970003_INSPECTIONS_20171231

Division of Water Resources
❑ Division of Soil and Water Conservation
❑ Other Agency
Facility Number:
970003 Facility Status:
Active Permit: AWC970003
Inpsection Type:
Compliance Inspection
Inactive Or Closed Date:
Reason for visit,
Routine
County: Wilkes Region:
Date of Visit:
11129/2017 Entry Time: 10:30 am
Exit Time: 12:15 pm Incident S
Farm Name:
A. H. & W. Farms
Owner Emil:
Owner:
Glenn Oren Weston
Phone:
Mailing Address:
1190 Fallview Rd
Boomer NC 286069187
Physical Address:
Facility Status:
0Compliant ❑ Not Compliant
Integrator:
3°L
❑ Denied Access
Winston-Salem
336-921-3368
Location of Farts: Latitude:
36" 01' Longitude: 81' 18' 35"
Hwy. 18 South 10 miles forth Moravian Falls. Turn left on Andrews Rd. Right at first fork and left at second fork.
Question Areas:
Dischrge & Stream Impacts Waste Col, Slor, & Treat
Waste Application
Records and Documents Other Issues
Certified Operator: Glenn Oren Weston
Operator Certification Number: 24833
Secondary OIC(s):
OnSite Representative(s): Name
This Phone
24 hour contact name Glenn Oren Weston
Phone: [phone]
Onsite representative Glenn Oren Weston
Phone: [phone]
Primary Inspector: Melissa Rosebrodk
Phone:
Inspector Signature:
Date:
Secondary Inspector(s):
Inspection Summary:
2. Leachate run-off from the silage area looks ok.
3. and 9. Please establish stream buffer in lot below apple bam to help fitter waste and sediment.
3. Keep check on crossing/feed area below road for run-off of waste and sediment.
B. Per Mr. Weston, may need to have the marker re -surveyed and reset. See SWCD/NRCS for assistance.
21. 2017 soil tests are not yet completed, check next visit.
21. Rainfall and freeboard records are complete this year.
24. Will need to complete calibration again in 2018.
"DWR located 6/2012017 waste analysis online after inspection. Possible overapplicalion of nitrogen on com since Fall waste
result of 5.16 lbs.N/1000 gal was used for PAN calculations. The 6/202017 result was 9.44 lbs. N/1000 gal. MMR
page: 1

0
Permit: AWC970003 Owner - Facility : Glenn Oren Weston Facility Number. 970003
Inspection Date: 11/29/17 Inpsection Type: Compliance Inspection Reason for Visit: Routine
Regulated Operations
Cattle
Design Capacity
Currant promotions
Cattle - Beef Feeder
600
250
Cattle - Beef Stocker Calf
122
Total Design Capacity: 600
Total SSLW: 480,000
Waste Structures
Dlsignated Observed
Type Identifier Closed Date Start Date Freeboard Freeboard
Waste Pond WSP 96.00
page: 2

Permit: AWC970003 Owner - Facility : Glenn Oren Weston Facility Number: , 970003
Inspection Date: 11/29/17 Inpsechon Type: Compliance Inspection Reason for Visit: Routine
Discharges & Stream Impacts
Yea
No Na No
1. Is any discharge observed from any part of the operation?
❑
❑
❑
Discharge originated at:
Structure
❑
Application Field
❑
Other
❑
a. Was conveyance man-made?
❑
❑ ❑
❑
b. Did discharge reach Waters of the State? (if yes, notify DWQ)
❑
❑ ❑
❑
c. What is the estimated volume that reached waters of the State (gallons)?
d. Does discharge bypass the waste management system? (if yes, notify DWQ)
❑
1111
❑
2. Is there evidence of a past discharge from any part of the operation? _
❑
M ❑
❑
3. Were there any observable adverse impacts or potential adverse impacts to Waters of the
0
❑ ❑
❑
State other than from a discharge?
Waste Collection. Storage & Treatment
Yea
No Na No
4. Is storage capacity less than adequate?
❑
0 ❑
❑
If yes, is waste level into structural freeboard?
❑
5. Are there any immediate threats to the integrity of any of the structures observed (Le./ large
❑
0 ❑
❑
trees, severe erosion, seepage, etc.)?
6. Are there structures on -site that are not properly addressed and/or managed through a
❑
0 ❑
❑
waste management or closure plan?
7. Do any of the structures need maintenance or improvement?
❑
M ❑
❑
8. Do any of the structures lack adequate markers as required by the permit? (Not applicable
❑
0 ❑
❑
to roofed pits, dry stacks and/or wet stacks)
9. Does any part of the waste management system other than the waste structures require
M
❑ ❑
❑
maintenance or improvement?
Waste ADDllcafion
Yee No Na No
10. Are there any required buffers, setbacks, or compliance alternatives that need
❑ M ❑ ❑
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)?
❑
PAN?
❑
Is PAN > 10%/10 lbs.?
❑
Total Phosphorus?
❑
Failure to incorporate manure/sludge into bare soil?
❑
Outside of acceptable crop window?
❑
Evidence of wind drift?
❑
Application outside of application area?
❑
page: 3

Permit: AWC970003 Owner - Facility : Glenn Oren Weston Facility Number:
970003
Inspection Date: 11/29/17 Inpsection Type: Compliance Inspection Reason for Visit:
Routine
Waste Application
Yea No No No
Crop Type 1
small Grain (Wheat
Barley,
oats)
Crop Type 2
Com (Silage)
Crop Type 3
Crop Type 4
Crop Type 5
Crop Type 6
Soil Type 1
Soil Type 2
Soil Type 3
Soil Type 4
Soil Type 5
Soil Type 6
14. Do the receiving crops differ from those designated in the Certified Animal Waste
❑
❑
❑
Management Plan(CAWMP)?
15. Does the receiving crop and/or land application site need improvement?
❑
E ❑
❑
16. Did the facility fail to secure and/or operate per the irrigation design or wettable acre
❑
❑ 0
❑
determination?
17. Does the facility lack adequate acreage for land application?
❑
M ❑
❑
18. Is there a lack of properly operating waste application equipment?
❑
0 ❑
❑
Records and Documents
Yea
No Na No
19. Did the facility fail to have Certificate of Coverage and Permit readily available?
❑
0 ❑
❑
20. Does the facility fail to have all components of the CAWMP readily available?
❑0
❑
❑
If yes, check the appropriate box below.
WUP?
❑
Checklists?
❑
Design?
❑
Maps?
❑
Lease Agreements?
❑
Other?
❑
If Other, please specify
21. Does record keeping need improvement?
❑
0 ❑
❑
If yes, check the appropriate box below.
Waste Application?
❑
Weekly Freeboard?
❑
Waste Analysis?
❑
Soil analysis?
❑
Waste Transfers?
❑
Weather code?
❑
Rainfall?
❑
Stocking?
❑
page: 4

Permit: AWC970003 Owner- Facility : Glenn Oren Weston Facility Number: 970003
Inspection Date: 11/29/17 Inpsection Type: Compliance Inspection Reason for Visit: Routine
Records and Documents
Ym No Na No
Crop yields?
❑
120 Minute inspections?
❑
Monthly and V Rainfall Inspections
❑
Sludge Surrey
❑
22. Did the facility fail to install and maintain a rain gauge?
❑
E ❑
❑
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. Is the facility out of compliance with permit conditions related to sludge? If yes, check the
❑
110
❑
appropriate box(es) below:
Failure to complete annual sludge survey
❑
Failure to develop a POA for sludge levels
❑
Noncompliant sludge levels in any lagoon
❑
List structure(s) and date of first survey indicating non-compliance:
26. Did the facility fail to provide documentation of an actively certified operator in charge?
❑
❑
❑
27. Did the facility fail to secure a phosphorous loss assessment (PLAT) certification?
❑
❑
❑
Other Issues
Yes
No Na No
28. Did the facility fail to properly dispose of dead animals within 24 hours and/or document
❑E
❑
❑
and report mortality rates that exceed normal rates?
29. At the time of the inspection did the facility pose an odor or air quality concern? If yes,
❑
0 ❑
❑
contact a regional Air Quality representative immediately.
30. Did the facility fail to notify regional DWQ of emergency situations as required by Permit?
❑
0 ❑
❑
(i.e., discharge, freeboard problems, over -application)
31. Do subsurface tile drains exist at the facility?
❑
0 ❑
❑
If yes, check the appropriate box below.
Application Field _
❑
Lagoon / Storage Pond
❑
Other
❑
If Other, please specify
32. Were any additional problems noted which cause noncompliance of the Permit or
❑
E ❑
❑
CAWMP?
33. Did the Reviewer/Inspector fail to discuss reviewfrnspection with on -site representative?
❑
E ❑
❑
34. Does the facility require a follow-up visit by same agency?
❑
E ❑
❑
page: 5

for Visit: (%Routine 0 Complaint 0 Follow-up 0 Referral 0
Technical
Other 0 Denied Access
Date of Visit: ► Arrival Time: �-1 Departure Time: Q�E� County: NJ5 Region: W 5 IZb
Farm Name &H w w FoarrlS
Owner Name: lAi;.Inn We,54-on
Mailing Address:
Physical Address:
Facility Contact: [nj"hNp) qq�5+-6✓) Title:
Onsite Representative:
Certified Operator:
Back-up Operator:
Location of Farm:
Owner Email:
Phone:
Ivler, NL a gbO,o
Phone: l0 7 — 66 &6
Integrator:
hr-s- by 12 3f ISM
Certification Number:
q"l
Certification Number:
Latitude: 360 (11 1- (o 11 Longitude: 110 1 R/ 35— //
V 5 Rwy4/ 01 NO-/4w y w S I L
Fa(( V i eu)
01 • 1
Fawn on L,
Swine
Wean to Finish
Design Current
Capacity Pop.
Wet Poultry
La er
Design
Capacity
Current
Pop.
Cattle
DairyCow
Design Current
Capacity Pop.
Wean to Feeder
Non -La er
Dairy Calf
Feeder to Finish
Dairy Heifer
Farrow to Wean
Farrow to Feeder
Farrow to Finish
Dr, Poultry
Layers
Design
Ga aci_
Current
P,o ,
Dry Cow
Non -Dairy
Beef Stocker
Gilts
Non -Layers
Beef Feeder
_127-
Q 0
Boars
Pullets
IBeefBrcodCovv
Other
Other
Turke s
Turkey Poults
Other
Discharges and Stream Impacts
1. Is any discharge observed from any part of the operation?
Discharge originated at: ❑ Structure ❑ Application Field ❑ Other:
a. Was the conveyance man-made?
b. Did the discharge reach waters of the State? (If yes, notify DWR)
c. What is the estimated volume that reached waters of the State (gallons)?
d. Does the discharge bypass the waste management system? (If yes, notify DWR)
2. Is there evidence of a past discharge from any part of the operation?
3. Were there any observable adverse impacts or potential adverse impacts to the waters
of the State other than from a discharge?
❑ Yes A No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes ❑ No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes ❑ No ❑ NA ❑ NE
[—]Yes
❑ No
❑ NA
❑ NE
[—]Yes
Djol�o
❑ NA
❑ NE
ArYes
❑ No
❑ NA
❑ NE
Page 1 of 3 21412015 Continued

Facili Number: 7- • Date of Inspection: { 2
Waste Collection & Treatment
up
4. Is storage capacity (structural plus storm storage plus heavy rainfall) less than adequate? ❑ Yes eNo ❑ NA ❑ NE
t 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
_�(0 Identifier: w 6 P
Spillway?:
Designed Freeboard (in):
Observed Freeboard (in):
5. Are there any immediate threats to the integrity of any of the structures observed? ❑ Yes [)rNo ❑ NA ❑ NE
(i.e., large trees, severe erosion, seepage, etc.)
6. Are there structures on -site which are not properly addressed and/or managed through a ❑ Yes oel�o ❑ NA ❑ NE
waste management or closure plan?
If any of questions 4-6 were answered yes, and the situation poses an immediate public health or environmental threat, notify DWR
7. Do any of the structures need maintenance or improvement?
❑ Yes XNo
❑ NA
❑ NE
8. Do any of the structures lack adequate markers as required by the permit?
❑ Yes 0 No
❑ NA
❑ NE
(not applicable to roofed pits, dry stacks, and/or wet stacks)
777T"""`"''
9. Does any part of the waste management system other than the waste structures
require Of Yes ❑ No
❑ NA
❑ NE
maintenance or improvement?
Waste Application
10. Are there any required buffers, setbacks, or compliance alternatives that need
❑ Yes DNo
❑ NA
❑ NE
maintenance or improvement?
11. Is there evidence of incorrect land application? If yes, check the appropriate box below. ❑ Yes jNo
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Excessive Pending ❑ Hydraulic Overload ❑ Frozen Ground
❑ Heavy Metals (Cu, Zn, etc.)
❑ PAN ❑ PAN > 10% or 10 lbs. ❑ Total Phosphorus ❑ Failure
to Incorporate Manure/Sludge into
Bare Soil
❑ Outside of Acceptable Crop Window ❑ Evidence of Wind Drift -
❑ Application Outside of Approved Area
� A14A.e 04k '
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 I/y No ❑ NA ❑ NE
16. Did the facility fail to secure and/or operate per the irrigation design or wettable ❑ Yes T❑] No NA ❑ NE
acres determination? /
17. Does the facility lack adequate acreage for land application? ❑ Yes X No ❑ NA ❑ NE
18. Is there a lack of properly operating waste application equipment? ❑ Yes pSrNo ❑ NA ❑ NE
Required Records & Documents
19. Did the facility fail to have the Certificate of Coverage & Permit readily available? ❑ Yes NNo ❑ NA ❑ NE
20. Does the facility fail to have all components of the CAWMP readily available? If yes, check ❑ Yes �rvo ❑ NA ❑ NE
the appropriate box. v
❑WUP ❑Checklists ❑ Design ❑ Maps ❑ Lease Agreements ❑Other:
21. Does record keeping need i provement? If yegI , .1 eppteprie e3evr— A'es No N{1 ❑ NE
Waste Applicati n W ekly Freeboard ante Analysis Soil Analysis Fz "L.T�"`w xp..r N Weather Code
Rainfall Stocking Crop Yield +errs Monthly and V Rainfall Inspections E3"wg--�
22. Did the facility fail to install and maintain a rain gauge? ❑ Yes gNo ❑, NSA ❑ NE
23. If selected, did the facility fail to install and maintain rainbreakers on irrigation equipment? ❑ Yes ❑ ,
No <A ❑ NE
Page 2 of 21412015 Continued

