMP)?
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
o
c) This facility is pended for a wettable acre determination?
❑ Yesko
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.)
El Yes
No
19.
Does record keeping need improvement? (ie/ irrigation, freeboard, waste analysis & soil sample reports)
El 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
XNO
22.
Fail to notify regional DWQ of emergency situations as required by General Permit?
(ie/ discharge, freeboard problems, over application)
❑ Yes
No
23.
Did Reviewer/inspector fail to discuss review/inspection with on -site representative?
❑ Yes
No
24.
Does facility require a follow-up visit by same agency?
❑ Yes
No
25.
Were any additional problems noted which cause noncompliance of the Certified AWMP?
❑ Yes
No
0
No violations or deficiencies were noted during this visit. You will receive no further correspondence about this visit.
Cominents (refer to,.question #)" Eacplalp dirty YES anrothei,'60 iments.
�lse:drawpgs.of`facility to better expia►ii sittiatioris: (use addidonal pages as n`cessary) 'liar{' €
Field Copv ❑ Final Notes
T
Reviewer/InspectorNaroe
Reviewer/Inspector Signature: Date: d
c.ununueu
N

dq
Facility Number: —dSTDate 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.)
3 1. Do the animals feed storage bins fail to have appropriate cover?
32. Do the flush tanks lack a submerged fill pipe or a permanent/temporary cover?
�I�l i11Qf rn AJvP
r4-/Jook
6'1
't V
� T- aaoi F-i ✓keed�ib �e -�� e a�e�/
m
11 �
ILI
i to
05103101

Type of Visit O Compliance Inspection ® Operation Review O Lagoon Evaluation
Reason for Visit O Routine O Complaint O Follow up O Emergency Notification O Other ❑ Denied Access
Facility Number 99 25 Date ur visit: G-6.2042 Time: 14:00
Q Not Operational Q Below Threshold
S Permitted ■ Certified 0 Conditionally Certified [3 Registered Date Last Operated or Above Threshold . ................
Farm Name: iGxanttlt.Gsustle.Dlilxy................................................................................ County: 'Adtcatx.............................................. xa~«........
OwnerName: Iietc........................................... UM&III.......:.:............................................. Phone No: 6.7,9::179.6 ....................................................................
Mailing Address: 140I.thatir..ltoad...............................:.:.....:........................................ YAdWrxy.0KN.0 .................................................... 27.05.5 .............
FacilityContact:...................................................:............:....:.........Title:................................................................ Phone No:
Onsile Representative:lodd.C.audle....................:....:......:.............................................. Integrator:...............................................................................::.....
Certified Operator:KcIlittelh.&.......................... CxAVA11............................................ Operator Certification Number: Z1.93.............................
Location of Farm:
miles North of Yadkinville 601 and turn on Haire Rd and 1.2 mile West and the farm is on both sides of the road. A
❑ Swine ❑ Poultry ® Cattle ❑ Horse Latitude ®• 09 6 i5 60 Longitude SO • 41 { 39 Li
Design Curreut
Swine Ca acit P,o ulation
Poultry
Design Current Design Current
Ca acMillilation
❑ Wean to Feeder
❑Layer
® Dairy 100
75
❑ Feeder to Finish
❑ Non -Layer
❑ Non -Dairy
❑ Farrow to Wean
{
❑ Other k
d
Total Design Capacity 100
h ,
Total SSL�'V 140,000
❑ Farrow to Feeder
❑ Farrow to Finish
❑ Gilts
❑ Boars
Number of Lagoons
Holding Ponds /Solid Traps 0
❑ Subsurface Drains Present ❑ Lagoon Area ❑ Spray Field Area
❑ No Liquid Waste Management System
Discharges & Stream Impacts
1. Is any discharge observed from any part of the operation? ❑ Yes ® No
Discharge originated at: ❑ Lagoon ❑ Spray Field ❑ Other
a. If discharge is observed, was the conveyance man-made? ❑ Yes ❑ No
b. If discharge is observed, did it reach Water of the State? (if yes, notify DWQ) ❑ Yes ❑ No
c. If discharge is observed, what is the estimated flow in gal/min?
d. Does discharge bypass a lagoon system? (If yes, notify DWQ) ❑ Yes ❑ No
2. Is there evidence of past discharge from any part of the operation? ❑ Yes ® No
3. Were there any adverse impacts or potential adverse impacts to the Waters of the State other than from a discharge? ❑ Yes ® No
Waste Collection & Treatment
4. Is storage capacity (freeboard plus storm storage) less than adequate? ® Spillway ❑ Yes ® No
Structure I Structure 2 Structure 3 Structure 4 Structure 5 Structure 6
Identifier: ................................................................... .:..................................... ................................... ......................................................................
Freeboard (inches): 84
05103101 Continued

Facility Number: 99-25 1 Date of Inspection 6-6-2002
5. Are there any immediate threats to the into of an of the structures observed? (ict trees• ere erosion,
g Y Y
seepage, etc.)
6. Are there structures on -site which are not properly addressed and/or managed through a waste management or
closure plan?
(If any of questions 4-6 was answered yes, and the situation poses an
immediate public health or environmental threat, notify DWQ)
7. Do any of the structures need maintenance/improvement?
8. Does any part of the waste management system other than waste structures require maintenance/improvement?
9. Do any stuctures lack adequate, gauged markers with required maximum and minimum liquid level
elevation markings?
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes IN No
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes ® No
Waste
Application
10.
Are there any buffers that need maintenance/improvement?
❑ Yes
® No
11.
Is there evidence of over application? ❑ Excessive Ponding ❑ PAN ❑ Hydraulic Overload
❑ Yes
® No
12.
Crop type Corn (Silage & Grain) Fescue (Graze) 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
IN No
Rye
uired_Records & Document
17.
Fail to have Certificate of Coverage & General Permit or other Permit readily available?
❑ Yes
® No
18.
Does the facility fail to have all components of the Certified Animal Waste Management Plan readily available?
(iet 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
113 No violations or deficiencies were noted during this visit. You will receive no further correspondence about this visit.
m nts a er to A lain any a an or any o me datio or any other comments.
in facilit ette ex p aln ituatio u 't nal a as nec sary ❑ Field Copy ®Final Notes
o ?d_ N
2574 field # 2 needs to be in crop rotation instead of Fescue.
AL
Recommend having the small grain cover crop changed to small grain(hay,silage), if it is going to be harvested.
Overall facility and records look good.
Reviewer/Inspector Name lRocky Durham
Reviewer/Inspector Signature: Date:
05103101 Continued

Facility Number: 99-25 DO Inspection 6-6-2002
Odor Issue
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?
analysis: 4-25-02 LSD 8.3 Ibs.N/1000 gals. B
10-11-01 LSD 9.0 Ibs.N/1000 gals. B
❑ Yes ❑ No .
❑ Yes ®No
❑ Yes ®No
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes ❑ No
J
05103101

Type of Visit ® Compliance Inspection O Operation Review O Lagoon Evaluation
Reason for Visit O Routine O Complaint O Follow up O Emergency Notification O Other ❑ Denied Access
Facility Number
Date of Visit: 1Q129/2tH11 Time: 1155 Printed on: 10/29/2001
99 25
0 Not Operational .0 Below Threshold
Permitted 0 Certified [] Conditionally Certified 0 Registered Date Last Operated or Above Threshold: ...................
Farm Name: G]r,Rya£tl1.CnutdkDAtirJ:............................................................................ .. County: YA. ....................... ....................... W5RQ........
Owner Name: Rcx........................................... C[utfll........
Mailing Address: t' 0I.H&C..SIPd..................................
................. Phone No:brfi.7.9..-7.AG.�x,.7.Q�4tQ.�amtota...
..... YA"Y.1i C SIC.............................................I....... 2.7.055 .............
Facility Contact: 100-Caulk....................................... ........... Title: ........................................................ I....... Phone No: R46.8,16.6t..C2415.164.....
Onsite Representative: iSlellua!~Xlx.(�ite7�).. 1r, [1t�illl.ti�lfl.A utl. t�cti�..................... Integrator:......................................................................................
Certified Operator:Kf iniaclh. L.......................... Q.g110li.................... ........................ Operator Certification Nurnber:2,13.93 .............................
Location of Farm:
L miles North of Yadkinville 601 and turn on Haire Rd and 1.2 mile West and the farm is on both sides of the road. A,
wr
[]Swine []Poultry ®Cattle []Horse Latitude 3b ' ®' 15 Longitude SO • 41 39 '6
1]esign. Current `� Design Cirrent Design"r°'Current+,xA
. tier: �+« fi .: ,..d: '{ea,. Y' .ii• A ',:. - y' i':i+it7t'w .,,;�1}�„:'.d t..:
' Poult . Cattle
Inc" i i Ca acit P,o ulation i'3 > ,Ca aclt . Po ulatlon ll• Ca"- aclt �; Po ulatton.-:,
ElWean to Feeder ❑ Layer ®Dairy 1(l0 74
�., ..�
❑ Feeder to Finish ElNon-Layer❑ Non -Dairy
❑ Farrow to Wean
Farrow to Feeder ❑Other r
Farrow o Finish Total7DCS1gI1 CapaClty 100
❑ Gilts
❑ Soars x n :< TotalSSLW 140,000 `.
agoons 0
JWH61�djngoolid Traps �1
❑ Subsurface Drains Present ❑ I agoon Area ❑ Spray Field Area
❑ No Liquid Waste Management System
Discharges & Stream Itnnaet�
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 llectit n & Ireatment
4. Is storage capacity (freeboard plus storm storage) less than adequate? to Spillway ❑ Yes ® No
Structure 1 Structure 2 Structure 3 Structure 4 Structure 5 Structure 6
Identifier: ...... asie.P.ond............... :......................... .................................... ................................... ......................................................................
Freeboard (inches): 138
05103101 Continu

Facility Number: 99-25 Date of Inspection 10/29/2001 Printed on: 10/29/2001
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 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 maintenancelimprovement?
❑ Yes
® No
11.
Is there evidence of over application? ❑ Excessive Ponding ❑ PAN ❑ Hydraulic Overload
❑ Yes
® No
12.
Crop type Small Grain (Wheat, Barley, Fescue (Graze)
13.
Do the receiving crops differ with those designated in the Certified Animal Waste Management Plan (CAWMP)?
❑ Yes
® No
14.
a) Does the facility lack adequate acreage for land application?
❑ Yes
® No
b) Does the facility need a wettable acre determination?
❑ Yes
® No
c) This facility is pended for a wettable acre determination?
❑ Yes
® No
15.
Does the receiving crop need improvement?
❑ Yes
® No
16.
Is there a lack of adequate waste application equipment?
❑ Yes
® No
Required
-Records & Documents
17.
Fail to have Certificate of Coverage & General Permit or other Permit readily available?
® Yes
❑ No
18.
Does the facility fail to have all components of the Certified Animal Waste Management Plan readily available?
(ie/ WUP, checklists, design, maps, etc.)
❑ Yes
® No
19.
Does record keeping need improvement? (ie/ irrigation, freeboard, waste analysis & soil sample reports)
❑ Yes
® No
20.
Is facility not in compliance with any applicable setback criteria in effect at the time of design?
❑ Yes
® No
21,
Did the facility fail to have a actively certified operator in charge?
❑ Yes
® No
22.
Fail to notify regional DWQ of emergency situations as required by General Permit?
(ie/ discharge, freeboard problems, over application)
❑ Yes
® No
23.
Did Reviewer/inspector fail to discuss review/inspection with on -site representative?
❑ Yes
® No
24,
Does facility require a follow-up visit by same agency?
❑ Yes
® No
25.
Were any additional problems noted which cause noncompliance of the Certified AWMP?
❑ Yes
® No
113 No violations or deficiencies were noted during this visit. You will receive no further correspondence about this visit.
ixplain any YE an andlor any ecommendations or any other comments.
en 1refer to q o RN
d in of facili etter explain situatio u addi i necessarmi.M0 Field Copy ® Final Notes
17. Operator called DWQ prior to inspection to request copy of permit and certificate of coverage. These will be mailed to operator at
1617 Shugart Mill Rd., Yadkinville, 27055.
_AL
19. Other records looked real good?
27. Burial of any mortality is greater than 300 feet from the creek.
w
Reviewer/Inspector Name Meli sa Rosebrock
Reviewer/Inspector Signature Date: Q
O5103101 -�- 1 Continued

Facilitty Number: 99-25 Dal nspection 10/29/2441
0 Printed on: 10/29/2001
►r I��
25. Does the discharge pipe from the confinement building to the storage pond or lagoon fail to discharge actor below
liquid level of lagoon or storage pond with no agitation?
27. Are there any dead animals not disposed of properly within 24 hours?
28. Is there any evidence of wind drift during land application? (i.e. residue on neighboring vegetation, asphalt,
roads, building structure, and/or public property)
29. Is the land application spray system intake not located near the liquid surface of the lagoon?
30. Were any major maintenance problems with the ventilation fan(s) noted? (i.e. broken fan belts, missing or
or broken fan blade(s), inoperable shutters, etc.)
31. Do the animals feed storage bins fail to have appropriate cover?
32. Do the flush tanks lack a submerged fill pipe or a permanent/temporary cover?
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes ❑ No
4.1
05103101

Type of Visit 0 Compliance Inspection O Operation Review O Lagoon Evaluation I
Reason for Visit Routine O Complaint. O Follow up O Emergency Notification 0.Other ❑ Denied Access
Facility Number Date of Visit: 0 Time:��
Not O erational=-Below Threshold
�j Permitted Certified 0 Conditionally Certified 0 Registered Caale Lasf perated.orj Above- reshold: . ....J'.!... �. 1
FarmName: ..... • • {...... ,r K.i. .....` ta0 1.....................................I....... County:.. Yad .14.��v}............................... ...................
OwnerName: ..............................................� n...1J•............................ Phone No:... �o • ra.. i...l:.. a ? a
�--j� �j D an�o�T� 33 6 b77 �
Facility Contact: .....tQdW:....ead.l�.........................Title:...................... ...........................
Mailing Address:. .�Q d.in.%1.�. ...1.�..�.........................G...... . ................ ...
..
Onsite Representative: ..............,.fir.. "�......,...,. I,Q,1. ""� [`-' Integrator:.... .......
T-W
e j
Certified Operatom..P. r,..... +,,,, -, .�1'� .............................................. Operator Certification Number....... .131-3.........
Location of Farm:
❑ Swine ❑ Poultry Cattle ❑ Horse Latitude ®' E�N° E=« Longitude
Design ; Current �' Design Current' Design ' 1'' Cun ei3t`!
Capacity.,` C` ciPo Capacity,, Po uanon Po ulatiouulatioCattle
❑ Wean to Feeder ❑ Layer Dairy Q Q
❑ Feeder to Finish JEI Non -Layer Non -Dairy
❑ Farrow to Wean
❑ ❑ Other Farrow to Feeder i
t ❑ Farrow to Finish Total DO -sigh Capacity
❑ Gilts ,
❑ Boars :Tatal:SSLW �a
�il> Number of Lagoons
Holdu►g PondEs'I Solid Traps
❑Subsurface Drains Present
❑ Lagoon Area
❑ Spray Field Ares
}
❑ No Liquid Waste Management System
,'=j!
Discharges & Stream Impacts
1. Is any discharge observed from any part of the operation?
❑ Yes KNO
Discharge originated at: ❑ Lagoon ❑ Spray Field ❑ Other
a. If discharge is observed, was the conveyance man-made`?
❑ Yes ❑ No
�1 b, if discharge is observed, did it reach Water of the State? (if yes, notify DWQ)
❑ Yes [:]No
1�
c. If discharge is observed, what is the estimated flaw in gal/min?
1� a` d. Does discharge bypass a lagoon system? (If yes, notify DWQ)
❑Yes ❑ No
Y
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
Struct re I Structure 2 Structure 3 Structure 4 Structure 5
Identifier: 5................................... .
Structure
Freeboard (inches): 3 V
5/00
Continued on back