Facili Number: - O jDate of inspection: I ZZ O
24. Did the facility fail to calibrate waste ion equipment as required by the permit? ❑Yes No ❑ NA ❑ NE
25. Is the facility out of compliance with permit conditions related to sludge? If yes, check ❑ Yes ❑ No XNA ❑ NE
the appropriate box(es) below.
❑ Failure to complete annual sludge survey ❑ Failure to develop a POA for sludge levels
❑ Non -compliant sludge levels in any lagoon
List structure(s) and date of first survey indicating non-compliance:
26. Did the facility fail provide documentation of an actively certified operator in charge? ❑ Yes � No ❑ NA ❑ NE
27. Did the facility fail to secure a phosphorus loss assessments (PLAT) certification? ❑ Yes �No ❑ NA ❑ NE
Other Issues �(
28. Did the facility fail to properly dispose of dead animals with 24 hours and/or document ❑ Yes 'sir' No ❑ NA ❑ NE
and report mortality rates that were higher than normal?
29. At the time of the inspection did the facility pose an odor or air quality concern?
❑ Yes _);�rNo
❑ NA ❑ NE
If yes, contact a regional Air Quality representative immediately.
30. Did the facility fail to notify the Regional Office of emergency situations as required by the
❑ Yes krNo
❑ NA ❑ NE
permit? (i.e., discharge, freeboard problems, over -application)
31. Do subsurface tile drains exist at the facility? If yes, check the appropriate box belo r IYI
1;- r 0
[X Yes ❑ No
❑ NA ❑ NE
0 Application Field ❑ Lagoon/storage Pond ❑ Other:
32. Were any additional problems noted which cause non-compliance of the permit or CAWMP?
❑ Yes XNo
❑ NA ❑ NE
33. Did the Reviewer/Inspector fail to discuss review/inspection with an on -site representative?
❑ Yes [N'No
❑ NA ❑ NE
34. Does the facility require a follow-up visit by the same agency?
❑ Yes N No
❑ NA ❑ NE
Comments (refer to question #): Explain any YES answers and/or any additional recommendations or any other comments.
Use drawings of facility to better explain situations (use additional pages as necessary).
;011
. Sot I +gists d ve_ 2oi'7
ab 16 0,0-11 b Ir&_+-i o n
'a' Run OCC Vi-orvm IA5
F rd
N of jet C'VV'Pt&ed( Gnerv'_ rq 6,51 }-o
eouKp ie+ed a geed �b eoq�Ia �act►n it
d- S t (a�e_ 6ino-C -5
nf-ig( + Free- boa-v-A recce rci5 01,6" (e fe- -K 15 4ei5-r ?I.L
r
�i
—7-=-P­f Ihs. N
Reviewer/Inspector Name:
Reviewer/Inspector Signatm
Page 3 of 3
A
Phone(,9 1 1 - 9
Date: �t j 17-Z / 1 7
21412015

for Visit: W Routine 0 Complaint 0 Follow-up 0 Referral 0 Emergency 0 Other 0 Denied Access
,nop
Date of Visit: /tG (6 Arrival Time: :(y n,^n Departure Time _ County: t�-+1LkGS Region: WSRo
Farm Name: A.4, I W. F1 Wxs Owner Email: \
Owner Name: (A-6)3 W &yTo 1J Phone: 5 5 6-1 a1 — 33 Q 6f
Mailing Address: 1F-ALL-\116W gooN.aR, QC_ 9AM
Physical Address: V'
Facility Contact: CTrLa) Title:
Onsite Representative: 11e �DJa
Certified Operator: &_L 4_1 I WB t"
Back-up Operator:
Location of Farm:
Latitude:
Discharges and Stream Impacts
1. Is any discharge observed from any part of the operation?
Discharge originated at: ❑ Structure ❑ Application Field ❑ Other:
a. Was the conveyance man-made?
Phone: MC- 9}7-046C(c)
Integrator:
Certification Number: � W S ja 131 1 18
Certification Number: �- 4 933
b. Did the discharge reach waters of the State? (If yes, notify DWR)
c. What is the estimated volume that reached waters of the State (gallons)?
d. Does the discharge bypass the waste management system? (If yes, notify DWR)
2. Is there evidence of a past discharge from any part of the operation?
3. Were there any observable adverse impacts or potential adverse impacts to the waters
of the State other than from a discharge?
Page 1 of 3
Longitude:
❑ Yes 1KNo ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes ❑ No
[—]Yes [:]No
❑ NA ❑ NE
337
❑NA ❑NE f
i
❑ Yes ❑ No ❑ NA ❑ NE
Yes [:]No ❑ NA ❑ NE ^
❑ Yes No ❑ NA ❑ NE
21412015 Continued

Facili Number: • 1 Date of inspection: (g
Waste Collection & Treatment
4. Is storage capacity (structural plus storm storage plus heavy rainfall) less than adequate? ❑ Yes [Z No ❑ NA ❑ NE
a. If yes, is waste level into the structural freeboard? ❑ Yes ❑ No ❑ NA ❑ NE
Structure 1 Structure 2 Structure 3 Structure 4
Structure 5
Structure 6
Identifier: Po 1.
Spillway?:
Designed Freeboard (in):
Observed Freeboard (in): &tAu
5. Are there any immediate threats to the integrity of any of the structures observed?
❑ Yes
O'No
❑ NA
❑ NE
(i.e., large trees, severe erosion, seepage, etc.)
6. Are there structures on -site which are not properly addressed and/or managed through a
❑ Yes
&'No
❑ NA
❑ NE
waste management or closure plan?
If any of questions 4-6 were answered yes, and the situation poses an immediate public health or environmental
threat,
notify DWR
7. Do any of the structures need maintenance or improvement?
❑ Yes
ONo
❑ NA
❑ NE
8. Do any of the structures lack adequate markers as required by the permit?
❑ Yes
Er 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
TKNo
❑ NA
❑ NE
maintenance or improvement?,
Waste Application
10. Are there any required buffers, setbacks, or compliance alternatives that need
Yes
❑ No
❑ NA
❑ NE
maintenance or improvement?
11. Is there evidence of incorrect land application? If yes, check the appropriate box below.
❑ Yes
rP.r No
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Excessive Ponding ❑ Hydraulic Overload ❑ Frozen Ground ❑ Heavy Metals (Cu, Zn, etc.)
❑ PAN ❑ PAN > 10% or 10 lbs. ❑ Total Phosphorus ❑ Failure to Incorporate Manure/Sludge
into
Bare Soil
❑ Outside of Acceptable Crop Window ❑ Evidence of Wind Drift ❑ Application
Outside of Approved Area
12. Crop Type(s): 4Aw
13. Soil Type(s):
14. Do the receiving crops differ from those designated in the CAWMP?
❑ Yes
liR No
❑ NA
❑ NE
15. Does the receiving crop and/or land application site need improvement?
❑ Yes
®No
❑ NA
❑ NE
16. Did the facility fail to secure and/or operate per the irrigation design or wettable
❑ Yes
YJ No
❑ NA
❑ NE
acres determination?
17. Does the facility lack adequate acreage for land application?
❑ Yes
vl No
❑ NA
❑ NE,`
18. Is there a lack of properly operating waste application equipment?
❑ Yes
� No
❑ NA
❑ NE
Required Records & Documents
_1
V
19. Did the facility fail to have the Certificate of Coverage & Permit readily available?
❑ Yes
Cffl No
❑ NA
❑ NE
20. Does the facility fail to have all components of the CAWMP readily available? If yes, check
❑ Yes
�No
❑ NA
❑1�NE
the appropriate box.
❑WUP ❑Checklists ❑Design ❑Maps ❑ Lease Agreements
❑Other:
21. Does record keeping need improvement? If yes, check the appropriate box below.
0Yes
❑ No
❑ NA
❑ NE
Weekly Freeboar lysis 48�yStS'
'Transf rs
❑ wosihert�
Ramfa 9Stoskit Crop Yiel E3120 Minuto 1, speoliaps n Aannthll.+ r ^ tx
'fan r.,sP�
-Els4tt�
22. Did the facility fail to install and maintain a rain gauge?
❑ Yes
D!�No
❑ NA
❑ NE
23. If selected, did the facility fail to install and maintain rainbreakers on irrigation equipment?
❑ Yes
KNo
❑ NA
❑ NE
Page 2 of 21412015 Continued

Facili Number: cO- ®, Date of Inspection:
24. Did the facility fail to calibrate waste applilon equipment as required by the permit? ❑ Yes [K No
25. Is the facility out of compliance with permit conditions related to sludge? If yes, check ❑ Yes eNo
the appropriate box(es) below..
❑ Failure to complete annual sludge survey ❑ Failure to develop a POA for sludge levels
❑ Non -compliant sludge levels in any lagoon
List structure(s) and date of first survey indicating non-compliance:
26. Did the facility fail provide documentation of an actively certified operator in charge? ❑ Yes � No
27. Did the facility fail to secure a phosphorus loss assessments (PLAT) certification? ❑ Yes ® No
Other Issues
28. Did the facility fail to properly dispose of dead animals with 24 hours and/or document
and report mortality rates that were higher than normal?
29. At the time of the inspection did the facility pose an odor or air quality concern?
If yes, contact a regional Air Quality representative immediately.
30. Did the facility fail to notify the Regional Office of emergency situations as required by the
permit? (i.e., discharge, freeboard problems, over -application)
31. Do subsurface tile drains exist at the facility? If yes, check the appropriate box below.
V9 Application Field ❑ Lagoon/Storage Pond ❑ Other:
32. Were any additional problems noted which cause non-compliance of the permit or CAWMP?
33. Did the Reviewer/Inspector fail to discuss review/inspection with an on -site representative?
34. Does the facility require a follow-up visit by the same agency?
❑NA ❑NE
❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes E No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes U No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes EffNo ❑ NA ❑ NE
M Yes ❑ No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes gNo
❑ Yes CKNo
❑ NA ❑ NE
❑NA ❑NE
❑ NA ❑ NE
Comments (refer to question #): Explain any YES answers and/or any additional recommendations or any other comments.
Use drawings of facility to better explain situations (use additional pages as necessary).
-Sole, ihov ;E Due 2-0k? VSti: '7A9,, lbo .towo 6+,t. 1J tmwR")
C/Ittt3RARa1S? rp-S 7(l- Ib3'foot, 6*� (iRMOCAs-T)
r-an1Ce LWE au ht61-t Pock RO ? Yes tr wAs t'_GM+_CD
G-lfi"fCs ?-6PUrC&o o,J dA t_6- VONAI? KJO 6D2sN"T- e ul-,.J 1 d
a, ktsp nW e(e 0" ",4#A cc vze� t&_t3 Awn 8v,L l,; D U41&* <3'10- M EL64TS,
ptREet teUACrF tAM T(
S+r�ts+r s'>'��-L►t2e aoueao � �-VE`f QQII.s `�
Stws of P-mow 50wr curia 64e6W U. rjrj ewvjwcts .eARIAO o
g� ftaR4AQQ MARkR- Nis Mww-t1t'sj cRots ep'k
Ie� BAe6- Fce-c-o Bq aft t4jso Ijtry- wAaPsA QkeW 15 D�upso /d�f� huts
AIO 6WISs olio t cuk,slPoR (b Lwrr ok ce 13Ack A iTTO&JAL
E o NS tOENz 4 t LV rajaaZ Al- Jtn6 B►aU t S I UAG E I R-P U &V� `�' �c6csP. !�
t•1 RP.wG�t�l. � FR-ssBtxacc0 R&�205 F�2ann Ulrrt �C�(g� 6A2s.Y �1� '�
Reviewer/Inspector Name:
Reviewer/Inspector Signatui
Page 3 of 3
Phone: 33G'4-06" 4A93
Date: & ILO ( Q
21412015

Type of Visit 0 Compliance Inspection 0 Operation Review 0 Structure Evaluation 0 Technical Assistance
Reason for Visit: ® Routine 0 Complaint 0 Follow-up 0 Referral 0 Emergency 0 Other 0 Denied Access
Date of Visit: �/- L/OI'Zi�S /Arrival Time: Ul ! oo Departure Time: County: 14/1 1kcy
Farm Name: A; !/. p li(J P✓tj15 Owner Email:
Owner Name:
Mailing Address:
yL
Region: IANO
Phone: `o-r.n 3 36-
od•ft'i ztt
Physical Address:
_ �e�� 3s6 9z 0606 Facility Contact: �j1Zrl W eS �O/Z Title: Phone:
OnsiteRepresentative: / Integrator:
Certified Operator: Certification Number:
Back-up Operator:
Location of Farm:
Latitude:
Certification Number:
Longitude:
Swine
Wean to Finish
Design Current
Capacity Pop. Wet Poultry
La er
Design
Capacity
Current
Pop.
Cattle
DairyCow
Design C•unrent
Capacity Pop.
Wean to Feeder
Non -La er
Da' Calf
Feeder to Finish
Da' Heifer
Farrow to Wean
Farrow to Feeder
Farrow to Finish
Dr. P,oW
Layers
Design
Ca aci_
Current
P.o P.
Cow
Non -Dairy
Beef Stocker
Gilts
Non -Layers
Beef Feeder
Boars
Pullets
Beef Brood Cow
Qther
Other
Turkeys
TurkeyPoults
Other
Discharges and Stream Impacts
1. Is any discharge observed from any part of the operation?
Discharge originated at: ❑ Structure ❑ Application Field ❑ Other:
a. Was the conveyance man-made?
b. Did the discharge reach waters of the State? (If yes, notify DWR)
c. What is the estimated volume that reached waters of the State (gallons)?
d. Does the discharge bypass the waste management system? (If yes, notify DWR)
2. Is there evidence of a past discharge from any part of the operation?
3. Were there any observable adverse impacts or potential adverse impacts to the waters
of the State other than from a discharge?
❑ Yes ® No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes ❑ No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes ❑ No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes
❑ No
❑ NA
❑ NE
[:]Yes
® No
❑ NA
❑ NE
[-]Yes
KLNo
❑ NA
❑ NE
Page 1 of 3 21412014 Continued

Facility Number: - • Date of Inspection:
Waste Collection & Treatment
4. Is storage capacity (structural plus storm storage plus heavy rainfall) less than adequate?
❑ Yes
® No
❑ NA
❑ NE
a. If yes, is waste level into the structural freeboard?
❑ Yes
[—]No
❑ NA
❑ NE
' Structure I Structure 2 Structure 3 Structure 4
Structure 5
Structure 6
Identifier: W S f re
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
(i.e., large trees, severe erosion, seepage, etc.)
6. Are there structures on -site which are not properly addressed and/or managed through a
❑ Yes
JENo
❑ NA
❑ NE
waste management or closure plan?
If any of questions 4-6 were answered yes, and the situation poses an immediate public health or environmental
threat,
notify DWR
7. Do any of the structures need maintenance or improvement?
❑ Yes
0 No
❑ NA
❑ NE
8. Do any of the structures lack adequate markers as required by the permit?
❑ Yes
RNo
❑ 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
t&No
❑ NA
❑ NE
maintenance or improvement?
Waste Application
10. Are there any required buffers, setbacks, or compliance alternatives that need
[—]Yes
® No
❑ NA
❑ NE
maintenance or improvement?
11. Is there evidence of incorrect land application? If yes, check the appropriate box below. ❑ Yes � No ❑ NA
❑ Excessive Ponding ❑ Hydraulic Overload ❑ Frozen Ground ❑ Heavy Metals (Cu, Zn, etc.)
❑ PAN ❑ PAN > 10% or 10 lbs. ❑ Total Phosphorus ❑ Failure to Incorporate Manure/Sludge into Bare Soil
❑ Outside of Acceptable Crop Window ❑ Evidence of Wind Drift ❑ Application Outside of Approved Area
12. Crop Type(s):
13. Soil Type(s):
14. Do the receiving crops differ from those designated in the CAWMP?
15. Does the receiving crop and/or land application site need improvement?
16. Did the facility fail to secure and/or operate per the irrigation design or wettable
acres determination?
17. Does the facility lack adequate acreage for land application?
18. Is there a lack of properly operating waste application equipment?
Required Records & Documents
19. Did the facility fail to have the Certificate of Coverage & Permit readily available?
20. Does the facility fail to have all components of the CAWMP readily available? If yes, check
the appropriate box.
❑ NE
❑ Yes
� No
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Yes
® No
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Yes
® No
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Yes � No
❑ Yes W No
❑ Yes Q No
[]Yes Eq No
❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ WUP ❑Checklists ❑ Design ❑ Maps ❑ Lease Agreements ❑Other:
21. Does record keeping need improvement? , ❑ Yes [3No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Waste Application Weekly Freeboard Z Waste Analysis EaSoil Analysis E3AN'a� ® Weather Code
.1741 Rainfall fZStocking ® Crop Yield ❑ t 28into P +� © Monthly and 1" Rainfall Inspections �3 y
22. Did the facility fail to install and maintain a rain gauge? ❑ Yes No ❑ NA ❑ NE
23. If selected, did the facility fail to install and maintain rainbreakers on irrigation equipment? ❑ Yes ❑ No aNA ❑ NE
Page 2 of 3 21412014 Continued