Facility Number: — s Date of Inspection .
5. Are there any immediate threats to the mtegnty of any of the structures observed? (ie/ trees, severe erosion,
seepage, etc.)
6. Are there structures on -site which are not properly addressed and/or managed through a waste management or
closure plan?
(If any of questions 4-6 was answered yes, and the situation poses an
immediate public health or environmental threat, notify DWQ)
7. Do any of the structures need maintenance/improvement?
8. Does any part of the waste management system other than waste structures require maintenance/improvement?
9. Do any stuctures lack adequate, gauged markers with required maximum and minimum liquid level
elevation markings?
Waste Application
10. Are there any buffers that need maintenance/improvement?
11. Is there evidence of over application?
12. Crop type
13. Do the receiving crops differ
❑ Excessive Ponding ❑ PAN ❑ Hydraulic Overload
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?
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.)
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?
P. Y���t :o 0aloomob *Ore infixed• Owing t�ls.wsjt; - Yoi� wJ11•te ��to *0o 41t1 .
Torres' oricience: about this visit:
■ -< II - 11 1J. , 11 D -ILI NUMU ; 1 U.&IjIR 1 rA- 1ti : , ,1 , 1 :, 1 :�: r\•:�
AL
❑ Yes �No
❑ Yes XNo
❑ Yes No
❑ Yes No
❑ Yes �No
❑ Yes No
❑ Yes No
❑ Yes '[ No
❑ Yes No
❑ Yes No
❑ Yes �No
❑ Yes [(No
PYes ❑ No
❑ Yes No
Yes *0
❑ Yes �No
❑ Yes No
❑ Yes K
No
❑ Yes No
❑ Yes No
❑ Yes No
a
5
Reviewer/Inspector Name
Reviewer/Inspector Signature: Date: 161 5/00

a�
Facility Number: — Do Inspection f
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?
��>J
❑ Yes _�jN0
—)J�No
28. Is there any evidence of wind drift during land application? (i.e. residue on neighboring vegetation, asphalt,
❑ Yes
roads, building structure, and/or public property)
29. Is the land application spray system intake not located near the liquid surface of the lagoon?
—Errrss""'❑'1Qo
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?
32. Do the flush tanks lack a submerged fill pipe or a permanent/temporary cover.?
-aYes --E3
Additional Comments and/or, Drawings: , 'J
O f "
19 �e e+�a ,-1da@� ✓��� �
.M
ALI
' i i urnu r� i nnnw�=
5100

Type of Visit O Compliance Inspection OO 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 or visit: 6/t9/2001 Time: t3a10 Printed on: 10/25/2001
F Not Operational C Below Threshold
Permitted E Certified 0 Conditionally Certified 0 Registered Date Last Operated or Above Threshold: .........................
Farm Name: Cx011101A.GatadkDaisY.............................................................................. County: �'atikint.............................................. 1'.l'SRR........
.
OwnerName: Ru........................................... CroWdl.............................................. . Phone No: b.7.9rZ.70.6................... .........................................................
Mailing Address: 1.401.11&g.iioad................................................................................. Yadlaitwril PAC.................................................... 2.795.5 ..............
Facility Contact: ..............................................................................Title:.....
Onsite Representative: 1odd.CmId1eA..ticx.CrwffJ11 ..........................
Certified Operator: jKeiameth............................I... Crutfall..............
Location of Farm:
Phone No:
Integrator: ......................................................................................
Operator Certification Number: Z13.93......................
miles North of Yadkinville 601 and turn on Haire Rd and 1.2 mile West and the farm is on both sides of the road. A
❑ Swine ❑ Poultry ® Cattle ❑ Horse Latitude 36 • 09 & 1546 Longitude 80 • 41 + 39 66
y','�, -r,G.z�€::nr�-m _.t';q J.s N a .aY�a.' �. y� c f, �y
Dye ignl ' UuYarreyn�t� 7 n Curprenpt�. 'j� Design Current
tik 96'S'x3..."44. {mL.':�G.. '3Y'TgHA d. 'Un'T� `4:.- t4 _�ii4
S�wme Sk ' Ca sett il?o ulation Piiult� rattle
x ; L��Y ?Wesi�
a sett�Po ulationr, C Ca acit" P,o 'ulatton
v ❑ Wean to Feeder ❑Layer ®Dairy 100 83
❑ Feeder to Finish : ❑ Non -Layer ❑ Non -Dairy Gsn
❑ Farrow to Wean
❑ Other y u a
5 ❑ Farrow to Feeder a
❑ Farrow to Finish �M'_ To"tal Design Capacity 100
❑ Gilts t
❑Boars }F:.zTotal. $SLAW 140,000
Number of Lagoons ❑Subsurface Drains Present ❑ Lagoon Area IC Spray Field Area-_
Hoh,ands /Solid Traps 1 ]MIO No Liquid Waste Management System
Discharges K Stream Impacts
1. Is any discharge observed from any part of the operation?
Discharge originated at: ❑ Lagoon ❑ Spray Field [],Other
a. If discharge is observed, was the conveyance man-made?
b. If discharge is observed, did it reach Water of the State? (If yes, notify DWQ)
c. If discharge is observed, what is the estimated flow in gal/min?
d. Does discharge bypass a lagoon system'? (If yes, notify DWQ)
2, is there evidence of past discharge from any part of the operation?
3. Were there any adverse impacts or potential adverse impacts to the Waters of the State other than from a discharge?
Waste Collection _& Treatment.
4. Is storage capacity (freeboard plus storm storage) less than adequate? ® Spillway
Structure I Structure 2 Structure 3 Structure 4 Structure 5
Identifier: ...................................
Freeboard (inches): 85
05103101
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes ® No
Structure 6
Continued

Facility Number: 99-25 Date of Inspection 6/1912QQ1 Printed on: 10/25/20010 . a
5. Are there any immediate threats to the integrity of any of the structures observed? (iel treessevere 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 Small Grain (Wheat, Barley, Soybeans Fescue (Graze) • Pearl Millet
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 Rggord5 & Doguments
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? (iel 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 reviewlinspection with on -site representative?
24. Does facility require a follow-up visit by same agency?
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes ® No
® Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes ® No
25. Were any additional problems noted which cause noncompliance of the Certified AWMP? ❑ Yes ® No
10 No violations or deficiencies were noted during this visit. You will receive no further correspondence about this visit.
❑ Field Copy ® Final Notes
13. Pearl Millet will need to be added to the WUP. I told Mr. Caudle that he could obtain a conditional amendment to the WUP for
casional crop changes. However, if he planned on adding the millet to the permanent crop rotation he should have the WUP
vended. Mr. Caudle had used his operators manual to figure his N total for the millet based on his yield expectations. Rated looked
alistic and no overappliction
t9. Need to keep the weekly waste pond levels on the forms supplied.
verall facility and records look good.
Reviewer/Inspector Name FRocky Durham
Reviewer/Inspector Signature: Date:
05103101 Continued

FagilityNurnber: 99_25 of Inspeclion 6/19/2001 Printed on: 10/25/2001
0 0
-Qdo—E 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 IN No
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes ❑ No
05103101