Facility Number: - 03 . jDate of Inspection: — ycy AtS
24. Did the facility fail to calibrate waste application equipment as required by the permit? ❑ Yes No
25. Is the facility out of compliance with permit conditions related to sludge? If yes, check ❑ Yes ❑ No
the appropriate box(es) below.
❑ Failure to complete annual sludge survey ❑ Failure to develop a POA for sludge levels
❑ Non -compliant sludge levels in any lagoon
List structme(s) and date of first survey indicating non-compliance:
26. Did the facility fail to provide documentation of an actively certified operator in charge?
27. Did the facility fail to secure a phosphorus loss assessments (PLAT) certification?
Other Issues
28. Did the facility fail to properly dispose of dead animals with 24 hours and/or document
and report mortality rates that were higher than normal?
29. At the time of the inspection did the facility pose an odor or air quality concern?
If yes, contact a regional Air Quality representative immediately.
30. Did the facility fail to notify the Regional Office of emergency situations as required by the
permit? (i.e., discharge, freeboard problems, over -application)
31. Do subsurface tile drains exist at the facility? If yes, check the appropriate box below.
Application Field ❑ Lagoon/Storage Pond ❑ Other:
32. Were any additional problems noted which cause non-compliance of the permit or CAWMP?
33. Did the Reviewer/Inspector fail to discuss review/inspection with an on -site representative?
34. Does the facility require a follow-up visit by the same agency?
❑NA ❑NE
t®.NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes
jD No
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Yes
Q No
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Yes
ID No
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Yes ® No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes 0 No ❑ NA ❑ NE
21 Yes ❑ No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes Q No
[—]Yes No
❑ Yes No
❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ NA ❑ NE
❑NA ❑NE
(Comments (refer to question ii): Explain any YES answers and/or any additional recommendations or any other comments.- .I
Use drawings of facility to better explain situations (use additional oases as-necessarv).
Soy/ Sn`� e� �ue / O// — A C) flee Lf 6 hrf EN4re. /z/3ll Zol5
�. Vp-a//l�r�on SST. ulov�5dN TI��S oY S�Ytawl �z.Il�n�S/e5 b- �21�i..d�n]�t��u- Oarp/1'�/�
ftt Jdi..1 Ijc, r wWc`j T((��Mwi Cfea1�j
� ?%� �- Wu+'K ON /Hvv�n, �etcl'E:rf a/ �`-.nit rl eti
z0 I N (crn v t�� %
1 tiD wlF� (�tl`�'� 4 QcG� Co,�na
/QCl(,Cer O I I/- // /[/,� �j)/9 leV-fJrnOv2?�nrtIi ne aR ld9PK1 qv
r/� -71,01 / /,, V I— -7! 1 � I I S leed j rL d5 II - i 1 �' KL tl / l r r
Reviewer/Inspector Name:
Reviewer/Inspector Signature:
Page 3 of 3
%t s k- e/1 o�zov
Phone: [3V - 77G -7j?
Date: / -Zy — 7—el
214,12014

for Visit: 0 Routine 0 Complaint 0 Follow-up 0 Referral
Other U Denied Access
Date of Visit: 10( Arrival Time: b Q� Departure Time: �- S County:
Farm Name:644 t��-,� �"� p H W W Fa rm.5
Owner Name: c4Iyi JL,:5+o17
Owner Email:
Region: W5R-0
Phone: arm 9a 1- 336 '
Mailing Address: 0 Fa-1 1/ je Lo Ind , , B o 6 le_r, MC. ;Z � 6 66
Physical Address:
Facility Contact: t 1 I eM w g $ fo ✓t Title:
Onsite Representative:
Certified Operator:
Back-up Operator:
Location of Farm:
Latitude:
Phone: C l a 7— 06 0
Integrator:
Certification Number:
Certification Number:
Longitude:
u s H w y�/ AJ Hvjy /V .5j
pa5-F ,Pjoom6'IQ Fo-l!
Viet 2de
Farm
011
Design Current
Design Current
Design Current
Swine
Capacity Pop.
Wet Poultry Capacity Pop.
Cattle
Capacity Pop.
Wean to Finish
I
ILayer I
Dairy Cow
Wean [o Feeder
I
INon-Layer
I
Dairy Calf
Feeder to sh
Dairy Heifer
Farrow to an
Design Current
Dry Cow
FartowtoFeeder
Dy+P,ouI Ca aci P,o P.
Non -Dairy
Farrow to Finish
I Layers
Beef Stocker
Wo
Gilts
Non -Layers
Beef Feeder
Boars
I
Pullets
I
jBecfBroodCow
Turkeys
Other
Turkey Poults
Other
Other
Discharges and Stream Impacts
1. Is any discharge observed from any part of the operation?
Discharge originated at ❑ Structure ❑ Application Field ❑ Other:
a. Was the conveyance man-made?
b. Did the discharge reach waters of the State? (If yes, notify DWR)
c. What is the estimated volume that reached waters of the State (gallons)?
d. Does the discharge bypass the waste management system? (If yes, notify DWR)
2. Is there evidence of a past discharge from any part of the operation?
3. Were there any observable adverse impacts or potential adverse impacts to the waters
of the State other than from a discharge?
❑ Yes W No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes ❑ No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes ❑ No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes ❑ No ❑ NA ❑ NE
�❑/Yes No ❑ NA ❑ NE
I YI Yes ❑ No ❑ NA ❑ NE
Page I of 3 21412014 Continued

Facility Number: Date of Inspection: _ ,2,0 13
Waste Collection & Treatment
4. Is storage capacity (structural plus storm storage plus heavy rainfall) less than adequate? ❑ Yes X
No ❑ NA ❑ NE
a. If yes, is waste level into the structural freeboard? ❑ Yes ❑ No ❑ NA ❑ NE
Structure 1 Structure 2 Structure 3 Structure 4 Structure 5 Structure 6
Identifier: w 5 P
Spillway?:
Designed Freeboard (in):
Observed Freeboard (in):
5. Are there any immediate threats to the integrity of any of the structures observed? ❑ Yes No ❑ NA ❑ NE
(i.e., large trees, severe erosion, seepage, etc.)
6. Are there structures on -site which are not properly addressed and/or managed through a ❑ Yes XNo ❑ NA ❑ NE
waste management or closure plan?
If any of questions 4-6 were answered yes, and the situation poses an immediate public health or environmental threat, notify DWR
7. Do any of the structures need maintenance or improvement? ❑ Yes] No ❑ NA ❑ NE
8. Do any of the structures lack adequate markers as required by the permit? ❑ Yes No ❑ NA ❑ NE
(not applicable to roofed pits, dry stacks, and/or wet stacks)
9. Does any part of the waste management system other than the waste structures require ❑ Yes t<No ❑ NA ❑ NE
maintenance or improvement?
Waste Apulication
�/
10. Are there any required buffers, setbacks, or compliance alternatives that need
❑ Yes QJQ No
❑ NA
❑ NE
maintenance or improvement?
j�
11. Is there evidence of incorrect land application? If yes, check the appropriate box below.
❑ Yes 0 No
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Excessive Pending ❑ Hydraulic Overload ❑ Frozen Ground ❑ Heavy Metals (Cu, Zn, etc.)
❑ PAN ❑ PAN > 10% or 10 lbs. ❑ Total Phosphorus ❑ Failure to Incorporate
Manure/Sludge into
Bare Soil
❑ Outside of Acceptable Crop Window ❑ Evidence of Wind Drift ❑ Application Outside of Approved Area
12. Crop Type(s): C-Arn Av �D an &4,4LA
I
13. Soil Type(s):
14. Do the receiving crops differ from those designated in the CAWMP?
❑ Yes L No
❑ NA
❑ NE
15. Does the receiving crop and/or land application site need improvement?
❑ Yes No
❑ NA
❑ NE
16. Did the facility fail to secure and/or operate per the irrigation design or wettable
to
❑ Yes [—]No
NA
❑ NE
acres determination?
17. Does the facility lack adequate acreage for land application?
y(
❑ Yes 9C I No
❑ NA
❑ NE
18. Is there a lack of properly operating waste application equipment?
❑ Yes Y N' o
❑ NA
❑ NE
Required Records & Documents
19. Did the facility fail to have the Certificate of Coverage & Permit readily available?
❑ Yes No
❑ NA
❑ NE
20. Does the facility fail to have all components of the CAWMP readily available? If yes, check
❑ Yes No
❑ NA
❑ NE
the appropriate box.
❑ WUP ❑Checklists ❑ Design ❑ Maps ❑ Lease Agreements ❑Other:
21. Does record keeping need i provement? [:]Yes ❑ No ONA [_]NE
❑Waste Applic ion ekly Freeboard Waste Analysis Soil Analysis �iYasteansfers Weather Code
[Rainfall Stocking Crop Yield r]" "� Monthly and 1" Rainfall Inspections
22. Did the facility fail to install and maintain a rain gauge? ❑ Yes J�ff`No ❑ NA ❑ NE
23. If selected, did the facility fail to install and maintain rainbreakers on irrigation equipment? ❑ Yes [:]No _Q'NA ❑ NE
Page 2 of 3 21412014 Continued

Facility Number: 1 7 _ Q 1
Date of Inspection: Oj �(
24. Did the facility fail to calibrate waste app [cation equipment as required by the permit? ❑ Yes V(INo ❑ NA ❑ NE
25. Is the facility out of compliance with permit conditions related to sludge? If yes, check ❑ Yes ('"" No ❑ NA ❑ NE
the appropriate box(es) below. X
❑ Failure to complete annual sludge survey ❑ Failure to develop a POA for sludge levels
❑ Non -compliant sludge levels in any lagoon is
List structure(s) and date of first survey indicating non-compliance:
26. Did the facility fail to provide documentation of an actively certified operator in charge?
27. Did the facility fail to secure a phosphorus loss assessments (PLAT) certification?
Otherlssues
28. Did the facility fail to properly dispose of dead animals with 24 hours and/or document
and report mortality rates that were higher than normal?
29. At the time of the inspection did the facility pose an odor or air quality concern?
If yes, contact a regional Air Quality representative immediately.
30. Did the facility fail to notify the Regional Office of emergency situations as required by the
permit? (i.e., discharge, freeboard problems, over -application)
3 1 1subsurface tile drains exist at the facility? If yes, check the appropriate box below.
Application Field ❑ Lagoon/Storage Pond ❑ Other:
32. Were any additional problems noted which cause non-compliance of the permit or CAWMP?
33. Did the Reviewer/Inspector fail to discuss review/inspection with an on -site representative?
34. Does the facility require a follow-up visit by the same agency?
❑ Yes No
IX� ❑ Yes No
❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes �(No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes [(No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes [ No ❑ NA ❑ NE
0(Yes ❑ No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes gNo ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes %No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes M No ❑ NA ❑ NE
(Comments (refer to question #): Explain any YES answers and/or any additional recommendations or any other comments. I
Usgdtawings of facility to better explain situations (use additional pages as necessary).
ter I
I
L '
MW
1
Reviewer/Inspector Name: Phone: -7-71
Reviewer/Inspector Signature: Avis, A_C� Date: �Vaol.2(01V_
Page 3 of 3 V412014

Type of Visit: Compliance Inspection Operation Review Q Structure Evaluation Q Technical Assistance
Reason for Visit: '6 Routine Q Complaint Q Follow-up Q Referral Q Emergency Q Other Q Denied Access
Date of Visit: Arrival Time: Departure Time: p� County: Region: RO
Farm Name: A • f i , f W . Farm5 Owner Email:
Owner Name: Cy lDAft W e-S-�Qr Phone: 'F 1 a-J - 33 b 9
Mailing Address:
Physical Address:
Facility Contact: & Lehn W -5io" Title:
Onsite Representative:
Certified Operator:
Back-up Operator:
Phone: C q .R-%-0lo Olio
Integrator:
Certification Number:
Certification Number:
Location of Farm: Latitude: ,3& 01 3 (D Longitude: $ l l ,3 S
�s HWy 4 112J N., +o Wy
s, pQsf 8UW---,
-FO-il VieA0 PCA,,
rarM
Design Current
Desigp
Current
Design
Current
wine Capacity Pop.
Wet Poultry Capacity
Pop.
Cattle Capacity
Pop.
oFinish
La er
Dai Cow
Feeder
Non -La er
Da Calf
eder to Finish
Da Heiferarrow
to Weanrrent
D , P,oult . Ga achy
Po
D Cow
[FlOther
arrow to Feeder
-Dairyarrow
to Finish
La ers
Beef Stocker
ilts
Non -La ers
Beef Feeder
oars
Pullets
Beef Brood Cow
Turke s
Turke Poults
Other
Discharges and Stream Impacts
1. Is any discharge observed from any part of the operation?
Discharge originated at: ❑ Structure ❑ Application Field ❑ Other:
a. Was the conveyance man-made?
b. Did the discharge reach waters of the State? (If yes, notify DWQ)
c. What is the estimated volume that reached waters of the State (gallons)?
d. Does the discharge bypass the waste management system? (If yes, notify DWQ)
2. Is there evidence of a past discharge from any part of the operation?
3. Were there any observable adverse impacts or potential adverse impacts to the waters
of the State other than from a discharge?
[-]Yes >(No
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes
❑ No
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Yes
VNo
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Yes
9e,o
❑ NA
❑ NE
Page I of 21412011 Condnued

Facility Number; - Q • Date of Inspection:
Waste Collection & Treatment
4. Is storage capacity (structural plus storm storage plus heavy rainfall) less than adequate? ❑Yes Ilvo ❑ NA ❑ NE
a. If yes, is waste level into the structural freeboard? ❑ Yes No ❑ NA ❑ NE
O Structure l Structure 2 Structure 3 Structure 4 Structure 5 Structure 6
2 Identifier: W 5 Q
Spillway?:
Designed Freeboard (in):
Observed Freeboard (in): 120
5. Are there any immediate threats to the integrity of any of the structures observed?
❑ Yes
Wo
❑ NA
❑ NE
(i.e., large trees, severe erosion, seepage, etc.);.,
6. Are there structures on -site which are not properly addressed and/or managed through a
❑ Yes
�"
I �yrvo
❑ NA
❑ NE
waste management or closure plan?
7`
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
NIo
❑ NA
❑ NE
8. Do any of the structures lack adequate markers as required by the permit?
❑ Yes
A
❑ NA
❑ NE
(not applicable to roofed pits, dry stacks, and/or wet stacks)
TT
9. Does any part of the waste management system other than the waste structures require ❑ Yes o ❑ NA ❑ NE
maintenance or improvement? �C
Waste Application ` /
10. Are there any required buffers, setbacks, or compliance alternatives that need ❑ Yes '��°1"'" ❑ NA ❑ NE
maintenance or improvement?
11. Is there evidence of incorrect land application? If yes, check the appropriate box below. JKYes ❑ No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Excessive Pending ❑ Hydraulic Overload ❑ Frozen Ground ❑ Heavy Metals (Cu, Zn, etc.)
❑ PAN I YI PAN > 10% or 10 lbs. ❑ Total Phosphorus ❑ Failure to Incorporate Manure/Sludge into Bare Soil
❑ Outside of Acceptable Crop Window ❑ Evidence of Wind Drift ❑ Application Outside of Approved Area
` 12. Crop Type(s): or h 1 5n=l) Q rla 1 L
13. Soil Type(s)
14. Do the receiving crops differ from those designated in the CAW -AP? ❑ Yes ]< No ❑ NA ❑ NE
15. Does the receiving crop and/or land application site need improvement? ❑ Yes O(No ❑ NA ❑ NE
16. Did the facility fail to secure and/or operate per the irrigation design or wettable ❑ Yes ❑ No �IA ❑ NE
acres determination?
17. Does the facility lack adequate acreage for land application?
❑ Yes
XNo
❑ NA
❑ NE
18: Is there a lack of properly operating waste application equipment?
❑ Yes
WNo
❑ NA
❑ NE
Required Records & Documents
19. Did the facility fail to have the Certificate of Coverage & Permit readily available?
❑ Yes
N No
❑ NA
❑ NE
20. Does the facility fail to have all components of the CAWMP readily available? If yes, check
❑ Yes
9No
❑ NA
❑ NE
the appropriate box.
❑WUP ❑Checklists ❑Design ❑ Maps ❑ Lease Agreements
❑Other:
21. Does record keeping need irprovement? I
❑ Yes
No
❑ NE
❑ aste Applic ion L`VJ/ eekly Freeboard ❑ Waste Analysts Soil Analysis
n" rise T ` s
WA
Weather
Code
Rainfall &SStocking Crop Yield E3 wo Min"to lnsp^^fi onthly and V Rainfall
Inspections
E "O- 649
22. Did the facility fail to install and maintain a rain gauge?
[—]Yes
;KNo
[:] NA
❑ NE
23. If selected, did the facility fail to install and maintain rainbreakers on irrigation equipment?
❑ Yes
❑ No
17I NA
❑ NE
Page 2 of 3
21412011 Continued

Facility Number: zf 7- •I Date of Inspection: $ 3
24. Did the facility fail to calibrate waste application equipment as required by the permit? ❑ Yes P No ❑ NA ❑ NE
25. Is the facility out of compliance with permit conditions related to sludge? If yes, check ❑ Yes [—]No PjrNA ❑ NE
the appropriate box(es) below. 7
❑ Failure to complete annual sludge survey [:]Failure to develop a POA for sludge levels
❑ Non -compliant sludge levels in any lagoon
List structure(s) and date of first survey indicating non-compliance:
26. Did the facility fail to provide documentation of an actively certified operator in charge? [:]Yes No ❑ NA ❑ NE
27. Did the facility fail to secure a phosphorus loss assessments (PLAT) certification? ❑ Yes %No ❑ NA ❑ NE
Other Issues �/
28. Did the facility fail to properly dispose of dead animals with 24 hours and/or document ❑ Yes �]Q No ❑ NA [3 NE
and report mortality rates that were higher than normal? j�
29. At the time of the inspection did the facility pose an odor or air quality concern?
If yes, contact a regional Air Quality representative immediately.
30. Did the facility fail to notify the Regional Office of emergency situations as required by the
permit? (i.e., discharge, freeboard problems, over -application)
❑ Yes XNo ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes PKNo ❑ NA ❑ NE
31.Do subsurface tile drains exist at the facility? If yes, check the appropriate box below.
❑ Yes
PKNo
❑ NA
❑ NE
rr
Application Field ❑ Lagoon/Storage Pond ❑ Other:
32. Were any additional problems noted which cause non-compliance of the permit or CAWMP?
❑ Yes
kNo
❑ NA
❑ NE
33. Did the Reviewer/Inspector fail to discuss review/inspection with an on -site representative?
❑ Yes
X-,,rN'o
❑ NA
❑ NE
34. Does the facility require a follow-up visit by the same agency?
❑ Yes
tc
� �V o
❑ NA
❑ NE
Comments (refer to question #): Explain any YES answers and/or any additional recommendations or any other comments.
Use drawings of facility to better explain situations (use additional pages as necessarv).
..
Wo.5te- manogen%e + Out loi aaros -read
1 I t TeP� 0-ire-0- &Cross 5 + -f_Q_rA.? Jku CAft11j"_e r
Neat Sol I +es+ dvt° i to 010►4• dlLt-,b, aot3 next v i
4. Nyui a-Vi I rocilon Auer i en a014.
al �o-wt tot � � No
P4N, w� '�QN ��01
ao 0 hQ Q.s+e A, La X(5
Reviewer/Inspector Name:
Reviewer/Inspector Signature:
Page 3 of 3
Phone: :M f0 1l I • S a-8 9
Date: .61 a'l Rz 13
2V2011