Type of Visit @ Compliance Inspection O Operation Review O Lagoon Evaluation
Reason for Visit ® Routine O Complaint O Follow up O Emergency Notification Q Other ❑ Denied Access
Daft! ut' Visit: 10/12/2000 T mc:
Facility Number 1324 Printed on: 10/12/2000
99 25
rO Not Operational 0 Below Threshold
0 Permitted 0 Certified 13 Conditionally Certified 0 Registered Date Last Operated or Above Threshold:
Farm Name: Qr�alnt0ll.G.amdlt:.n?Wtcy........................................................................... ... County: YA knit .............................................. !'.l',S.f+;Q........
Owner Name: Kvx........................................... Ct mflu....................................................... Phone No: ft- .7.9-,�7.Af.a7Atufis�- bF!�7.�..4 �R..............
Facility Contact: To.dd.Cattdk..................................................Title:................................................................ Phone No: 33.6,46.8,16.11........................
MailingAddress: 1.401H irtr..i ud................................................................................. YAdkjay.1Uc..N.0 .................................................... 2.7.05.5 ..............
Onsite Representative: lodd.Caud1c..Adam ........................................ I ..... ...1.1. ..... Integrator:..............
Certified Operator:XmIxelk................................ CirwarAll ............................................ Operator Certification Number: 2,1393.............................
Location of Farm:
miles North of Yadkinville 601 and turn on Haire Rd and 1.2 mile West and the farm is on both sides of the road. A
❑ Swine ❑ Poultry ® Cattle ❑ Horse
k,D+e...srgn ',Curs
Wine u. t .: Capacity • P.nriulf
Latitude 36 • 09 15
t 'Design�� Curr'en1
yn Poultry;.Cana itv kP'onila'tii
❑ Wean to Feeder
❑ Feeder to Finish
'
❑ Layer
❑ Non -Layer
❑ Farrow to Wean
ro _ r
rF .;r •K.S a.. ,r: °
❑ Farrow to Feeder
❑ Other
y 7.73'TOta]
❑ Farrow to Finish
�� F" DCSI
".
,, ����� � 3� �.
❑Gilts
❑ Boars
Longitude 80 • 4l 39 �;
;a M Design Current
Cattle ': W; Ca sett PoY'ulati in
® Dairy 100 72
r I Non-Dairy
100
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?
Structure 1 Structure 2 Structure 3
Identifier: ......WastaRand.......................................................................
Freeboard (inches): 96
5100
® Spillway ❑ Yes ® No
r
Structure 4 Structure S Structure 6
..............................................................................................................
3 %d ? Continued on back

Facility Number: 99-25 Date of Inspection 10/12/2000
0 Printed on: 10/12/2000
5. Are there any immediate threats to theority of any of the structures observed? (ie/ trAsevere erosion, ❑ Yes IN No
seepage, etc.)
6. Are there structures on -site which are not properly addressed and/or managed through a waste management or
closure plan? ❑ Yes ® No
(If any of questions 4-6 was answered yes, and the situation poses an
immediate public health or environmental threat, notify DWQ)
7. Do any of the structures need maintenance/improvement?
❑ Yes ® No
8. Does any part of the waste management system other than waste structures require maintenance/improvement? ❑ Yes ® No
9. Do any stuctures lack adequate, gauged markers with required maximum and minimum liquid level
elevation markings? ® Yes ❑ No
Waste Application
10. Are there any buffers that need maintenance/improvement? ❑ Yes ® No
11. Is there evidence of over application? ❑ Excessive Ponding ❑ PAN ❑ Hydraulic Overload ❑ Yes ® No
12. Crop type Fescue (Hay) Small Grain (Wheat, Barley, Soybeans
13. Do the receiving crops differ with those designated in the Certified Animal Waste Management Plan (CAWMPV ❑ 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?
Relluired 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?
(iel WUP, checklists, design, maps, etc.)
19. Does record keeping need improvement? (iel irrigation, freeboard, waste analysis & soil sample reports)
20, Is facility not in compliance with any applicable setback criteria in effect at the time of design?
21. Did the facility fail to have a actively certified operator in charge?
22. Fail to notify regional DWQ of emergency situations as required by General Permit?
(ie/ discharge, freeboard problems, over application)
23. Did Reviewer/Inspector fail to discuss review/inspection with on -site representative?
24. Does facility require a follow-up visit by same agency?
25. Were any additional problems noted which cause noncompliance of the Certified AWMP?
0; No•yiolatibiis:or derieienc es•wete:noted:duriii' this; visit:.'Wu' Vill irkdy ti&further.: ;
corresnoiidence about this :visit: " ..::::: ,
ay want to contact technical specialist to have rye added/changed on T-2201 F-10. Change fescue to include July?
4. Need gauged marker now that permit has been issued.
15. Fescue pasture needs weed control.
19. Need to start keeping weekly freeboard now that permit has been issued (Sept. 18, 2000)
IN Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes ® No
® Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes IN No
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes ® No
V
Reviewer/Inspector Name Melissa Rosebrock
Reviewer/Inspector Signature: ; ,( f/f A.,A,, 4. J A,10 /) Ar _ Date: % lr�l ff-) ;/oo

Facility Number: 99-25 Div Inspection 1 —57 i-272o—oo-1 Printed on: 10/12/2000
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 fall pipe or a permanent/temporary cover? ❑ Yes ❑ No
tt I ona MMOMMEM C
Ta'nJM611MEMS,
5100
5100

,d
ivision of Water Quality
ivision of Soil and Water Conservation
Q Other Agency
Type of Visit Compliance Inspection O Operation Review O Lagoon Evaluation
Reason for Visit Routine Q Complaint O Follow up O Emergency Notification O Other ❑ Denied Access
Facility Number Date or visit: t O a- Q ine: Printers on: 7/21/2000
O Not O erational elo►v Threshold Permitted Certified ©Conditionally Certified ©Registered Date Last Operated or Above 'Threshold: lskw too
. c
Farm Name: 0.r.,�n:��..I. (.,a.cJ �l . �..�. .... Councy:...Yad' I .In....................6.-ijo ..0
Owner Name:.d4! ..l..r(�r .r}�"�..�1........ !..i�la1 ........L-CILU J.P................. Phone No:... �..�F?.:.SQ. .:1..:.a�..1. ..................
Facility Contact: — 7-oUd.......4r.Q..u.&k............'I'itle:................................................................ Phone No. ...............
.ZIQ�� � >�
Mailing Address: ........ 0. I ✓fit? .arZ..7. �J.. ..........................
Onsite Representative: ! o=(�..,d. c udl ....... ' J!1!�aiY], Integrator: ........................
................................ ......... ......
Certified Operator:... Q.n .Q• ............ .......(�.ca.JGI................. Operator Certification Number: ... :al ... 3�............
Location of Farm:
rvrr ! k Y1 V11 ; o 0 on 0 m 1 e5. 7-orn an77
o 1045f !.� ! l� 1�a r n tbo s d of ro -
❑ Swine ❑ Poultry VCattle ❑ Horse Latitude' ®° ��� Longitude • 17Z7c �fe
Design Current
Swine Canacity Ponulation
❑ Wean to Feeder
❑ Feeder to Finish
❑ Farrow to Wean
❑ Farrow to Feeder
❑ Farrow to Finish
❑ Gilts
❑ Boars
Design Current Design Current
Poultry Capacity Population Cattle Capacity Population
❑ Layer Dairy 0 Q
❑ Non -Layer I I Non -Dairy
❑ Othcr
Total Design Capacity f6�
Total SSL W 0 Q O
Number of Lagoons JE1 Subsurface Drains Present ❑ Lag,-n Area ❑ Spray Field Area
Holding Ponds / Solid Traps ❑ No Liquid Waste ]Management System
Discharg & Stream Im act
1. Is any discharge observed from any part of the operation? ❑ Yes XNo
Discharge originalcd at: ❑ Lagoon ❑ Spray Field ❑ Other
a. Ii'discharge is observed, was dte conveyance; man -matte? ❑ Yes ❑ No
b. If discharge is observed, did it reach Water of the Stale? (If yes, notify DWQ) ❑yes ❑ No
C; If discharge is observed. what is the estimated flow in gathnin?
if. Does discharge bypass a lagoon system? (If yeas, 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
Strtwt iru l Structure 2 Structure 3 Structure 4 Structure 5 Structure Y
ktentiFier: ...Vv.....:`........Qj............................................................................................................................................................
Freehoard (inches): t
5100 Continued on back