Type of Visit: F, Compliance Inspection O Operation Review O Structure Evaluation 0 Technical Assistance
Reason for Visit: (vRoutine 0 Complaint 0 Follow-up 0 Referral 0 Emergency 0 Other 0 Denied Access
- Date of Visit:
Time: ® Departure Time: [ County: ( Region: C��
Farm Name: A, /Ntt , I�{ 10 FarM_n Owner Email: c/
Owner Name: l] IF,Y 1 V\ w P'5't"ot7 Phone: F q,? /_
Mailing Address: 1190 FQII y � � 2d Pi�MPK tJ � 6 Qlo
Physical Address:
Facility Contact: 6� ICI1 W P-5*0 r) Title:
Onsite Representative:
Certified Operator:
Back-up Operator:
Location of Farm:
Latitude:
)9 a7-660h
Integrator:
Certification Number:
Certification Number:
Longitude:
kJ5 HWy a.l N. fo Hwy
lBSt (J4s+
600lher,
Fc><.tl Vi'e t,v R cl.
Design.
Swiae Capacity
Wean to Finish
Current
Pop.
Wet Poultry
I ILayer
Design
Capacity
I
Current
Pop.
Cattle
Cow
Design Current
CapaciIL ty Pop.
Wean to Feeder
[Non -Layer
I
Calf
Feeder to Finish
Farrow to Wean
Farrow to Feeder
Farrow to Finish
D . + P,oul
Layers
Design
Ca aci
Current
P.o
Da' Heifer
D Cow
Non-Da6
Beef Stocker
0Q
Gilts
Non -Layers
Beef Feeder
Boars
Pullets
lBeef Brood Cow
Other
Other_j
Turke s
Turke Poults
Other
Discharges and Stream Impacts
1. Is any discharge observed from any part of the operation?
Discharge originated at: ❑ Structure ❑ Application Field ❑ Other:
a. Was the conveyance man-made?
b. Did the discharge reach waters of the State? (If yes, notify DWQ)
c. What is the estimated volume that reached waters of the State (gallons)?
d. Does the discharge bypass the waste management system? (If yes, notify DWQ)
2. Is there evidence of a past discharge from any part of the operation?
3. Were there any observable adverse impacts or potential adverse impacts to the waters
of the State other than from a discharge?
❑ Yes 19
No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes ❑ No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes ❑ No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes
❑ No
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑,(, Yes
4 No
❑ NA
❑ NE
1X1 Yes
❑ No
❑ NA
❑ NE
Page I of 21412011 Continued

Facili Number: . Date of Inspection:
/
Waste Collection & Treatment
4. Is storage capacity (structural plus storm storage plus heavy rainfall) less than adequate?
❑ Yes
No
❑ NA
❑ NE
a. If yes, is waste level into the structural freeboard?
❑ Yes
No
❑ NA
❑ NE
a Structure 1 Structure 2' Structure 3 Structure 4
Structure 5
Structure 6
(� b Identifier: Vj QS -'e Pc�
Spillway?:
Designed Freeboard (in):
Observed Freeboard (in):
5. Are there any immediate threats to the integrity of any of the structures observed?
❑ Yes
No
❑ NA
❑ NE
(i.e., large trees, severe erosion, seepage, etc.)
6. Are there structures on -site which are not properly addressed and/or managed through a
❑ Yes
�f
I RI No
❑ NA
❑ NE
waste management or closure plan?
i`�
If any of questions 4-6 were answered yes, and the situation poses an immediate public health or environmental threat, notify DWQ
7. Do any of the structures need maintenance or improvement? ❑ Yes $No ❑ NA ❑ NE
8. Do any of the structures lack adequate markers as required by the permit? ❑ Yes fkrNo ❑ NA ❑ NE
(not applicable to roofed pits, dry stacks, and/or wet stacks)
9. Does any part of the waste management system other than the waste structures require Yes ❑ No ❑ NA ❑ NE
maintenance or improvement?
Waste Application
10. Are there any required buffers, setbacks, or compliance alternatives that need ❑ Yes [!�No ❑ NA ❑ NE
maintenance or improvement?
11. Is there evidence of incorrect land application? If yes, check the appropriate box below. ❑ Yes XNo ❑ 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 Win W.
Evidence of Wind Drift ❑ Application Outside of Approved Area
}v V0 C, LC VRA e)
12. Crop Type(s): 1 M o br01;11 t AM) S k 4P
13. Soil Type(s)
14. Do the receiving crops differ from those designated in the CAWMP?
[—]Yes
b(No
❑ NA
❑ NE
15. Does the receiving crop and/or land application site need improvement?
❑ Yes
k(No
❑ NA
❑ NE
16. Did the facility fail to secure and/or operate per the irrigation design or wettable
❑ Yes
❑ No
%NA
❑ NE
acres determination?
17. Does the facility lack adequate acreage for land application?
❑ Yes
No
❑ NA
❑ NE
18. Is there a lack of properly operating waste application equipment?
❑ Yes
No
❑ NA
❑ NE
Required Records & Documents
19. Did the facility fail to have the Certificate of Coverage &Permit readily available?
❑Yes
No
❑ NA
❑ NE
20. Does the facility fail to have all components of the CAWMP readily available? If yes, check
El
No
❑ NA
❑ NE
the appropriate box.
❑ WUP ❑Checklists ❑ Design ❑ Maps ❑ Lease Agreements ❑Other:
21. does record keeping need'rovement? Ifj�es,.che a�p�Analysis[
Yes ❑ No N� ❑ NE
Waste Applica on eekly Freeboar ❑Wastenalysis 111 "ste Frm6fE[s Weather Code
�ainfall Stocking WC, Yield �20 Minute Inspections Monthly and V Rainfall Inspections LD4fuagc coarocr
22. Did the facility fail to install and maintain a rain gauge? ❑ Yes Nf No E] NA ❑ NE
23. If selected, did the facility fail to install and maintain rainbreakers on irrigation equipment? [:]Yes 7777❑-No PC
NA ❑ NE
Page 2 of 3 214412011 Continued

]Facility Number: 071• Date of Inspection:
24. Did the facility fail to calibrate waste application equipment as required by the permit?
❑ Yes
No
❑ NA
❑ NE
25. Is the facility out of compliance with permit conditions related to sludge? If yes, check
❑ Yes
❑ No
[;dNA
❑ NE
the appropriate box(es) below.
❑ Failure to complete annual sludge survey [:]Failure to develop a POA for sludge levels
❑ Non -compliant sludge levels in any lagoon
List structure(s) and date of first survey indicating non-compliance:
26. Did the facility fail to provide documentation of an actively certified operator in charge?
❑ Yes
No
❑ NA
❑ NE
27. Did the facility fail to secure a phosphorus loss assessments (PLAT) certification?
❑ Yes
No
TT
❑ NA
❑ NE
Other Issues
28. Did the facility fail to properly dispose of dead animals with 24 hours and/or document
❑ Yes
No
❑ NA
❑ NE
and report mortality rates that were higher than normal?
29. At the time of the inspection did the facility pose an odor or air quality concern?
❑ Yes
I yrvo
❑ NA
❑ NE
If yes, contact a regional Air Quality representative immediately.
7`
30. Did the facility fail to notify the Regional Office of emergency situations as required by the
❑ Yes
KNo
❑ NA
❑ NE
permit? (i.e., discharge, freeboard problems, over -application)
31. Do subsurface tile drains exist at the facility? If yes, check the appropriate box below.
Yes
❑ No
❑ NA
❑ NE
I Y1/Application Field ❑ Lagoon/Storage Pond ❑ Other:
32. Were any additional problems noted which cause non-compliance of the permit or CAWMP?
❑ Yes
�No
❑ NA
❑ NE
33. Did the Reviewer/Inspector fail to discuss review/inspection with an on -site representative?
❑ Yes
N� No
❑ NA
❑ NE
34. Does the facility require a follow-up visit by the same agency?
❑ Yes
['T�Jo
❑ NA
❑ NE
Comments (refer,to question #): Explain any YES,answers, and/or any,additional.recommendations,or any..other comments;
aOLa 5oi
- R �n of F b I d t I A's bew to ? fr� ax'eA Lxcrobs cmO1
-Ev idevyz o �vnaQ_S a(3'cte mode_ Feede '5 BCLcK
3 f�_u r\ o� �P �- w 0.5-E-e ©n l0+ o fFC f ca-d ?
v�m-V
p2_
d."
1a1 131 aocc;l- PAW CW
ql�l�
= az
I lbs
Iv��000_0.
Reviewer/Inspector Name:
Reviewer/Inspector Signature:
Page 3 of 3
Phone: ���- s agiS ag�
Date: I a�o� D
2141 011

Date of Visit: If./ ,t,,t,/ dtp�Prival TTiime: . 0 rE
Departure Time: �t ounty: W i �:�.5 Region:
Farm Name: A.H. + w . Fa f m5 Owner Emaiaill:`" 1
Owner Name: to(`- w P 5 -4-p n Phone: r�' Old-) - 3 ,3 6 Yj
Mailing Address:
Physical Address:
Facility Contact: I D IM k0est6U\ Title:
Onsite Representative:
Certified Operator:
Back-up Operator:
Location of Farm:
Phone: . { A 7 — 66 Q.4
Integrator:
Certification Number: a "f ? 5 -3
Certification Number:
Latitude: a to b 1 3 (1 Longitude: S1 1,9 .3-5-
4-w1 al N•
fib Nu�� 185� Past
Boorheri
fall U(e�
ad,
Swine
Wean to Finish
Design Current
Capacity Pop.
Wet Poultry
I iLayer
Design nt
u,,jjjrre
Capacity Pop.
Cattle
Dai Cow
Design Current
Capacity Pop.
Wean to Feeder
I jNon-Layer
I IDai
Calf
Feeder to Finish
Farrow to Wean
I) , P,oul
ILayers
Design Current
Ca aci + Po .
Dairy Heifer
Dry Cow
'
Farrow to Feeder
Farrow to Finish
Non-DairyQ
Beef Stocker
j
Gilts
Non -Layers
Beef Feeder
Boars
Pullets
Beef Brood Cow
Other
Other
Turke s
Turke Poults
Other
Discharges and Stream Impacts
1. Is any discharge observed from any part of the operation?
Discharge originated at: ❑ Structure ❑ Application Field ❑ Other:
a. Was the conveyance man-made?
b. Did the discharge reach waters of the State? (If yes, notify DWQ)
c. What is the estimated volume that reached waters of the State (gallons)?
d. Does the discharge bypass the waste management system? (If yes, notify DWQ)
2. Is there evidence of a past discharge from any part of the operation?
3. Were there any observable adverse impacts or potential adverse impacts to the waters
of the State other than from a discharge?
❑ Yes 0 No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes ❑ No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes ❑ No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes ❑ No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes tt No ❑ NA ❑ NE
1$ Yes ❑ No ❑ NA ❑ NE
Page I of 21412011 Continued

Facili Number: q- t) • Date of Ins ection:
Waste Collection & Treatment
4. Is storage capacity (structural plus storm storage plus heavy rainfall) less than adequate? ❑ Yes [� No
a. If yes, is waste level into the structural freeboard? ❑ Yes ❑ No
Structure I (� Structure 2 Structure 3
Identifier: W QS1-e. POrA
Spillway?:
Designed Freeboard (in):
Observed Freeboard (in): 54
❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ NA ❑ NE
Structure 4 Structure 5 Structure 6
5. Are there any immediate threats to the integrity of any of the structures observed?
(i.e., large trees, severe erosion, seepage, etc.)
6. Are there structures on -site which are not properly addressed and/or managed through a
waste management or closure plan?
Yes [)(No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes *o ❑ NA ❑ NE
If any of questions 4-6 were answered yes, and the situation poses an immediate public health or environmental threat, notify DWQ
7. Do any of the structures need maintenance or improvement?
❑ Yes XNo
❑ NA
❑ NE
8. Do any of the structures lack adequate markers as required by the permit?
❑ Yes �No
❑ NA
❑ NE
(not applicable to roofed pits, dry stacks, and/or wet stacks)
9. Does any part of the waste management system other than the waste structures
require ❑ Yes WNo
❑ NA
❑ NE
maintenance or improvement?
Waste Application
10. Are there any required buffers, setbacks, or compliance alternatives that need
❑ Yes M No
❑ NA
❑ NE
maintenance or improvement?
11. Is there evidence of incorrect land application?
/
❑ Yes I yTIO
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Excessive Ponding ❑ Hydraulic Overload ❑ Frozen Ground
❑ Heavy Metals (Cu, Zn, etc.)
❑ PAN ❑ PAN > 10% or 10 lbs. ❑ Total Phosphorus ❑ Failure
to Incorporate Manure/Sludge into
Bare Soil
❑ Outside of Acceptable Crop Window ❑ Evidence of Wind Drift
❑ Application Outside of Approved Area
12. Crop Type(s): [/Lt� ll/({t-Y�Y C14L4_41-1
13. Soil Type(s):
14. Do the receiving crops differ from those designated in the CAWMP?
❑ Yes
No
❑ NA
❑ NE
15. Does the receiving crop and/or land application site need improvement?
❑ Yes
No
❑ NA
❑ NE
16. Did the facility fail to secure and/or operate per the irrigation design or wettable
❑ Yes
❑ No
[XNA
❑ NE
acres determination?
T
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
`Ile No
7"`
❑ NA
❑ NE
Required Records & Documents
19. Did the facility fail to have the Certificate of Coverage &Permit readily available?
❑Yes
❑ NA
❑ NE
20. Does the facility fail to have all components of the CAWMP readily available? If yes, check
❑ Yes
No
❑ NA
❑ NE
the appropriate box.
❑WUP ❑Checklists ❑Design ❑ Maps ❑ Lease Agreements
❑Other:
21 oes record keeping need i provement?d4esrcw�� [—]Yes [—]No NA, ❑ NE
W ste Applicati W ekly Freeboard Waste Analysis Soil Analysis ,� r"ast T ^` -^ Bather Code
ainfall tricking Crop Yield 20 Minute Inspections Didmithly and N Rainfall Inspections QSledgu_ a
22. Did the facility fail to install and maintain a rain gauge? ❑ Yes �Io [—] NA ❑ NE
23. If selected, did the facility fail to install and maintain rainbreakers on irrigation equipment? ❑ Yes ❑ No [, NA ❑ NE
Page 2 of 3 21412011 Continued

Facili Number: q —j- Date of Inspection: &IIJ;E61
24. Did the facility fail to calibrate waste apppVtion equipment as required by the permit? - ❑ Yes oNo []NA [:]NE
25. Is the facility out of compliance with permit conditions related to sludge? If yes, check ❑ Yes [:]No NA ❑ NE
the appropriate box(es) below. r
❑ Failure to complete annual sludge survey ❑ Failure to develop a POA for sludge levels
❑ Non -compliant sludge levels in any lagoon
List structure(s) and date of first survey indicating non-compliance:
26. Did the facility fail provide documentation of an actively certified operator in charge?
❑ Yes
0 No
❑ NA
❑ NE
27. Did the facility fail to secure a phosphorus loss assessments (PLAT) certification?
❑ Yes
% No
❑ NA
❑ NE
Other Issues
28. Did the facility fail to properly dispose of dead animals with 24 hours and/or document
❑ Yes
� No
❑ NA
❑ NE
and report mortality rates that were higher than normal?
29. At the time of the inspection did the facility pose an odor or air quality concern?
❑ Yes
No
Pr
❑ NA
❑ NE
If yes, contact a regional Air Quality representative immediately.
30. Did the facility fail to notify the Regional Office of emergency situations as required by the
permit? (i.e., discharge, freeboard problems, over -application)
31. Dp subsurface tile drains exist at the facility? If yes, check the appropriate box below.
lib%,C,l Application Field ❑ Lagoon/Storage Pond ❑Other:
32. Were any additional problems noted which cause non-compliance of the permit or CAWMP?
33. Did the Reviewer/Inspector fail to discuss review/inspection with an on -site representative?
34. Does the facility require a follow-up visit by the same agency?
❑ Yes A/ I No ❑ NA ❑ NE
IYI Yes ❑ No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes PQ No
❑ [� N• Yes o
Yes [:]No
❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ NA ❑ NE
Comments (refer to question #): Explain any YES answers and/or any additional recommendations or any other comments:
Use 4raWings of facility to better explain situations (use additional pages as necessary).es S r
4.
d,u e to r a
aI aolo aotI.
co 1e-
SoiI +? aolo Contip(e-ted.
19 • �•-f-a-hs �'e�-r�d ? o
t0dl hex+ Vls rt—
(aP�earw� r k 2{�jn run-o�� -Frore b�hir.d the&/Uc�n• Suaae.s�
COrn� tot 25`i��OIIS}� VP�i$i$`i46f) i OU/0.1 I a 14
MvSF FeAce,Z Oa-rf Ca(le-i-�eS+3t,6116k Vt° P4-a ior\
°fS on
Alx3Q -6 Checf__ w�,n
V/5/.2011
Reviewer/Inspector Name: la to I 1
Reviewer/Inspector Signature:
Page 3 of 3
in
Evi JkA ee v -\ uw a 5fe.
5 {read
P
I o w 5 pots r n
rvn - off ;n+0
Phone: %7T 5-a$9
Date: aZ/�Lo!-Jo20��
21412011 /

C
Type of Visit
Compliance Inspection
0 Operation Review 0 Structure Evaluation
0 Technical Assistance
Reason for Visit
*Routine 0 Complaint
0 Follow up 0 Referral 0 Emergency
0 Other ❑ Denied Access
Date of Visit: E/ZA 21 # Arrival Time: N O.0_0A Departure Time: �� �,3� an County: W 11 [`GS Region: -WSRO
Farm Name: A, T l • Q '^'� Tvymf Owner Email: 1
Owner Name: W. L �ffd.%4A Phone: (r) 9 2/ " 3-TGi�
Mailing Address: % d r� �� V;tW P.j, l�eon�®r, n� G 2-re 0&
Physical Address: A
JM -
Facility Contact: G 1'_'A 0PU-k n / Title:
OnsiteRepresentative: / Gle'i t/-Je67an
Certified Operator: 0. 1
hJ6S4h
Back-up Operator:
Location of Farm:
Phone No: g Z-Z— 06 OLi
Integrator:
Operator Certification Number:
Back-up Certification Number:
Latitude: ©o �' M Longitude: ®o
72� IVi� (rWy r'd .JOU 1 'Pa s4 FooM� O r" it Vtia..l F-a./ 1;," 0� l.eT'�
Design Current
Design Current
Design Current
Swine C•apaci[v Population
We[ Poultry Capacity Population
Cattle C•apaci1y Population
❑ Wean to Finish
ID Layer I
❑ Dairy Cow
❑ Wean to Feeder
ILJ Non -Layer I
❑ Dairy Calf
❑ Feeder to Finish
❑ Dairy Heifer
❑ Farrow to Wean
❑ Farrow to Feeder
❑ Farrow to Finish
❑ Gilts
El Boars
Dry Poultry
_ Layers
❑
❑ Non -Layers
El Pullets
❑ Turkeys
❑ Dry Cow
on-Dairy00
KBeel' Stocker
❑Beef Feeder
❑ Beef Brood Co
n) i.e Q
Other
Number of Structures:
❑ Turkey Pouets
❑ Other
❑ Other
Discharges & Stream Impacts
1. Is any discharge observed from any part of the operation?
Discharge originated at: ❑ Structure ❑ Application Field ❑ Other
a. Was the conveyance man-made?
b. Did the discharge reach waters of the State? (If yes, notify DWQ)
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?
age 1 of 3
❑ Yes XNo ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes ❑ No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ NA
❑ NE
0
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes )<No
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ YesXNo
[]NA
❑ NE
12128104 Continued

Facility Number: — Q�7 • Date of Inspection 2 D t •
Waste Collection & Treatment /
4. Is storage capacity (structural plus storm storage plus heavy rainfall) less than adequate? El Yes pQ No El 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: A on
Spillway?:
Designed Freeboard (in):
Observed Freeboard (in): 70
�-
5. Are there any immediate threats to the integrity of any of the structures observed? ❑ Yes h No ❑ NA ❑ NE
(ie/ large trees, severe erosion, seepage, etc.)
6. Are there structures on -site which are not properly addressed and/or managed ❑ YeskNo ❑ NA ❑ NE
through a waste management or closure plan?
If any of questions 4-6 were answered yes, and the situation poses an immediate public health or environmental threat, notify DWQ
7. Do any of the structures need maintenance or improvement? ❑ Yes kNo ❑ NA ❑ NE
8. Do any of the strictures lack adequate markers as required by the permit? ❑ Yes XNo ❑ NA ❑ NE
(Not applicable to roofed pits, dry stacks and/or wet stacks)
9. Does any part of the waste management system other than the waste structures require ❑ Yes )�No ❑ NA ❑ NE
maintenance or improvement?
Waste Application
10. Are there any required buffers, setbacks, or compliance alternatives that need ❑ Yes No ❑ NA El NE
maintenance/improvement? '������..)1\,,,���rrrrrr
11. Is there evidence of incorrect application? If yes, check the appropriate box below. El Yes y(J No ❑ NA El NE
❑ Excessive Ponding El Hydraulic Overload El Frozen Ground El 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)
Im
14.
Do the receiving crops differ from those designated in the CAWMP?
El Yes
No ❑ NA
❑ NE
15.
Does the receiving crop and/or land application site need improvement?
❑ Yes
o ❑ NA
'
,❑
❑ NE
16.
Did the facility fail to secure and/or operate per the irrigation design or wettable acre determination ?
❑ Yes
\
NoX NA
❑ NE
17.
Does the facility lack adequate acreage for land application?
❑ Yes
No ❑ NA
❑ NE
18.
Is there a lack of properly operating waste application equipment?
❑ Yes
No ElNA
ElNE
Comments (refer to,question #): Explain -any YES answers and/or any recommendations or any.other comments '� _
Useedrawings.of facility to better explain situations. (use additional pages as necessary) ,, -;-
}G7T�L
3. �Of /0� evelo Je YYDM wJer A14 V/5;
Reviewer/Inspector Name r,' a k "
Phone: Sir
Reviewer/Inspector Signature:
Date: 12 O ZO
Page 2 of 3 12128104 Continued

Facility Number: — 03 *of Inspection 2 01 O •
_Required
Records & Documents
19.
Did the facility fail to have Certificate of Coverage & Permit readily available?
�/
M Yes
'❑C
El No
El NA
❑ NE
20.
Does the facility fail to have all components of the CAWMP readily available? If yes, check
Yes
)<No
❑ NA
❑ NE
the appropriate box. ❑ WUP ❑ Checklists ❑ Design ❑ Maps ❑ Other
21.
Does re rd keeping need improvement.
❑ Yes
XNo
❑ NA
❑ NE
Waste Application 2<eekly Freeboard aste Analysis - Soil A rl Analysis "
-
Rainfall Stocking 21crop Yield 3<onthly and 1" Rain Inspections EglVeather Code
22.
Did the facility fail to install and maintain a rain gauge?
❑ Yes
o
❑ NA
❑ NE
23.
If selected, did the facility fail to install and maintain rainbreakers on irrigation equipment?
❑ Yes
❑ No
gNA
❑ NE
24.
Did the facility fail to calibrate waste application equipment as required by the permit?
El Yes
91
[I NA
El 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
XNo
❑ NA
❑ NE
27.
Did the facility fail to secure a phosphorus loss assessment (PLAT) certification?
❑ Yes
>No
❑ NA
❑ NE
Other Issues
28.
Were any additional problems noted which cause non-compliance of the permit or CAWMP?
❑ Yes
No
❑ NA
❑ NE
29.
Did the facility fail to properly dispose of dead animals within 24 hours and/or document
No
❑ NA
❑ NE
and report the mortality rates that were higher than normal?
30.
At the time of the inspection did the facility pose an odor or air quality concern?
❑ Yes
XNo
ElNA
❑ 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
)j�No
❑ NA
❑ NE
. 33.
Does facility require a follow-up visit by same agency?
❑ Yes
XNo
❑ NA
❑ NE
/e4eJ /0
't
2 S, /AS I /Sn t7
If�'`�p�e�
2 /• 20/D � : l c,�q�/,7 Co,�.pl�/� ? 1J0. j%e skrt -Yo CoC�eu{- Sad � 'Fer7�` lO.
�q, l�•M;� no�—GV41&ae, �/�rn/� �er>vy tf%cr��tl� a Gle.ts nit ,
Dk�e_
n �XtL
O�ZDI Z
I.Igf�h'Mf�,i0 2/IGlid
�^%"� �1 b: Gb IS ID ✓
Page 3 of 3 11/18104

;1
of Visit (V Compliance Inspection 0 Operation Review 0 Structure Evaluation 0 Technical Assistance
Reason for Visit 0( Routine 0 Complaint 0 Follow up 0 Referral 0 Emergency 0 Other ❑ Denied Access
Date of Visit: f7 1 Arrival Time: DA��d Departure Time: ; QQ County: W) 5 Region: �O
Farm Name: A .14 l� fa//r�m5 Owner Email:) /
Owner Name: wStCln Phone: IilFL9�I'3162S
Mailing Address:
Physical Address: 56XAe,
Facility Contact: � IVA ""k'S-br) Title:
Onsite Representative: jj6 It v, Wes+o n
Certified Operator: �D -0-0 0 ' Wc5-�c h
Back-up Operator:
Location of Farm:
Phone No: 9 d"1 - 66 N6
Integrator:
Operator Certification Number:
Back-up Certification Number:
Latitude: DUO Longitude: ® ° ®1 ®-
US l .1 4a l N • i 0 A e, dw y ) s 50.N+ j pasf- 560mce. Le-p-f on �-o
R, I J Pal • Fw m ate l.e -4
Design Current
Design Current Design Current
Swine Capacity Population
Wet Poultry Capacity Population Cattle Capacity Population
❑ Wean to Finish
10 Layer I ❑ Dairy Cow
❑ Wean to Feeder I I
JO Non -Layer 1 ❑ Dairy Calf
❑ Feeder to Finish I 1
❑ Dairy Heifer
❑ Farrow to Wean
❑ Farrow to Feeder
❑ Farrow to Finish
Dry Poultry ❑ Dry Cow
Non -Dairy
❑ Layers
La Beef Stocker
❑ Non -Layers
Beef Feeder
El Pullers
❑ Beef Brood Co
❑ Turke s
❑ Gilts
❑ Boars
Other
❑ Other
❑ TurkeyPoults
❑Other Number of Structures:
Discharees & Stream Impacts
I. Is any discharge observed from any part of the operation?
Discharge originated at: ❑ Structure ❑ Application Field ❑ Other
a. Was the conveyance man-made?
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
iNo
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Yes
❑ No
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Yes
❑ No
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Yes
0
❑ No
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Yes No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes No ❑ NA ❑ NE
12128104 Continued

i
Facility Number: �—� •
EwilbCP
Date of Inspection
Waste Collection & Treatment
4. Is storage capacity (structural plus storm storage plus heavy rainfall) less than adequate?
❑ Yes N(No
❑ NA
❑ NE
a. If yes, is waste level into the structural freeboard?
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ NA
❑ NE
StructureUj,, Structure 2 Structure 3 Structure 4
Structure 5
Structure 6
Identifier:Q,Tnn
Spillway?:
Designed Freeboard (in):
Observed Freeboard (in):
5. Are there any immediate threats to the integrity of any of the structures observed?
�,f
N
❑ Yes Lj;,o
[-INA❑
NE
(ie/ large trees, severe erosion, seepage, etc.)
6. Are there structures on -site which are not properly addressed and/or managed
�'`
❑ Yes No
❑ NA
❑ NE
through a waste management or closure plan?
If any of questions 4-6 were answered yes, and the situation poses an immediate public health or environmental threat, notify DWQ
7. Do any of the structures need maintenance or improvement? ❑ Yes �No ❑ NA ❑ NE
8. Do any of the stuctures lack adequate markers as required by the permit? ❑ Yes No ❑ NA ❑ 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 ADnlication
10. Are there any required buffers, setbacks, or compliance alternatives that need ❑ Yes jNo ❑ NA ❑ NE
maintenance/improvement?
11. Is there evidence of incorrect application? If yes, check the appropriate box below. ❑ Yes o ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Excessive Ponding ❑ Hydraulic Overload ❑ Frozen Ground ❑ Heavy Metals (Cu, Zn, etc.)
[]PAN ❑ PAN > 10% or 10 Ibs
❑ Outside of Acceptable Crop Window
12. Crop type(s)
13. Soil type(s)
❑ Total Phosphorus ❑ Failure to Incorporate Manure/Sludge into Bare Soil
❑ Evidence of Wind Drift ❑
Outside of Area
14. Do the receiving crops differ from those designated in the CAWMP? [ Yes
15. Does the receiving crop and/or land application site need improvement? ❑ Yes
16. Did the facility fail to secure and/or operate per the irrigation design or wettable acre determination ? ❑ Yes
17. Does the facility lack adequate acreage for land application? ❑ Yes
18. Is there a lack of properly operating waste application equipment?
❑ Yes
El No El NA ❑NE
%❑ NA ❑ NE
El No D4 NA ❑ NE
[A No ❑ NA ❑ NE
[ LNo ❑ NA ❑ NE
Comments (refer to question #): Explain any YES answers and/ocany recommendations or any othgr,comments
Use drawings of facility to better explain situations: (use additional pages as.necessary) ;„
3, N®,�-h C o-+Ue
I��' bJ4 e orje rro Ad rise ?
I 4kA- J
0
Reviewer/Inspector Name
S Phone: — O
Reviewer/Inspector Signature:
Date: 7 ()
12128104 Continued

Facility Number. — IF of Inspection 1 •
Reauired Records & Documents
19. Did the facility fail to have Certificate of Coverage & Permit readily available? ❑ Yes No ❑ NA ❑ NE
20. Does the facility fail to have all components of the CAWMP readily available? If yes, check ❑ Yes No ❑ NA ❑ NE
the appropriate box. ❑ AFUP ❑ Checklists ❑ Design ❑ Maps ❑ Other
21. Does cord keeping need�ovement? If yes, the . 'ate box elow. Yes []No /❑ NA ❑ NE
ante Applica 'on WeeJcly Freeboard Waste Analysis Soil A ysis ❑ems �rxpleaFF�eeifieation
—I1` /Rainfall Stocking El Crop Yield onthly and V Rain Inspections �QJWeather Code
22. Did the facility fail to install and maintain a min gauge? ❑ Yes No ❑ NA ❑ NE
23. If selected, did the facility fail to install and maintain rainbreakers on irrigation equipment? ❑ Yes ❑ No 19 NA ❑ NE
24. Did the facility fail to calibrate waste application equipment as required by the permit? ❑ Yes P(No ❑ NA ❑ NE
25. Did the facility fail to conduct a sludge survey as required by the permit? ❑ Yes ❑ No PqNA ❑ NE
26. Did the facility fail to have an actively certified operator in charge? ❑ Yes O No ❑ NA ❑ NE
27. Did the facility fail to secure a phosphorus loss assessment (PLAT) certification? ❑ Yes Q�No ❑ NA ❑ NE
Other Issues
28. Were any additional problems noted which cause non-compliance of the permit or CAWMP? ❑ Yes o El NA El NE
29. Did the facility fail to properly dispose of dead animals within 24 hours and/or document El
lll� 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? ElYes No El 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 KNo ❑ 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 1XNo [I NA ❑ NE
33. Does facility require a follow-up visit by same agency? ❑ Yes 777777X```` No ❑ NA ❑ NE
r r i i u ui i i r r 1 N' k„ • •`,a• `s �K` , s �`. r Y-i'�6 za :•
-71
• /
/ •
sr• .,
• y I
I
IZ129104