Facility Number: — rF1T7 Date of Inspection Printed on: 7/21/2000
5. Are there any immediate threats to the il�lEgrity of any of the structures observed'? (ic/ 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 )(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 ANo
8. Does any part of the waste management system other than waste structures require maintenance/improvement? ❑ Yes 0No
4. 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 o
11. Is there evidence ofover application? ❑ Excessive Ponding ❑ PAN El Hydraulic Overload ❑ Yes No
12. Crop type r� U
13. Do the receiving cr ps differ with t ose designated in the Certifie nimal Waste Manag ment Plan (CAWMP)? ❑ Yes ANo
14. a) Does the facility lack adequate acreage for land application? ❑ Yes KNo
b) Does the facility need a wettable acre determination? ❑ Yes No
c) This facility is pended for a wettable acre determination? El Yes o
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 readily available'? ❑ Yes �No
18. Does the facility fail to have all components of the Certified Animal Waste Management Plan readily available?
(ic/ WUP, checklists, design, maps, etc.) ❑ Yes >(No
14. Does record keeping need improvement'? (ic/ irrigation, free , waste analysis & soil sample reports) Yes ❑ No
20. Is facility not in compliance with any applicable setback criteria in effect at the time of design? ❑ Yes o
21. Did the facility fail to have a actively certified operator in charge'? ❑ Yes (V0
22. Fail to notify regional DWQ of emergency situations as required by General Permit'?
(ic/ discharge, freehoard 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 �fNo
25. Were any additional problems noted which cause noncompliance of the Certified AWMP? ❑ Yes �No
0.
10 yiblaficjris;oi- dgficiencies -*ere noted• diWing this visit' • Yotr Wiii-ree6,06 rid fuk hor; . ;
corres' oridence: AG' U' . 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):
IY1 kki t m+ n , ca 1 S ec i4) i s4' `)i have -
on -ra a-b I �1d b
bh ot`.c�`� e, fescue. 4o 'i n d � d,v 10 li ?
k5r.�`� s 4u re, A 0Ad�5
Reviewer/Inspector Name
Reviewer/Inspector Signaturer—j[ jjjj4 A >l/N1�Tl�1r °_/ Date: /n/ /;1—/00 5100

Facility Number: — a I A Inspection f�q %�p� � Printed on. 7/21/2000
Odor Issues
26, Does the discharge pipe from the confinement building to the storage pond or lagoon fail to discharge atlor helow
liquid level of lagoon or storage pond with no agitation? Q M f rl aQQQ r
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) 9
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 XNO
31. Do the animals feed storage bins fail to have appropriate cover?
o M I r, aoao .
32. Do the flush tanks lack a submerged fill pipe or a permanent/temporary cover?
Additional omments and/orDrawings:
I�
it
19.
how 4-lnaA
(tea 10�
AL
5100

State of North Carolina*
Department of Environment
and Natural Resources
Division of Water Quality
James B. Hunt, Jr., Governor
Bill Holman, Secretary
Kerr T. Stevens, Director
CERTIFIED MAIL
RETURN RECEIPT REQUESTED
Rex Cranfill
Rex Cranfill Dairy
1401 Haire Road
Yadkinville NC 27055
Farm Number: 99 - 25
d0_dlb I
Dear Rex Cranfill:
July 11, 2000
1 � •
NCDENR
NORTH CAROLINA DEPARTMENT OF
ENVIRONMENT AND NATURAL RESOURCES
RErEivE0
N.C. Dej)t, Of EHNR
J U L 12 2009
Winston-Salem R
Regjonal Of€ice
You are hereby notified that Rex Cranfill Dairy, in accordance with G.S. 143-215.10C, must apply for coverage
under an Animal Waste Operation General Permit. Upon receipt of this letter, your farm has sixty (60) days to submit the
attached application and all supporting documentation. In accordance with Chapter 626 of 1995 Session Laws (Regular
Session 1996), Section 19(c)(2), any owner or operator who fails to submit an application by the date specified by the
Department SHALL NOT OPERATE the animal waste system after the specified date. Your application must be
returned within sixty (60) days of receipt of this letter. Failure to submit the application as required may also subjec('your
facility to a civil penalty and other enforcement actions for each day the facility is operated following the due date of the
application.
The attached application has been partially completed using information listed in your Animal Waste Management
Plan Certification Form. If any of the general or operation information listed is incorrect please make corrections as noted on
the application before returning the application package. The signed original application, one copy of the signed application,
two copies of a general location map, and two copies of the Certified Animal Waste Management Plan must be returned to
complete the application package. The completed package should be sent to the following address:
North Carolina Division of Water Quality
Water Quality Section
Non -Discharge Permitting Unit
1617 Mail Service Center
Raleigh, NC 27699-1617
If you have any questions concerning this letter, please call Sue Homewood at [phone] extension 502 or
Melissa Rosebrock with the Winston-Salem Regional Office at [phone].
Sincerely,
cam"
for Kerr T. Stevens
cc: Permit File (w/o encl.)
Winston-Salem Regional Office (w/o encl.)
1617 Mall Service Center, Raleigh, NC 27699-1617 Telephone [phone] FAX [phone]
An Equal Opportunity Affirmative Action Employer 50% recycled/ 10% post -consumer paper

L
f Visit O Compliance Inspection ® Operation Review O Lagoon Evaluation
for Visit O Routine O Complaint O Follow up O Emergency Notification O Other ❑ Denied Access
Facility Number 99 2$ Date or visit: 7/6/2000 1'imc: 13:00 Printed on: 10/4/2000
Not O erational C Below Threshold
0 Permitted N Certified 13 Conditionally Certified [3 Registered Date Last Operated or Above Threshold: .................
Farm Name: RU-CrWtt"t11..17ttittx...................................................................................... . County: YAdkla .............................................. WSRQ........
OwnerName: Ru........................................... Cr Will....................................................... Phone No: UY-2.79.6 ............................................................
FacilityContact: ..............................................................................Title:................................................................ Phone No:...................................................
Mailing Address: d.40l.k&g..HQad................................................................................. YatlWaYil PAC.................................................... 2.7.05.5 ..............
Onsite Representative: lodd.CaudIc................................................ ............................... Integrator:......................................................................................
Certified Operator:Kgjataclrh.&.......................... Crud~i11............................................. Operator Certification Number:2d 9 .............................
Location of Farm:
miles North of Yadkinville 601 and turn on Haire Rd and 1.2 mile West and the farm is on both sides of the road. A
❑ Swine ❑ Poultry ® Cattle ❑ Horse Latitude 36 • ®� 15 Longitude SO • 41 39
I .,esign Current Destgn� Currentf' Destgn Current
Swine, 6_ ��:rAnACItVI,: Pnnutatinn o �I'OUItrY:r. Ar (han __ it 1 .Pnnnlaatinn
❑ Wean to Feeder
❑ Feeder to Finish
❑ Farrow to Wean
❑ Farrow to Feeder
❑ Farrow to Finish
❑ Gilts
❑ Boars
❑ Layer
❑ Non -Layer
T'CA�7�1fu
'9®tlA.m-.��,;i:.�.
tF'....:cF�;l:- r?.Y;vTJr�.,..n-zn,^.:fY[fi'�-
® Dairy
❑ Non -Dairy
It}a 76
r. • _ _,
Other
100
140,000
Discharees & Stream Imparts
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
Wgste CQllectign Sc Ireatmenl
4. Is storage capacity (freeboard plus.storm storage) less than adequate? ❑ Spillway
Structure I Structure 2 Structure 3 Structure 4
❑ Yes IN No
Structure 5 Structure 6
Identifier: ...................................................................................................
Freeboard (inches): 60
5100
Continued on back

Facility Number: 99—ZS Date of Inspection 7/6/2000 Printed on: 10/4/2000
5. Are there any immediate threats to the oilgrity of any of the structures observed? (ie/ tre , -evere erosion, ❑ Yes ® No
seepage, etc.)
6. Are there structures on -site which -are not properly addressed and/or managed through a waste management or
closure plan? ❑ Yes ® No
(If any of questions 4-6 was answered yes, and the situation poses an
immediate public health or environmental threat, notify DWQ)
7. Do any of the structures need maintenance/improvement? ❑ Yes ® No
8. Does any part of the waste management system other than waste structures require maintenance/improvement? ❑ Yes ® No
9. Do any stuctures lack adequate, gauged markers with required maximum and minimum liquid level
elevation markings? ❑ Yes ® No
Waste Application
10. Are there any buffers that need maintenance/improvement? ❑ Yes ® No
11. Is there evidence of over application? ❑ Excessive Ponding ❑ PAN ❑ Hydraulic Overload ❑ Yes ® No
12. Crop type Fescue (Hay) Fescue (Graze)
13. Do the receiving crops differ with those designated in the Certified Animal Waste Management Plan (CAWMP)? ❑ Yes ® No
14. a) Does the facility lack adequate acreage for land application? ❑ Yes ® 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 & Doctimenfs
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.)
t9. 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•yiolatioris:or deficiencies were :noted during this: visif; ;Yvu:wilt receive nti further
. • cor:res'vondenee: about this'visit:: :::....:: • :: :: :
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes ® No

•- .Facility Number: 99-25 1)f Inspection r 7/6/2000 1 Printed on: 10/4/2000
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
5100

L,
Facility Number 99 25 Date of Inspection 12/21/99
Time of Inspection 24 hr. (hh:mm)
Permitted ® Certified 13 Conditionally Certified [3 Registered 113 Not Operational I Date Last Operated: ..........................
Farm Name: R.t:xXrtxtul•>aLDAitc ........... County: Yadkxl ...............................................
y............................................................................!...R..........
OwnerName: licat........................................... Ct:mfill....................................................... Phone No: b.7R.M..11Ct...................................................................
Facility Contact: 194AC utlle...................................................Title:................................................................ Phone No: 679::Z7.Q.6 ................................
Mailing Address: J441.1.k Wrp..liA.ad................................................................................. YAdW yllle.SIG.................................................... 2705 .............
Onsite Representative: T,9fjd.Cmixd1c................ .. Integrator:...................
Certified Operator:Rgianfrlttx.lL.......................... UUM011 ............................................ Operator Certification Number: ZX3,93.............................
Location of Farm:
..........................................................................................................................................................................................................................................
�.arxite�.Ha�klk.Ql'.Xa�lkti�avat��.l�R�..axttl.x►xrrx.urn.�Is�ix:c.R.d.Gautd.1.Z.xnil�.!'�t;�t,.a�ad.lth.�.f�axx»..is.rasa.baldt.�id�s.gal.tk��.xaattl....................... _
Latitude 36 • 09 15 Longitude 80 • 41 39
.:.: "-0., i� F r�.wa:a. P .164, �'i�Pss s"''l.R`. v-..: N !. S IDENiE6i66
"Ct Design Current s1gn Cu ,S.wmea �. _" ""F' Ca aci `P.o "ulation Poultry FCa acit I;o ulatlon' Cattle :.
,'. Ca aCltrli0 UIatI
❑ Wean to Feeder ❑Layer ® Dairy 100 E
`3 ❑ Feeder to Finish ❑Non -Layer] ❑ Non -Dairy .�
ie
❑ Farrow to Wean l'
❑ Other , !s
Farrow to Feeder
Farrow to Finish
�. ❑ Total Design Capact�y,,- 100
❑ Gilts K
❑ Boars Total SSLW 140,000
Iffl..
Number of Lagoons ❑ Subsurface Drains Present ❑ Lagoon Area ❑ Spray Field Areall
Holding Ponds 1 Solid Traps 1� ❑ No Liquid Waste Management System
Dischawma K 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
WasteCollection & Treatment
4. Is storage capacity (freeboard plus storm storage) less than adequate? ❑ Spillway ❑ Yes ❑ No
Structure I Structure 2 Structure 3 Structure 4 Structure 5 Structure 6
Identifier:
Freeboard (inches): 96".....................................
5. Are there any immediate threats to the integrity of any of the structures observed? (ie/ trees, severe erosion, ❑ Yes ® No
seepage, etc.)
3/23/99 Continued on back
Printed on 12/30/99

Facility Number: 99-25 I MF' Inspection
6. Are there structures on -site which are nopperly addressed and/or managed through a waste management or
closure plan?
(If any of questions 4-6 was answered yes, and the situation poses an
immediate public health or environmental threat, notify DWQ)
7. Do any of the structures need maintenance/improvement?
8. Does any part of the waste management system other than waste structures require maintenance/improvement?
9. Do any stuctures lack adequate, gauged markers with required maximum and minimum liquid level
elevation markings?
Waste Application
10. Are there any buffers that need maintenance/improvement?
11. Is there evidence of over application? ❑ Excessive Ponding ❑ PAN
12. Crop type Small Grain (Wheat, Barley, Corn (Silage & Grain) Fescue (Graze)
12/21/99
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?
P
15. Does the receiving crop need improvement?
16. Is there a lack of adequate waste application equipment?
Reuuired 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?
......1..: Nd:yiolations;or ;defieieneies-wcre noted duting.this; visit. ;You:wili receive i�o fu:rthe>r ; ;
.... correspondence: about this:visit:
❑ Yes ® No
I
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes ® No
® Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes ® No
[-]Yes IN No
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes IN No
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes ® No
- Mr. Cranfill indicated that when storage pond was built, engineer stated that pipe from milk parlor was "start pump" indicator; AL
!d to contact Technical Specialist to have pipe invert marked as such.
Reviewer/Inspector Name Abner Braddy 7
Reviewer/Inspector Signature: Date:

Facility Number Date of Inspection a'
Time of inspection F�fU hr. (hh:mm)
© Permitted Vertified © Conditionally Certified © Registered [3 Not Operational I Date Last Operated:
FarmName: ................. .............. ........................................ County:.....................................................................................
OwnerName: ............................................ I-- ...' .......................................... 11 Phone No:.......................................................................................
Facility Contact: ..............................................................................Title:.................................... Phone No:
MailingAddress: ..................................................................................................................... .................................................................................
OnsiteRepresentative . .....................................................Integrator:......................................................................................
Certified Operator:................................................................................................................ Operator Certification Number:..........................................
Location of Farm:
A
............................. ......................
Latitude ' ° .4 Longitude • & "
u {` Deigm Current, ,eg n
Design Current
°Caactty Po ulatCapacity PSwineI Con o ulatton. attle Capacity Population " .
'
❑ Wean to Feeder
❑ Feeder to Finish
❑ Farrow to Wean
❑ Farrow to Feeder
❑ Farrow to Finish
❑ Gilts,
❑ Boars
1❑ Layer ❑Dairy
E] Non -Layer JE1 Non -Dairy
❑ Other
Total DiAgn'Caj city
Total SSLW
II ! Fri
Number of Lagoons Subsurface Drains Present ❑Lagoon Area ❑Spray Field Area
HoldingPon❑ No L ds / Solid Traps iquid Waste Management System
1
;
r.
Discharge- & Stream Impacts
I. Is any discharge observed from any part of the operation? ❑ Yes XNo
Discharge originated au ❑ Lagoon ❑ Spray Field ❑ Other r
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. Dices discharge bypass a lagoon system? (If ycs, notify DWQ) ❑ Yes ❑ No
2. Is there evidence of past discharge from any part of the operation'? ❑ Yes PKio
3. Were there any adverse impacts or potential adverse impacts to the Waters of the State other than from a discharge? ❑ Yes XNo
Waste Collection & Treatment
4. Is storage capacity (freeboard plus storm storage) less than adequate? ❑ Spillway ❑ Yes ❑ No
Structure I Structure 2 Structure 3 Structure 4 Structure 5 Structure 6
Identifier:
Freeboard (inches):..............................................................................
.....................'............................................................................................................
5. Are there any immediate threats to the integrity of any of the structures observed? (ie/ trees, severe erosion, []Yes XNo
seepage, etc.)
3/23/99 Continued on back