Division of Water Quali' �t�t I
Facility Number O Q Division of Soil and Water'Conservation la/"1"/
O Other Agency
Type of Visit Compliance Inspection 0 Operation Review 0 Structure Evaluation 0 Technical Assistance
Reason for Visit Y Routine 0 Complaint 0 Follow up 0 Referral 0 Emergency 0 Other ❑ Denied Access
Date of Visit: I Arrival Time: Q 6 0 Departure Time: County: 120i 16e 5 Region: "ieo
Farm Name: A A to. �AY M5 Owner Email:
Owner Name: 1A ie� L P5Ae-)n Phone: 1 ilFI1 Q a I — 33��
Mailing Address: Igo Fau Vpto �c� • _ Mew, NC, a $ 60(0
Physical Address: //�� SQXY�P_
Facility Contact: (0 I PXn too *on Title: Phone No:le j 4 )7— 06 0fo
I11c
OnsiteRepresentative: IP/1 `1) 12JT0L Integrator:
Certified Operator: �I 1QJA 6. 11 �SL0o Operator Certification Number:
Back-up Operator:
Location of Farm:
US Hwy 4{
View Pd.
Swine
Other
❑ Other
Latitude:
y19 5 b L344
Farm on Ief 4.
Back-up Certification Number:
®° OQ Longitude: ®° © I LJS
,Past gnomes Leff611-f6 r tl
Design Current Design Current
Capacity Population Wet Poultry Capacity Population
❑ Layer
i
❑ Non -La et
Dry Poultry
Design Current
Cattle Capacity Population
❑ Dairy Cow
❑ Dairy Calf
❑ Dairy Heifei
Dry Cow
jA Non -Dairy
C)
El Beef Stocker
❑ Beef Feeder
❑ Beef Brood Co
Number of Structures:
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?
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
4No
``No
El NA
El NE
❑ Yes
❑
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Yes
❑ No
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Yes
❑ No
[I NA
❑ NE
❑ Yes
No
❑ NA
❑ NE
I][I Yes
❑ No
❑ NA
❑ NE
12128104 Continued

Facility Number: — • Date of Inspection fir'
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: 'L7'5 Q
Spillway?:
Designed Freeboard (in):
Observed Freeboard (in):
5. Are there any immediate threats 2eShe'tintegrity of any of the structures observed?
(ie/ large trees, severe erosion, seepage, etc.)
6. Are there structures on -site which are not properly addressed and/or managed
through a waste management or closure plan?
❑ Yes �No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes ❑ No ❑ NA ❑ NE
Structure 5 Structure 6
❑ Yes ��No [I NA ❑ NE
El Yes pQ No ❑ NA ❑ NE
If any of questions 4-6 were answered yes, and the situation poses an immediate public health or environmental t real, notify DWQ
7. Do any of the structures need maintenance or improvement? ❑ Yes ,,,,,�///,,, I�No El NA ❑ NE
8. Do any of the stucmres lack adequate markers as required by the permit? El Yes No El 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 ' L�(,Yes ❑ No ❑ NA ❑ NE
maintenance or improvement? (7`�l
Waste Application
10. Are there any required buffers, setbacks, or compliance alternatives that need ❑ Yes No ❑ NA ❑ NE
maintenance/improvement? /./�f
11. Is there evidence of incorrect application? If yes, check the appropriate box below. ElYes �,J No ❑ NA ElNE
❑ Excessive Ponding ElHydraulic Overload [IFrozen Ground ElHeavy Metals (Cu, Zn, etc.) / V
❑ PAN ❑ PAN > 10% or ] 0 Ibs ❑ Total Phosphorus ❑ Failure to Incorporate Manure/Sludge into Bare Soil
❑ Outside of Acceptable Crop Window ❑ Evidence of Wind
Drifi ❑ Application Outside of Area
12. Crop type(s) _ IVI Au w LP &n Ai 1,� , (�AJ
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 ❑ NE
17. Does the facility lack adequate acreage for land application? ❑ Yes No ❑ NA ❑ NE
18. Is there a lack of properly operating waste application equipment? ❑ Yes No ❑ NA ❑ NE
Comments (refer to question #): Explain any YES answers and/or any recommendations or any other comments.
Use drawings of facility to better explain situations. (use additional pages as necessary):
3 9 e P�J1�2.t� Ca�#1�0--�,d�/kpr�,ml.9- cf'
6
Reviewer/Inspector Name (i t5E 10Cl-- Phone:
Reviewer/Inspector Signature:1hitz
%� j ���J Date:
'— r `^-� " y( 104 ontinued
(J

Facility Number: — p gate of Inspection •
Required Records & Documents
19. Did the facility fail to have Certificate of Coverage & Permit readily available? ❑ Yes ,,. 43k' ❑ NA ❑ NE
20. Does the facility fail to have all components of the CAWMP readily available? If yes, check El Yes Ll Co ❑ NA ❑ NE
the appropirate box. ❑ WUP ❑ Checklists ❑ Design ❑ Maps
p El Other
21. Doe record keeping need imp "ovement? tf�tap�rep�aleav� ❑ Yes No ❑ NA ❑ NE
aste App�lic/anon ,�eeklkly Freeboard Waste Analysis Soil A lysis en --
Rainfall M Stocking E, top Yield ❑ 1$0 *"�^^-_�T^�^^.^'..;�^^s-- Monthly and 1" Rain Inspections ea[her Code
22.
Did the facility fail to install and maintain a rain gauge?
❑ Yes
)(No
❑ NA
❑ NE
23.
If selected, did the facility fail to install and maintain rainbreakers on irrigation equipment?
❑ Yes
❑ No
%NA
❑ NE
24.
Did the facility fail to calibrate waste application equipment as required by the permit?
❑ Yes
%No
❑ NA
❑ NE
25.
Did the facility fail to conduct a sludge survey as required by the permit?
❑ Yes
No
O NA
❑ NE
26.
Did the facility fail to have an actively certified operator in charge?
ElYes
.❑I
D9 No
❑ NA
❑ NE
27.
Did the facility fail to secure a phosphorus loss assessment (PLAT) certification?
❑ Yes
"No
❑ NA
❑ NE
Other Issues
28.
Were any additional problems noted which cause non-compliance of the permit or CAWMP?
Yes
[�:1( No
❑ NA
El NE
29.
Did the facility fail to properly dispose of dead animals within 24 hours and/or document
El Yes
IN No
❑ NA
El NE
and report the mortality rates that were higher than normal?
!l��ff
30.
At the time of the inspection did the facility pose an odor or air quality concern?
❑ Yes
L8 No
[I NA
El 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?
ElYes
LEl No
❑ NA
❑ NE
33.
Does facility require a follow-up visit by same agency?
❑ Yes
No
❑ NA
❑ NE
Additional Comments and/or Drawings:
054 w bra'►oq d ue Oct .
CheetL Sfft. aco-7 6ppt'lC4-4i6nS.(Lbere Abe- Scent 4_-Ob
I1 11 /0-7 = 4.3
(D®nc e, way 4 r �,,�2p (Yla�. z P1 aoog
cent e o Jmo d
PAN
41 A�+- a4Aj,� ---- 4WA,7�j
v wC-)P_t6_h
12128104

Division of Water Quality- I
Facility Number O Division of Soil and Water Conservation 3a
0 Other Agency
Type of Visit ompliance 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: IUAA7Arrival Time:E§UKI Departure Time: County: "Ve5 Region: LOS t O
:aaai��Trr�
*]f•
Mailing Address:
Owner Em t :
Phone: 4 331e 8�
r , N a S6ob
Physical Address: j
Facility Contact: fDl4240 11)40S—fOl/i� Title: Phone No: I 0400
Onsite Representative: CJ
�1Qn w<2's-t6n Integrator:
pp�� j � �
Certified Operator: IQ j1 0. Ll..�'e - 6 f7 Operator Certification Number:
Back-up Operator:
Back-up Certification Number:
Location of Farm: Latitude: M o ©''M" Longitude: ° 02, �—
U S o 7 o v P- O66 $comer.
Fa II viet.0 81 . F&--m dri le 04,
Swine
Wean to
Wean to
Feeder tc
Farrow
Farrow
Gilts
Boars
Other
❑ Other
Design Current Design Current
Capacity Population Wet Poultry Capacity Population
❑ Layer
❑ Non -La et
Dry Poultry
❑ Layers
❑ Non -Layers
❑ Pullets
❑ Turkeys
❑ Turkey Poults
❑ Other
Discharges & Stream Impacts
1. Is any discharge observed from any part of the operation?
Discharge originated at: ❑ Structure ❑ Application Field ❑ Other
a. Was the conveyance man-made?
Design Current
Cattle Capacity Population
E]Dairy Cow
E]Dairy Calf
E]Dairy Heifer
❑ Dry Cow
Non -Dairy
LJ Beef Stocker
❑ Beef Feeder
❑ Beef Brood Co
Number of Structures:
b. Did the discharge reach waters of the State? (If yes, notify DWQ)
c. What is the estimated volume that reached waters of the State (gallons)?
d. Does discharge bypass the waste management system? (If yes, notify DWQ)
2. Is there evidence of a past discharge from any part of the operation?
3. Were there any adverse impacts or potential adverse impacts to the Waters of the State
other than from a discharge?
❑ Yes No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes
❑ No
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Yes
❑ No
❑ NA
❑ NE
0
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Yes
❑ No
❑ Yes 0 No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes No ❑ NA ❑ NE
1212 104 Continued

Facility Number. q �- (� • Date of Inspection L'
Waste Collection & Treatment
4. Is storage capacity (structural plus stone storage plus heavy rainfall) less than adequate?
❑ Yes No ❑ NA ❑ NE
a. If yes, is waste level into the structural freeboard?
❑ Yes ❑ No ❑ NA ❑ NE
Structure 1 Structure 2 Structure 3 Structure 4
Identifier: W0.S+e-
Structure 5 Structure 6
Spillway?:
Designed Freeboard (in):
Observed Freeboard (in):
5. Are there any immediate threats to the integrity of any of the structures observed?
❑ Yes No ❑ NA ❑ NE
(ie/ large trees, severe erosion, seepage, etc.)
6. Are there structures on -site which are not properly addressed and/or managed
❑ Yes �(No ❑ NA ❑ NE
through a waste management or closure plan?
If any of questions 4-6 were answered yes, and the situation poses an immediate public health or environmental threat, notify DWQ
7. Do any of the structures need maintenance or improvement? ❑ Yes [).No ❑ NA ❑ NE
8. Do any of the smctures lack adequate markers as required by the permit? ❑Yes No ❑ NA ❑ NE
(Not applicable to roofed pits, dry stacks and/or wet stacks)
9. Does any part of the waste management system other than the waste structures require ❑ Yes [No ElNA ❑ NE
maintenance or improvement?
Waste Application �,[/
10. Are there any required buffers, setbacks, or compliance alternatives that need Eli6J 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 Pending ❑ Hydraulic Overload ❑ Frozen Ground ❑ Heavy Metals (Cu, Zn, etc.)
l PAN ❑ PAN > 10% or 10 Ibs Total Phosphorus ❑ Failure to Incorporate Manure/Sludge into Bare Soil
C�rLFOutside of Acceptable Crop Window ❑ Evidence of Wind Drill El Application Outside of Area
V 12. Crop type(s) YVYI B _� QUA i
13.
Soil type(s) _ V
14.
Do the receiving crops differ from those designated in the CAWMP?
❑ Yes
X(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
VNA
❑ NE
17.
Does the facility lack adequate acreage for land application?
❑ Yes
XNo
❑ NA
❑ NE
18.
Is there a lack of properly operating waste application equipment?
❑ Yes
ta-No
❑ NA
❑ NE
IComments (refer to question #): Explain anv YES answers and/or any recommendations or any other comments.
Use drawings of facility to better explain situations. (use additional pages as necessary):
Reviewer/inspector Name Phone: I - SW -Z6
Reviewer/Inspector Signature. D4 b �l Date: 1 010 b I
Cnalinuad

Facility Number: — Oate of Inspection 111 /Q n7 •
Reauired Records & Documents
19. Did the facility fail to have Certificate of Coverage & Permit readily available? ❑ Yes Y
No ❑ NA [INE
20. Does the facility fail to have all components of the CAWMP readily available? If yes, check ElYesNo ElNA [INE
El❑Design ❑Maps ❑Otherthe appropirate box. WUP ❑ Checklists
/
21. Does record keeping need ittent? If yes, the the appropriate box ow. Yes ❑ No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑,/`rVaste Applicatio ,L.,�JJWEekllopFrceboard Waste Analysis Soil alysisxoFs�eather
❑
Rainfall Stocking Yield Monthly and 1" Rain Inspections
22. Did the facility fail to install and maintain a rain gauge? ❑ Yes [ o ❑ NA ❑ NE
23. If selected, did the facility fail to install and maintain rainbreakers on irrigation equuij�fm�ent? ElYes ❑ No ;,NA [INE
24. Did the facility fail to calibrate waste application equipment as required by the perniit? b UQ_ Yes VNo ❑ NA El NE
25. Did the facility fail to conduct a sludge survey as required by the permit? ❑ Yes ❑ No D�NA ❑ NE
26. Did the facility fail to have an actively certified operator in charge? ❑ Yes PIo ❑ NA ❑ NE
27. Did the facility fail to secure a phosphorus loss assessment (PLAT) certification? ❑ Yes 4No ❑ NA ❑ NE
Other Issues
28. Were any additional problems noted which cause non-compliance of the permit or CAWMP? ❑ Yes No ❑ NA ❑ NE
29. Did the facility fail to properly dispose of dead animals within 24 hours and/or document ❑ Yes L](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 L74No ❑ NA ❑ NE
If yes, contact a regional Air Quality representative immediately �,/T1
31. Did the facility fail to notify the regional office of emergency situations as required by ❑ Yes LXI 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 P No ❑ NA ❑ NE
33. Does facility require a follow-up visit by same agency? ❑ Yes No ❑ NA ❑ NE
Additional Comments and/or Drawings:
a1. Lva�.t� �e�,�12� O 2 •
i.
�J A 4 n d.4 J0,4A. (A ./1d�/'�s DB AJJA, 4,7L vP--R �r ►>2S. -
12128104

Division of Water Quality- 416t0 0 Fl9Vl I
Facility Number 3 Division of Soil and Water Conservation _
— -- -- _ Q Other Agency
Type of Visit C 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 1�
Date of Visit: 0 Arrival Time: ® Departure Time: County: aOcRegion: W& PO
Farm Name: A 0 w r l Fa rM5 Owner Email: G
Owner Name: Wc' W e'6 fon ^ ' Phone: :?,2L _ ,7)'%O
Mailing Address: 1 1 9 O Fa I I V i P tO (�i •T ocM Par I ty(:� a p (o ff (D
Physical Address:
Facility Contact: (bIQ� W�S�dYj Title: Phone No: C1 a,—O606
//C
Onsite Representative: (n I w i_ oes-ion Integrator: Certified Operator: (I ' / 1P ✓) n • W e 5 10Operator Certification Number. — L aC,
3 _3
Back-up Operator: Back-up Certification Number:
Location of Farm: Latitude: ®° ® ® Longitude: � ° ®, 0—
US 491 N P,X 1 � 18 Sou` h past Booryme_r. Lef4 ar)foq
1-all vim M • Farm on 1eV+. _
Discharges & Stream Impacts �,,.,(
1. Is any discharge observed from any part of the operation? ❑ Yes ICI No ❑ NA ❑ NE
Discharge originated at: ❑ Structure ❑ Application Field ❑ Other
a. Was the conveyance man-made?
b. Did the discharge reach waters of the State? (If yes, notify DWQ)
c. What is the estimated volume that reached waters of the State (gallons)?
d. Does discharge bypass the waste management system? (If yes, notify DWQ)
2. Is there evidence of a past discharge from any part of the operation?
3. Were there any adverse impacts or potential adverse impacts to the Waters of the State
other than from a discharge?
Page 1 of 3
❑ Yes
❑ No
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Yes
❑ No
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Yes
0
❑ No
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Yes �......////No El NA [I NE
El Yes lNo ❑ NA ❑ NE
12128104 Continued