Facility Number: — . 110of Inspection
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 Pio
8. Does any part of the waste management system other than waste structures require maintenance/improvement?
❑ Yes XNo
9. Do any stuctures lack adequate, gauged markers with required maximum and minimum liquid level
elevation markings?
�,,�
Qd r e5 ❑ No
Waste Application
10. Are there any buffers that need maintenance/improvement?
❑ Yes )YNo
It. Is there evidence of over application? ❑ Excessive Ponding ❑ PAN
❑ Yes XNo
12. Crop type -52 / S
13. Do the receiving crops differ with those designated in the Certified Animal Waste Management Plan (CAWMP)?
❑ Yes jrNo
14. a) Does the facility lack adequate acreage for land application?
❑ Yes A No
b) Does the facility need a wettable acre determination?
❑ Yes ;2rNo
c) This facility is pended for a wettable acre determination?
❑ Yes CINo
15. Does the receiving crop need improvement?
❑ Yes10,10
16. Is there a lack of adequate waste application equipment?
❑ Yes (8'No
f
Required Records & Documents
17. Fail to have Certificate of Coverage & General Permit readily available?
❑ Yes ❑ No
18. Does the facility fail to have all components of the Certified Animal Waste Management Plan readily available?
(ie/ WUP, checklists, design, maps, etc.)
❑ Yes No
19. Does record keeping need improvement? (ie/ irrigation, freeboard, waste analysis &'soil sample reports)
❑ Yes *5No
20. Is facility not in compliance with any applicable setback criteria in effect at the time of design?
❑ Yes VNo
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 reviewlinspection with on -site representative?
❑ Yes gNo
24. Does facility require a follow-up visit by same agency?
❑ Yes [�No
/OrNo
25. Were any additional problems noted which cause noncompliance of the Certified AWMP?
❑ Yes
NO- UAati06s'oir d0ficjcintkp5 -*i' rip �'lOie(l• dWirig Obis.visit; You Witt �ee�iye �io:;f. thgr
• � • ctirres� onc�ence. a�Qu1" this .visit. - • � . . • • - • - • - •
Gomments:(refer:,to;questio'n #}.,' Explain any YES answers add/or aiay;recon�mendations or any other comments ' 1'=@ r
, lain situations use.;addatranal pages as � , . ,) i� js
Use drawings of fac�ltty to better_exp { p g 'necessary
� � - j1 � !'���: l/ �� car .¢� f✓�,r� -���J� yd.�.� `
Wee
se
.. �.— "'.,""1 .. . -. i, f rp _ .� ¢ i�'��1 i � € "�� fa#�`F F .}� �i1ri r-e r
Reviewer/Inspector Name 3' qq
a. f'_4—.•ai
Reviewer/Inspector Signature: er Date: �l
3/23/99

Facility Number 99 25 Date of Inspection 7/7/99
Time of Inspection 12:45 24 hr. (hh:mm)
0 Permitted ® Certified 0 Conditionally Certified 0 Registered 0 Not Opera Date Last Operated:
... County: Y�tckkAn ............................... .... !'. SRQ........
Farm Name: R.C�.Ct�ti�lJll.�?�.1t3:.................................................................................. ............
Owner Name: R,e.X........................................... .CrWWLl.................
Facility Contact:..............................................................................Title:.............
Mailing Address: 1401.QWrt..8Aad..........................................
Onsite Representative: Rcx.CxanGtll< .T.udd,.G, nWc..................................
Phone No: 6.71:2.7.0.6 ........................
Phone No:
...................... .......
YAdklrtxlM. C.........................
Integrator: ................
2.7.0S5...
Certified Operator. Ratttclth. L.......................... cr.44l1............................................ Operator Certification Number: ,2Ja93.............................
Location of Farm:
Latitude = • 09 15 « Longitude =0 41 , =11
" { Design
Swine' Ca acit
❑ Wean to Feeder
❑ Feeder to Finish
Fr —rent
Po ula ton
ia. Design Coerent =
Pioultr. a ,
Y = Gaacit `iP.o o- ula �o Cattie
❑ Layer ®Dairy
❑ Non -Layer ❑Non -Dairy
❑ Other+
r
Total Design Ca�aCtty
'Total SSLiV
Design s= Curren't'
`
,Ca acit �I;o ulation .
100 86
s: I Y
too
140,000
❑ Farrow to Wean'
❑ Farrow to Feeder
❑ Farrow to Finish
❑ Gilts
❑ Boars
Number of Lagoons
HPond olding s / Solitl Traps I.. j
❑ Subsurface Drains Present ❑ Lagoon Area ❑ Spray Field Arca
1[3 No Liquid Waste Management System
Discharges & Stream Imnacts
1. Is any discharge observed from any part of the operation?
Discharge originated at: ❑ Lagoon ❑ Spray Field ❑ Other
a. If discharge is observed, was the conveyance man-made?
b. If discharge is observed, did it reach Water of the State? (If yes, notify DWQ)
c. If discharge is observed, what is the estimated flow in gal/min?
d. Does discharge bypass a lagoon system'? (If yes, notify DWQ)
2. Is there evidence of past discharge from any part of the operation?
3. Were there any adverse impacts or potential adverse impacts to the Waters of the State other than from a discharge?
Waste Collection && Treatment
4. Is storage capacity (freeboard plus storm storage) less than adequate? ® Spillway
Structure I Structure 2 Structure 3 Structure 4 Structure 5
Identifier:
Freeboard (inches): ................3.Q.............................
5. Are there any immediate threats to the integrity of any of the structures observed? (ie/ trees, severe erosion,
seepage, etc.)
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes ® No
Structure 6
❑ Yes ® No
Continued on hack
Printed on 12/21/99
3/23/99

Facility Number: 99-25 I) f Inspection
6. Are there structures on -site which are nooperly addressed and/or managed through a wa a management or
closure plan?
(If any of questions 4-6 was answered yes, and the situation poses an
immediate public health or environmental threat, notify DWQ)
7. Do any of the structures need maintenance/improvement?
8. Does any part of the waste management system other than waste structures require maintenance/improvement?
9. Do any stuctures lack adequate, gauged markers with required maximum and minimum liquid level
elevation markings?
Waste Annlicalion
10. Are there any buffers that need maintenance/improvement?
11. Is there evidence of over application? ❑ Excessive Ponding ❑ PAN
12. Crop type Fescue (Graze) Fescue (Hay) Corn (Silage)
717/99
❑ 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 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/]nspector 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?
:: I'. . yi. . . .. .. cleli. . .. es were noted :durii}g..js. Vim .... . ... .:recei<ve n6 . . .1 e
ctir.. poridence: abauti this :visit:
❑ Yes IN No
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes ® No
m en B efe-affoTtluutj an. a a an a an. ommendations o a
oth�eipmen
d awing a 'I 4 'tua additions a es a essary
ft 7 Need to keep weeds cut down for easy visual inspection. (18" or less)
Keep an eye on WSP embankment for erosion problems from cattle grazing.
9 Owner said the milk parlor pipe was the max. liquid level.
This is an exclusively honey wagon operation.
Reviewer/Inspector Name iRocky Durham
Reviewer/Inspector Signature: Date:
Printed on 12/21/99

Routine O Com
Facility Number 49 2_i
0 Registered ® Certified ©Applied for Permit E3Permitted
ow -up orDSWC review O Other
Date of Inspection 7/1198
Time of Inspection 04:00 24 hr. (hh:mm)
Not Opera Date Last Operated: ..........................
Farm Name: >lira.Cranlll.DA ry....................................................................................... County: YarlkiD.............................................. .W..SRQ........
Owner Name: Rex ........................................... .Crsinfill....................................................... Phone No: 71
.......................................................
Facility Contact: Tndui.Caudk.................................................. Title:................................................................ Phone No: 3,36.4.71,27.06 .......................
Mailing Address: 1.40I.klaireAuad................................................................................. YAdkinville.N.0 .................................................... 17.055 .............
Ousite Representative: IR( t%. autdl4 e�.C1G�tIfVl'All...................................................Integrator:......................................................................................
Certified Operator: Rrnneth L.......................... Cr'.agUll............................................. Operator Certification Number:21393 .............................
Location of Farm:
Latitude 3b • 09 15
...................................................................................................................................................
...................................................................................................................................................
Longitude 80 ' 41 39 f{
General
1. Are there any buffers that need maintenance/improvement? ❑ Yes ® No
2. Is any discharge observed from any part of the operation? ❑ Yes H No
Discharge originated at: ❑ Lagoon ❑ Spray Field ❑ Other
a. If discharge is observed, was the conveyance man-made'? 0 Yes 0 No
b. If discharge is observed, did it reach Surface Water'? (If yes, notify DWQ) ❑ Yes [I 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) 0 Yes © No
3. is there evidence of past discharge from any part of the operation'? ❑ Yes 0 No
4. Were there any adverse impacts to the waters of the State other than from a discharge? ❑ Yes X No
5. Does any part of the waste management system (other than lagoons/holding ponds) require ❑ Yes H No
niaintenaneehrnprovetnent'?
6. Is facility not in compliance with any applicable setback criteria in effect at the time of design'? ❑ Yes 0 No
7. Did the facility fail to have a certified operator in responsible charge'? ❑ Yes IN No
7/25/97