Facility Number: ,— • Date of Inspection
Waste Collection & Treatment
4. Is storage capacity (structural plus storm storage plus heavy rainfall) less than adequate?
a. If yes, is waste level into the structural freeboard?
\ Structure 1 Structure 2 Structure 3 Structure 4
a Identifier: )lrXS P
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 4No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes ❑ No ❑ NA ❑ NE
Structure 5 Structure 6
❑ Yes IA No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes KNo ❑ NA ❑ NE
If any of questions 4-6 were answered yes, and the situation poses an immediate public health or environmental threat, notify DWQ
7. Do any of the structures need maintenance or improvement? ❑ Yes �No ❑ NA ❑ NE
8. Do any of the stuctures lack adequate markers as required by the permit? ❑ Yes �No ❑ NA ❑ NE
(Not applicable to roofed pits, dry stacks and/or wet stacks)
9. Does any part of the waste management system other than the waste structures require Yes ❑ No ❑ NA ❑ NE
maintenance or improvement? /
Waste Application
10. Are there any required buffers, setbacks, or compliance alternatives that need
maintenance/improvement?
❑ Yes *o
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 El PAN > ] 0% or 10 lbs El Total Phosphorus [I Failure to Incorporate Manure/ udge into Bare Soil
❑ Outside of Acceptable Crop Window ❑ Evidence of Wind Drift ❑ Application Out ' e of Area
12. Crop type(s) PAW , A/�(,I( I &I Aa w.
13. Soil type(s)
14. Do the receiving crops differ from those designated in the CAWMP?
15. Does the receiving crop and/or land application site need improvement?
❑ Yes
❑ Yes
16. Did the facility fail to secure and/or operate per the irrigation design or wettable acre determination ? ❑ Yes
17. Does the facility lack adequate acreage for land application? ❑ Yes
18. Is there a lack of properly operating waste application equipment?
❑ Yes
❑ NA ❑ NE
KNo ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ No 9 NA ❑ NE
O•No ❑ NA ❑ NE
lNo ❑ NA ❑ NE
Comments (refer to question tt): 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):
Dorm s pcut ;r•o
� o-+ C-inAlt: ��rn f\dXA5 10 e_
i VIT-61n km_lre, ou'f O u,a5+e- Pond
Reviewer/Inspector Name I e l� Phone:
Reviewer/Inspector Signature; Date:
Page 2 of M )I - • 72/28/04 " Continued

Facility Number: — Wate of Inspection
Required Records & Documents
19. Did the facility fail to have Certificate of Coverage & Permit readily available? ❑ Yes ,,,���.....///No ❑ NA ❑ NE
20. Does the facility fail to have all components of the CAWMP readily available? If yes, check El Yes I� No ❑ NA [I NE
the appropriate box. / ,
El El Checklists El Design El Maps El Other
21. Does keeping need improvement? If yes, check
the appropriate box b low. ❑ Yes LjSJ No ❑ NA ❑ NE
��Waste Application �—�eeek�kly Freeboard L�i�aste Analysis S"O�"d /AAnalysis -� n�aLS(P T��^� ^-� .®-,A re
02'Rainfall Stocking CR Crop Yield B Monthly and 1" Rain Inspections her Code
22. Did the facility fail to install and maintain a rain gauge? ❑ Yes VNo ❑ NA ❑ NE
23. If selected, did the facility fail to install and maintain rainbreakers on irrigation equipment? ❑ Yes ,yj �No XNA [I NE
24. Did the facility fail to calibrate waste application equipment as required by the permit? ❑ Yes 15WNo [I NA ❑ NE
25. Did the facility fail to conduct a sludge survey as required by the permit? El Yes ❑`'No XNA ❑ NE
26. Did the facility fail to have an actively certified operator in charge? '❑ Yes 1XNo EI NA ❑ NE
27. Did the facility fail to secure a phosphorus loss assessment (PLAT) certification? ❑ Yes ❑ No XNA ❑ NE
Other Issues �`
28. Were any additional problems noted which cause non-compliance of the permit or CAWMP? ❑ Yes ,,,/No [I NA El NE
29. Did the facility fail to properly dispose of dead animals within 24 hours and/or document El Yes ```"`LYNo ❑ NA El 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 I(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? El Yes L73No ❑ NA ❑ NE
33. Does facility require a follow-up visit by same agency? ❑ Yes &No ❑ NA ❑ NE
Additional Comments and/or Drawings:
aI. Fall `C>S recor�5 iCOCR. waSfe5mwple •
�1. luea�'her C.o�e St-oc-kin ✓ teld5V/
6>00(p 5oi 1 fest e olkplet ed . Iles � l�-s Bell Por 1 k me .
Cb P P e.r Ie-ve.1 t 5 1 S-O o. / .O( tF
(0 /n,6 lie 0 e a 00
It
Page 3 of 3

Division of Water Quality
Division of Soil and Water Conservation
❑ Other Agency
Facility Number: 970003 Facility Status: Active Permit: AWC970003 ❑ Denied Access
Inspection Type: Compliance Inspection Inactive or Closed Date:
Reason for Visit: Routine County: Wilkes Region: Winston-Salem
Date of Visit: 10/20/2005 Entry Tiime:09710 AM Exit Time: 10:30 AM Incident #:
Farm Name: A H. & W. Farms Owner Email:
Owner. W C Weston Phone: [phone]
Mailing Address: 1190 FalNiew Rd Boomer NC 286069187
Physical Address:
Facility Status: ❑ Compliant ❑ Not Compliant Integrator.
Location of Farm:
Latitude: 36'01'36" Longitude: 81"18'35"
Hwy. 18 South 10 miles forth Moravian Falls. Turn left on Andrews Rd. Right at first fork and left at second fork.
Question Areas:
Discharges & Stream Impacts Waste Collection & Treatment Waste Application
Records and Documents Other Issues
Certified Operator: Glenn Oren Weston
Secondary OIC(s):
On -Site Representative(s): Name
On -site representative Glen Weston
24 hour contact name Glen Weston
Primary Inspector:
Inspector Signature: J
Secondary Inspector(s):
Operator Certification Number: 24833
Title Phone
Phone: [phone]
Phone: [phone]
Phone: [phone]
Ext.383
Date:
Phone:
Phone:
Inspection Summary:
7. No holes in embankment noted at this time.
21. Went over new permit requirements with Mr. Weston. Need to maintain weather code, stocking, crop yields, and all precipitation
events.
21. April 2005 records look good.
21. Waste sample has been sent for October 2005 applications and operator is awaiting results to complete records this fall. Check
next visit.analysis
Page: 1

�I
I,
Permit: AWC970003 Owner- Facility: W C Weston Facility Number: 970003
Inspection Date: 10120/2005 Inspection Type: Compliance Inspection Reason for Visit: Routine
Regulated Operations Design Capacity Current Population
Cattle
Q Cattle - Beef Feeder 600 150
Total Design Capacity: 600
TotalSSLW: 480,000
Waste Structures
Type Identifier Closed Date Start Date Designed Freeboard Observed Freeboard
aste Pond WSP 108.00
Page: 2

• •
Permit: AWC970003 Owner- Facility: W C Weston Facility Number:
970003
Inspection Date: 10/20/2005 Inspection Type: Compliance Inspection Reason for Visit: Routine
Discharges &Stream Impacts
Yes
No
NA
NE
1. Is any discharge observed from any part of the operation?
❑
■
❑
❑
Discharge originated at:
Structure
❑
Application Field
❑
Other
❑
a. Was conveyance man-made?
❑
■
❑
❑
b. Did discharge reach Waters of the State? (if yes, notify DWQ)
Cl
■
❑
❑
c. Estimated volume reaching surface waters?
d. Does discharge bypass the waste management system? (8 yes, notify DWQ)
❑
■
❑
Cl
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?
Cl
■
❑
❑
If yes, is waste level into structural freeboard?
❑
5. Are there any immediate threats to the integrity of any of the structures observed (Le./ large trees, severe erosion,
❑
■
❑
❑
seepage, etc.)?
6. Are there structures on -site that are not property addressed and/or managed through a waste management or
�, ❑
■
❑
❑
closure plan?
7. Do any of the structures need maintenance or improvement?
❑
■
❑
❑
8. Do any of the structures lack adequate markers as required by the permit? (Not applicable to roofed pits, dry
❑
■
❑
❑
stacks and/or wet stacks) .
9. Does any part of the waste management system other than the waste structures require maintenance or
❑
■
❑
❑
improvement?
Waste Application
Yes
No
NA
NE
10. Are there any required buffers, setbacks, or compliance alternatives that need maintenance or improvement?
❑
■
0
❑
11. Is there evidence of incorrect application?
❑
■
❑
❑
If yes, check the appropriate box below.
Excessive Ponding?
Cl
Hydraulic Overload?
❑
Frozen Ground?
❑
Heavy metals (Cu, Zn, etc)?
❑
PAN?
Cl
Is PAN > 10%/10 lbs.?
❑
Total P2O5?
❑
Failure to incorpomte manure/sludge into bare soil?
❑
Outside of acceptable crop window?
❑
Evidence of wind drift?
❑
Application outside of application area?
❑
Crop Type 1
Cora (Silage)
Crop Type 2
Small
Grain (Wheat,
Barley, Oats)
Crop Type 3
Crop Type 4
Page: 3

Permit: AWC970003 Owner- Facility: W C Weston
Facility Number:
970003
Inspection Date: 10/20/2005 Inspection Type: Compliance Inspection
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)? ❑
■
n
n
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?
n
■
❑
n
Records and Documents
Yes
No
NA
NE
19. Did the facility fail to have Certificate of Coverage and Permit readily available?
n
■
n
n
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?
n
21. Does record keeping need improvement?
■
❑
❑
❑
If yes, check the appropriate box below.
Waste Application?
n
120 Minute inspections?
n
Weather code?
n
Weekly Freeboard?
❑
Transfers? -
❑
Rainfall?
❑
Inspections after > 1 inch rainfall & monthly?
❑
Waste Analysis?
❑
Annual soil analysis?
❑
Crop yields?
■
Stocking?
■
Annual Certification Forth (NPDES only)?
n
22. Did the facility fail to install and maintain a rain gauge?
❑
■
❑
Cl
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?
❑
01111
25. Did the facility fail to conduct a sludge survey as required by the permit?
In
■
❑
❑
26. Did the facility fail to have an actively certified operator in charge?
n
■
n
❑
Page: 4

Permit: AWC970003 Owner - Facility: W C Weston Facility Number: 970003
Inspection Date: 1012012005 Inspection Type: Compliance Inspection Reason for Visit: Routine
Records and Documents
27. Did the facility fail to secure a phosphorous 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 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 concem? If yes, contact a regional Air Quality
representative immediately.
31. Did the facility fail to notify regional DWQ of emergency situations as required by Permit?
32, Did Reviewer/Inspector fail to discuss review/inspection with on -site representative?
33. Does facility require a follow-up visit by same agency?
Yes No NA NE
OEDO
Yes No NA NE
❑ ■ ❑ ❑
❑ ■ ❑ ❑
❑ ■ ❑ ❑
Page: 5

IType of Visit �mpliance Inspection 0 Operation Review 0 Structure Evaluation 0 Technical Assistance I
Reason for Visit Routine 0 Complaint 0 Follow up 0 Referral 0 Emergency 0 Other El Denied Access
Date of Visit: tt Arrival Time: ' 'y I Departure Time: 1 :3 County:
Farm Name:�TTrt'y"01yi. Form'---) Owner Email:
Region: v�L 6 RO
Owner Name: Lo . C • W !? S+O r) Phone: q off- I _ 3 3 6O 0
Mailing Address: I I" Iy 1—�tL I II �XJ I PxiJ 1 <-(A r U C
Physical Address:
Facility Contact: (J �P.Y1�I2rj�oi�l Title:
Onsite RepresentativeS ///O kP_S+o n
Certified Operator: _ /1lt/ leh 0 •y e,--+ n
Back-up Operator:
Location of Farm: Latitude:
Nl_ 234010
Phone No: 9 ;2 —No0(p
Integrator:
Operator Certification Number:
Back-up Certification Number:
Design Current Design Current
Swine Capacity Population Wet Poultry Capacity Population
❑ Layer
❑ Non -La et
Other
❑ Other
Dry Poultry
❑ Layers
❑ Non -Layers
❑ Pullets,
❑ Turkeys
❑ Turkey Poults
❑ Other
Discharges & Stream Impacts
1. Is any discharge observed from any part of the operation?
Discharge originated at: ❑ Structure ❑ Application Field ❑ Other
a. Was the conveyance man-made?
Design Current
Cattle Capacity Population
❑ Dairy Cow
❑ Dairy Calf
I
❑ Dairy Heifer
❑ Dry Cow
WNon-Dalry
t. 00
Beef Stocket
❑ Beef Feeder
❑ Beef Brood Cow
Number of Structures: Ell,
I
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 4No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes
❑ No
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Yes
❑ No
❑ NA
❑ NE
0
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Yes
❑ No
❑ Yes No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes No []NA ❑ NE
12128104 Continued

Facility Number: 9 — O3 • Date of Inspection
Waste Collection & Treatment
4. Is storage capacity (structural plus storm storage plus heavy rainfall) less than adequate? ❑ Yes *o ElNA ❑ NE
a. If yes, is waste level into the structural freeboard? ❑ Yes ❑ No ❑ NA ❑ NE
a Structure 1 Structure 2 Structure 3 Structure 4 Structure 5 Structure 6
Identifier: 1p) SP
Spillway?:
Designed Freeboard (in):
Observed Freeboard (in): I V ]S
5.
Are there any immediate threats to the integrity of any of the structures observed?
❑ Yes
o
ElNA
❑ NE
(ie/ large trees, severe erosion, seepage, etc.)
6.
Are there structures on -site which are not properly addressed and/or managed
❑ Yes
p(I No
❑ NA
❑ NE
through a waste management or closure plan?
/
If any
of questions 4-6 were answered yes, and the situation poses an immediate public health or environmental
t real,
notify DWQ
7.
Do any of the structures need maintenance or improvement?
❑ Yes
o
❑ NA
❑ NE
8.
Do any of the stuctures lack adequate markers as required by the permit?
❑ Yes
�(
No
❑ NA
❑ NE
(Not applicable to roofed pits, dry stacks and/or wet stacks)
T'
9.
Does any part of the waste management system other than the waste structures require
❑ Yes
o
❑ NA
❑ NE
maintenance or improvement?
Waste Application
10. Are there any required buffers, setbacks, or compliance alternatives that need ❑ Yes No ❑ NA ❑ NE
maintenance/improvement?
11. Is there evidence of incorrect application? If yes, check the appropriate box below. ❑ Yes ❑ No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Excessive Ponding ❑ Hydraulic Overload ❑ Frozen Ground ❑ Heavy Metals (Cu, Zn, etc.)
❑ PAN ❑ PAN > 10% or 10 Ibs ❑ Total Phosphorus ❑ Failure to Incorporate Manure/Sludge into Bare Soil
❑ Outside of Acceptable Crop Window ❑ Evidence of Wind Drift ❑ Application Outside of Area
12. Crop type(s)
13. Soil type(s)
14. Do the receiving crops differ from those designated in the CAWMP?
15. Does the receiving crop and/or land application site need improvement?
❑ Yes
❑ Yes
16. Did the facility fail to secure and/or operate per the irrigation design or wettable acre determination" El Yes
17. Does the facility lack adequate acreage for land application? ❑ Yes
18. Is there a lack of properly operating waste application equipment?
❑ Yes
QSJ No ❑ NA
❑ NE
f(YT'0p`No ❑ NA
❑ NE
El No A NA
❑ NE
0�1���((4 No ❑ NA
❑ NE
py No ❑ NA
❑ NE
Will,rAll
1 .
12128104 Continued

(400
Facility Number: — 03 Do Inspection aqwO S
Required Records & Documents
19. Did the facility fail to have Certificate of Coverage & Permit readily available? ❑ Yes )�&, El NA ❑ NE
20. Does the facility fail to have all components of the CAWMP readily available? If yes, check ❑ Yes LWlvo [I NA El NE
ElEl❑ Design El ❑Other
the appropirate box. WUP Checklists J/`"'
21. Does record keeping need improvement? If yes, check a appropriate box b W. Ayes ❑ No ❑ NA ❑ NE
�aste Application L7Weekly Freeboard Waste Analysis oil An lysis ❑=vvascc// __ - n '
ex
Rainfall Stocking Crop Yield au '"" ' l �SMonthly and I" Rain Inspectiony/ KzWeather Code
22. Did the facility fail to install and maintain a rain gauge? ❑ Yes o ❑ NA ❑ NE
23. If selected, did the facility fail to install and maintain rainbreakers on irrigation equipment?�q { ❑ Yes /❑l No %NA ❑ NE
24. Did the facility fail to calibrate waste application equipment as required by the permit? �tkpvkl Yes ko ❑ NA El NE
25. Did the facility fail to conduct a sludge survey as required by the permit? El Yes ////❑No �(NA ❑ NE
26. Did the facility fail to have an actively certified operator in charge? ❑ Yes No }� ❑��/// NA ❑ NE
27. Did the facility fail to secure a phosphorus loss assessment (PLAT) certification? ❑ Yes �No I NA ❑ NE
Other Issues
28.
Were any additional problems noted which cause non-compliance of the permit or CAWMP?
❑ Yes
tdNo
❑ NA
❑ NE
29.
Did the facility fail to properly dispose of dead animals within 24 hours and/or document
❑ Yes
Q(I No
El NA
❑ NE
and report the mortality rates that were higher than normal?
( �
30.
At the time of the inspection did the facility pose an odor or air quality concern?
❑ Yes
)�No
❑ NA
❑ NE
If yes, contact a regional Air Quality representative immediately
31.
Did the facility fail to notify the regional office of emergency situations as required by
❑ Yes
4No
❑ NA
❑ NE
General Permit? (ie/ discharge, freeboard problems, over application)
32.
Did Reviewer/Inspector fail to discuss review/inspection with an on -site representative?
El Yes
����{{{{
X No
❑ NA
❑ NE
33.
Does facility require a follow-up visit by same agency?
❑ Yes
V�o
❑ NA
❑ NE
�Additional Comments and/orDrawings:
I
ON
U
12128104