Facility Number: 99-25 Date o nspection 711198
S. Are there lagoons or storage ponds ou sitAch need to be properly closed'? ❑ Yes ❑ No
Structures (LagoonsMoldine Ponds, Flush Pits, etc.
9. Is storage capacity (freeboard plus storm storage) less than adequate? ❑ Yes ® No
Stnicture I Structure 2 Structure 3 Structure 4 Structure 5 Structure 6
Identifier: ........ ...p.gjjdj............
Freeboard (fl): ..............10.............. ...............
10. Is seepage observed from any of the structures? © Yes ® No
11. Is erosion, or any other threats to the integrity of any of the strictures observed'?
12. Do any of the structures need tnaintenance/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 strictures lack adequate mininunn or maximum liquid level markers?
Waste Application
14. Is there physical evidence of over application?
(If in excess of WMP, or runoff entering waters of the State, notify DWQ)
15. Crop type ........ CurizlUggp.A.Cmajal
16. Do the receiving crops differ with those designated in the Animal Waste Management flan (AWMP)?
17. Does the facility have a lack of adequate acreage for laud application?
18, Does the receiving crop need improvement?
19. Is there a lack of available waste application equipment'?
20. Does facility require a follow-up visit by same agency?
21. Did Reviewer/Inspector fail to discuss review/inspection with on -site representative'?
22, Does record keeping need improvement?
For Certified or Permitted Facilities Only
23. Does the facility fail to have a copy of the Animal Waste Management Plan readily available'?
24. Were any additional problems noted which cause noncompliance of the Certified Mh MP?
25. Were any additional problems noted which cause noncompliance of the Permit?
LJ •No. violatibrts' 6r'd'efi-ietreies.wbre'noted'dnHing this•visit.' Wq-VAJ'rbCe1Ve'nb farther
:::eorresvuudeiiit akioW this:visit:: :......
::............... .
marker to be installed soon.
[] Yes CO No
[] Yes H No
I] Yes I] No
© Yes ® No
I] Yes IM No
© Yes ® No
© Yes ® No
0 Yes H No
0 Yes 0 No
❑ Yes ® No
0 Yes 0 No
[] Yes 0 No
❑ Yes I} No
ED Yes No
Reviewer/Inspector Name
Reviewer/Inspector Signature: Date:

❑ DSWC Ani4p Feedlot Operation Review W
® DWQ Animal Feedlot Operation Site Inspection
10 Routine 0 Complaint 0 Follow-up of DWO inspection 0 Follow -tip of DS%V(: review 0 Other
Date of Inspection
Facility Number
Time of Inspection []= 24 hr. (hh:mm)
© Registered 10 Certified © Applied for Permit (] Permitted 0 Not Operational I Date Last Operated:
Farm Name:...1���...lriZLl1 County: ........ .1. �` 1..�i....................................................
Owner Name:........ ............... ��,,.�..r.�.?.1........................................... Phone No:................p`.2. 96
11�.�+� �1.......4P...pp..................................
Facility Contact: Titlo a�d9-t� ` �QlU t? F.!` ... Phone No: � I.............................l-z746
............................... .... , ...............,..................................
1llailing Address %4o.,i Va-ir6 PITad
............................................................................................................................................................................... ............... I..........
t o0"-d �
OnsiteRepresentative :..................... ......................................................... ............. ........ Intel;rator:............................
...................................,......................
Certified Operator;........70 .................. 1'0� ... Operator Certification Number.............................
Location of Farm:
i
.Wem%sue2-mile�A/o cK1i1............. .......
r- _ r _--, _n r--� _ �� r ^ M rid
MM�+�jM_YL!Jii1•tiislw� +' ■il/�Yi��iiE+Jl•liii
Design Current
Swine Capacity Population
❑ Wean to Feeder
❑ Feeder to Finish
❑ Farrow to Wean
❑ Farrow to Feeder
❑ Farrow to Finish
❑ Gilts
❑ Boars
Design Current Design Current ,
Poultry Capacity Population Cattle Capacity Population .
❑ Layer ®Dairy j g
❑ Non -Layer I ❑ Non -Dairy
❑ Other
Total Design Capacity 1 00
Total SSLW
'Number of Lagoons / Holding Ponds ❑ Subsurface Drains Present ❑ Lagoon Area ❑ Spray Field Area
❑ No Liquid Waste Management System
General
1. Are there any buffers that need maintenance/improvement?
2. Is any discharge observed from any part of the operation?
Dischar-e ori-inated at. ❑ Lagoon ❑ Spray Field ❑ Other
a. If discharge is observed, was the conveyance man-made?
b. If discharge is observed, dill it reach Surrace Water" ([f yes. notify DWQ)
c. If discharge is observed, what is the estimated flow in oal/min?
d. Does discharge bypass a lagoon system? (If yes, notify DWQ.)
3. Is there evidence of past discharge from any part of the operation?
4. Were there any adverse impacts to the waters of the State other than from a discharge?
5. Does any part of the waste management system (other'than lagoons/holding ponds) require
main ten an ce/improvement?
6. Is facility not in compliance with any applicable setback criteria in effect at the time of design?
7. Did the facility fail to have a certified operator in responsible charge?
7/25/97
❑ Yes ,TNo
❑ Yes �rNo
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes VX No
❑ Yes 6 No
❑ Yes 2fNo
❑ Yes EfNo
❑ Yes VNo
Continued on back M.

A., Facility Number: 9 —
8. Are there lagoons or storage ponds on site which need to be properly closed? ❑ Yes * No
Structures (Lacoons.iiolding Ponds, Flush fits, eta:.)
9. Is storage capacity (freeboard plus storm storage) less than adequate? ❑ Yes PdNo
Structure Structure 2 Structure 3 Structure 4 Structure 5 Structure 6
Identifier:
...................................
....
....................
................
............
...................
I... ......
...................
I .......
....................................
Freeboard(ft): ..................................................................................................................................................................................................................
10. Is seepage observed from any of the structures? ❑ Yes V(No
11, Is erosion, or any other threats to the integrity of any of the structures observed? ❑ Yes )RrNo
12. Do any of the structures need maintenance/improvement? ❑ Yes WNo
(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 DNo
Waste Application
14. Is there physical evidence of over application? ❑ Yes ONO
(If in excess of WMP, or runoff entering waters of the State, notify DWQ)
15. Crop type jCVP..................................................... .....................................................................................................................................................................
16. Do the receiving crops differ with those designated in the Animal Waste Management Plan (AWMP)? ❑ Yes 9No
17. Does the facility have a lack of adequate acreage for land application? ❑ Yes WNo
18. Does the receiving crop need improvement? ' ❑ Yes ,9fNo
19. Is there a lack of available waste application equipment? ❑ Yes eNo
20. Does facility require a follow-up visit by same agency? ❑ Yes N No
21. Did Reviewer/inspector fail to discuss review/inspection with on -site representative? ❑ Yes lyNo
22. Does record keeping need improvement'? ❑ Yes KNo
For Certified or Pennitted Facilities Only
23. Does the facility fail to have a copy of the Animal Waste Management Plan readily available? ❑ Yes El No
24. Were any additional problems noted which cause noncompliance of the Certified AWMP? ❑ Yes �No
25. Were any additional problems noted which cause noncompliance of the Permit? ❑ Yes KNo
0 No.violations or. deficiencies w'ere noted during' this.'visit.-You "Will receive -no further
ctirre pondence.'ahoitt this.visit.,:.
�omments (refer.to question #) Explaimany YES answers and/or any'reei
Jse drawings of facility to better explain .situations. (use additional pis 'es a
7/25/97
Reviewertinspector Name i
Reviewer/inspector Signature: f-SKU"I YUAl4 -1 I Date: /-I --