Facility Number 97 j Date of Visit: 6/29/2004 Time: 1315
O Not Operational 0 Below Threshold
® Permitted ® Certified 0 Conditionally Certified E3 Registered Date Last Operated or Above Threshold: .........................
Farm Name: A...H,.xft..W Far.]ms....................................................................................... County: WAUs ................................................ WSSQ........
OwnerName: W_C........................................ W.V;5.tQjL ....................................................... Phone No: (33b1.9217336.8.W.a.d)..........................................
Mailing Address: 11991YAR.V.ieet'..];i.Rad......................................................................... U9.0mcrAc ............................................................ 28.6.0.6 ........
Facility Contact: G.IexI..9fifoo..................................................Title:................................................................ Phone No: 33.&9.Z7..Q6Q6..(CcU)..........
Onsite Representative: G1ea.VlfStRa............................................................................... Integrator:......................................................................................
Certified Operaton.Glf R,tt-OX.ert......................... W.Csion ............................................. Operator Certification Number:Z4jU3 .............................
Location of Farm:
Hwy. 18 South 10 miles form Moravian Falls. Turn left on Andrews Rd. Right at first fork and left at second fork.
❑ Swine ❑ Poultry ® Cattle ❑ Horse Latitude 36 • Ol ° 36 Longitude 81 • 18 35 "
Design Current
Swine - _ Canacity Ponulation
❑ Wean to Feeder
❑ Feeder to Finish
❑ Farrow to Wean
❑ Farrow to Feeder
❑ Farrow to Finish
❑ Gilts
❑ Boars
Design Current DesignCurrent
Poultry Capacity Population Cattle : Capacity Population
❑ Layer 10 Dairy
❑ Non -Layer ® Non -Dairy 600
❑ Other
Total' Design Capacity 600
Total SSLW 480,000
Number of Lagoons 0 I II I I I
1 l
Discharees & 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: ......W.aste.P.ond.....................................................................................................................................................................................
Freeboard (inches): 66
12112103 Continued

Facility Number: 97-3 Date of Inspection 6/29/2004
5. Are there any immediate threats to th ntegrity 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 N No
9.
Do any stuctures lack adequate, gauged markers with required maximum and minimum liquid level
❑ Yes
N No
elevation markings?
Waste Application
10.
Are there any buffers that need maintenance/improvement?
❑ Yes
N No
11.
Is there evidence of over application? If yes, check the appropriate box below.
❑ Yes
N No
❑ Excessive Ponding ❑ PAN ❑ Hydraulic Overload ❑ Frozen Ground ❑ Copper and/or Zinc
12.
Crop type Corn (Silage & Grain) Small Grain (Wheat, Barley,
13.
Do the receiving crops differ with those designated in the Certified Animal Waste Management Plan (CA WMP)?
❑ Yes
N No
14.
a) Does the facility lack adequate acreage for land application?
❑ Yes
N No
b) Does the facility need a wettable acre determination?
❑ Yes
N No
c) This facility is pended for a wettable acre determination?
❑ Yes
N No
15.
Does the receiving crop need improvement?
❑ Yes
N No
16.
Is there a lack of adequate waste application equipment?
❑ Yes
N No
Odor Issues
17. Does the discharge pipe from the confinement building to the storage pond or lagoon fail to discharge at/or below ❑ Yes ❑ No
liquid level of lagoon or storage pond with no agitation?
18. Are there any dead animals not disposed of properly within 24 hours? ❑ Yes N No
19. Is there any evidence of wind drift during land application? (i.e. residue on neighboring vegetation, asphalt, ❑ Yes N No
roads, building structure, and/or public property)
20. At the time of the inspection did the facility pose an odor or air quality concern? If yes, contact a regional ❑ Yes N No
Air Quality representative immediately.
Coments;(re[er to question 1#) ; Explain any YES:answers and/or any recommendations or any other co_mmen_ts
m
Use drawings of facility to better explain situations: (use additionai.pages as'necessary) i ❑Field Copy N Final Notes
3. Creek running through farm on Hwy 18 looks good. No cattle onsite that have access to the stream. DO in stream was 8.25mg/L.
Aerator has agreed not to return cattle to the lot next to the stream until fencing is installed.
3. Could not tell which waste analysis (March or June 2004?) was used in calculating the PAN balance. Just need to list on the form to
confirm that the waste analysis that was used was obtained within 60 days of application.
3. Don't forget to obtain 2004 soil test results.
9. Tract 2400 (fields 7 and 8) are designated as receiving fields on maps in the WUP but are not listed as part of the chart. Suggest
adding these fields to the chart for easier reference.
/22/04 waste analysis=0.04 lbs. N/1000 gal. This result appears to be unusually low in nitrogen. Suggest using "10"for
calculations and resampling.
Reviewer/Inspector Name €Melis a Rosebrock
Reviewer/Inspector Signature: Date:
fc..uw a ..eu.ueu

Facility, NumD&f Inspection 6/29/2004 •
Required Records & Documents
21. Fail to have Certificate of Coverage & General Permit or other Permit readily available? ❑ Yes ® No
22. Does the facility fail to have all components of the Certified Animal Waste Management Plan readily available?
(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
29.
Were any additional problems noted which cause noncompliance of the Certified AWMP?
❑ Yes
®No
NPDES Permitted Facilities
30.
Is the facility covered under a NPDES Permit? (If no, skip questions 31-35)
❑ Yes
®No
31.
If selected, did the facility fail to install and maintain rainbreakers on irrigation equipment?
❑ Yes
❑ No
32.
Did the facility fail to install and maintain a rain gauge?
❑ Yes
❑ No
33.
Did the facility fail to conduct an annual sludge survey?
❑ Yes
❑ No
34.
Did the facility fail to calibrate waste application equipment?
❑ Yes
❑ No
35.
Does record keeping for NPDES required forms need improvement? If yes, check the appropriate box below.
❑ Yes
❑ No
❑ Stocking Form ❑ Crop Yield Form []Rainfall []Inspection After V Rain
❑ 120 Minute Inspections ❑ Annual Certification Form
12112103

(Type of Visit MCompliance Inspection O Operation Review O lagoon Evaluation
Reason for Visit Alloutine O Complaint O Follow up O Emergency Notification O Other ❑ Denied Access
Facility Number r Date of Visit: a2 Q Time:
y,� O Not Operational Q Below Threshold
fermttted 0 Certified 0 Conditionally Certified 0 Registered Date Last Operated or Above Threshold:
Farm Name: Aa� �:°i. L%l:IA-5................. _---- -------- -_-------- County: __ 1(�%.11.�q
Owner Name: ..UY:...... .�+o.n..
h..._........-... _.....__.._......._...._................. Phone N^o:...��
Mailing Address: .._// dj�+F`t. ( ._...._
/�t_ VeA.0. ......V q- 7._.___ ... C)
Facility Contact: ..SY� .....�. s ?'�_...._.......»...Title: ... ...... ..... _...... _. ................_...._._. Phone No: 32h' 212 /-•..U% �(✓
�r�i .1� 1�2__------------ Integrator:
e,
Onsite Representative- „ _ _____••
Certified Operator:._..'.!q_.I.ef.f.............. . .............. Operator Certification Number:..,,.y.y 3..
Location of Farm:
❑ Swine ❑ Poultry lycattle ❑ Horse Latitude [=• �' Longitude ®• Eljol ®"
to
Farrow to Wean
Farrow to Feeder
Farrow to Finish
Dischames & Stream Impacts
1. Is any discharge observed from any part of the operation?
❑ Yes XNo
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 o
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
`- 1S,truuc ure Structure 2 Structure 3 Structure 4 Structure 5 Structure 6
Identifier: Y�I1Sl...................._...._- ................. ......... _..........................
Freeboard (inches):
12112103 Continued

Facility Number: — • Date of InspectionE
pt� •5.
Are there any immediate threats to the integrity of any of the structures ed?TT(ieT/Ttrees, severe erosion,
❑ Yes
seepage, etc.)
INOo
6. Are there structures on -site which are not properly addressed and/or managed through a waste management or
❑ Yes
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 o
8. Does any part of the waste management system other than waste structures require maintenance/improvement?❑
o
YesfNo
9. Do any strictures lack adequate, gauged markers with required maximum and minimum liquid level
❑ Yes
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 No
❑ Excessive Ponding ❑TN ❑ Hydraulic Overload ❑ zen Ground ❑ Copper and/or Zinc
12. Crop type
13. Do the receiving crops differ with those designs in the Certified Animal Waste Management Plan (CAWMP)?
❑ Yesto
o
14. a) Does the facility lack adequate acreage for lan application?
❑Yes
b) Does the facility need a wettable acre determination?
❑ Yes A-flo
c) This facility is pended for a wettable acre detemtination?
❑ Yes rilo
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
'RYer$
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,
❑ Ye 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 To
Air Quality representative immediately.
//��
Reviewer/Inspector Name
Reviewer/Inspector Signal
Final Notes
0' 0� I bs. N1 / 600
a'oU oo j��
C'W'tl�) w U P.
Date:
12112103

Facility Number: _ 3 �e of Inspection (p/�I�► / p y{ •
Required Records & Documents
21. Fail to have Certificate of Coverage & General Permit or other Permit readily available?
22. Does the facility fail to have all components of the Certified Animal Waste Management Plan readily available?
(ie/ WUP, checklists, design, maps, etc.)
23. D7acility
ord keeping need improvement? If yes, check the appropriate box below.
te Application p Peeboard ❑ � to Analysis ❑ Soil Sampling A04
24, Is not in compliance with any applicable setback criteria in effect at the time of design?
25. Did the facility fail to have a actively certified operator in charge?
26. Fail to notify regional DWQ of emergency situations as required by General Permit?
(ie/ discharge, freeboard problems, over application)
27. Did Reviewer/Inspector fail to discuss review/inspection with on -site representative?
28. Does facility require a follow-up visit by same agency?
29. Were any additional problems noted which cause noncompliance of the Certified AWMP?
NPDES Permitted Facilities
30. Is the facility covered under a NPDES Permit? (If no, skip questions 31-35)
31. If selected, did the facility fail to install and maintain rainbreakers on irrigation equipment?
32. Did the facility fail to install and maintain a rain gauge?
33. Did the facility fail to conduct an annual sludge survey?
34. Did the facility fail to calibrate waste application equipment?
35. Does record keeping for NPDES required forms need improvement? If yes, check the appropriate box below.
❑ Stocking Form ❑ Crop Yield Form []Rainfall []Inspection After 1" Rain
❑ 120 Minute Inspections ❑ Annual Certification Form
❑ Yes No
❑ Yes No
❑ Yes No
❑ Yes o
❑ YesINo
o
❑ Yes
❑ Yeso
❑ Yeso
❑ Yeso
❑ Yes *io
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes ❑ No
0 No violations or deficiencies were noted during this visit. You will receive no farther correspondence about this visit
(!&4 A(-b)t
12112103

G
ical Assistance Site Visit
Natural Resources Conservation Service
Soil and Water Conservation District
Other...
Facility Number 97 - Date: 3/30/04 Time: 11:40 Time On Farm: 90 WSRO
Farm Name A. H. 8 W. Farms County Wilkes Phone: [phone]
Mailing Address 1190 Fall View Road
Boomer NC
Onsite
Representative Glenn Weston Integrator
Type Of Visit
Operation Review
Compliance Inspection (pilot only)
Technical Assistance
Confirmation for Removal
❑ No Animals -Date Last Operated:
❑ Operating below threshold
❑ Swine ❑ Poultry N Cattle ❑ Horse
Design Current
Capacity Population
❑ Wean to Feeder
❑ Feeder to Finish
❑ Farrow to Wean
❑ Farrow to Feeder
❑ Farrow to Finish
❑ Gilts
❑ Boars
Purpose Of Visit
Routine
Response to DWQ/DENR referral
Response to DSWC/SWCD referral
Response to complaint/local referral
Requested by producer/integrator
Follow-up
Emergency
Other...
Design Current
Capacity Po ulation
❑ Layer
❑ No _Layer
❑ Dairy
® Non -Dairy
Purpose Of Visit
Routine
Response to DWQ/DENR referral
Response to DSWC/SWCD referral
Response to complaint/local referral
Requested by producer/integrator
Follow-up
Emergency
Other...
Design Current
Capacity Po ulation
❑ Layer
❑ No _Layer
❑ Dairy
® Non -Dairy
❑ Dairy
® Non -Dairy
soo
ns
❑ Other
GENERAL QUESTIONS:
1. Is waste discharging from any part of the operation and reaching surface waters or wetlands?
2. Is there evidence of a past waste discharge from any part of the operation that waste reached
surface waters or wetlands?
3. Does any problem pose an immediate threat to the integrity of the waste structure (large trees,
seepage, severe erosion, etc.)?
4. Is there evidence of nitrogen over application, hydraulic overloading or excessive ponding
requiring DWQ notification?
5. Is there evidence of improper dead animal disposal that poses a threat to the environment
and/or public health?
6. Is the waste level within the structural freeboard elevation range for any waste structure?
28606
❑ yes N no
❑ yes N no
❑ yes N no
❑ yes N no
❑ yes N no
❑ yes N no
Structural Structure 2 Structure 3 Structure 4 Structure 5
Identifier WSP
Level (Inches) 38
CROP TYPES ICom, Silage oybeans j IFescue-graze mall grain silage j lFescue-hay
CkA CwA
MaB2
MaC2
PaD
7. What type of technical assistance does the onsite representative feel is needed? (list in comment section)
03/10/03

•
Facility Number 97 - 3 Date:
3/30/04
PARAMETER
O 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
❑
❑
❑ 10. Level in structural freeboard
❑ 11. Level in storm storage
26. Waste Plan Conditional Amendment
❑
❑
27. Review or Evaluate Waste Plan w/producer
❑
❑
❑ 12. Waste structure integrity compromised
28. Forms Need (list in comment section)
❑
❑ 13. Waste structure needs maintenance
❑
❑
29. Missing Components (list in comments)
[114. Over application >= 10% & 10 lbs.
❑
❑
❑ 15. Over application < 10% or < 10 lbs.
30.2Hre-certification reertification
❑ 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
❑ 20. Late/missing soils analysis
34. Sludge Evaluation
❑
❑
[121. Crop needs improvement
35. Sludge or Closure Plan
❑
❑
❑ 22. Crop inconsistent with waste plan
36. Sludge removal/closure procedures
❑
❑
37. Waste Structure Evaluation
❑
❑
[123. 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:
Other...
43. Irrigation system design/installation
El
El
Date:
44. Secure irrigation information (maps, etc.)
❑
❑
LIST IMPROVEMENTS
46. Operating improvements (pull signs, etc.)
❑
❑
MADE BY OPERATION
46. Wettable Acre Determination
❑
❑
1
47. Evaluate WAD certificationfrechecks
❑
❑
48. Crop evaluation/recommendations
❑
❑
2
49. Drainage work/evaluation
❑
❑
50. Land shaping, subsoiling, aeration, etc.
51. Runoff control, stormwater diversion, etc.
❑
❑
❑
❑
3
52. Buffer improvements
❑
❑
53. Field measurements(GPS, surveying, etc.)
❑
❑
4.
54. Mortality BMPs
❑
❑
55. Waste operator education (NPDES)
❑
❑
5.
56. Operation & maintenance education
❑
❑
57. Record keeping education
❑
6
58. Crop/forage management education
❑
❑
59. Soil and/or waste sampling education
❑
❑
03/10/03

Facility Number 97 - 0 Date: 3/30/04
COMMENTS:
Waste analysis: 3-16-04 LSB 2.5 Ibs.N/1000 gals. B
Mr. Weston is planning on getting his fencing installed at the Hwy. 18 farm and a stream
crossing/access point.
'Remember to get your 2004 soil samples.
Facility looks good overall.
TECHNICAL SPECIALIST JlRocky Durham
SIGNATURE
Date Entered: /2/04
Entered By: lRocky Durham
03/10/03

vision of Water Quality
ision'of Soil and Water Conservation •
O Other Agency
Type of Visit ® Compliance Inspection O Operation Review O Lagoon Evaluation
Reason for Visit *Routine O Complaint O Follow up O Emergency Notification O Other ❑ Denied Access
Facility Number 97 3 Date" t V i`it: 06/18/2003 Time: 0915
Folu-0perational O Below Threshold
N Permitted ® Certified 0 Conditionally Certified 13 Registered Date Last Operated or Above Threshold:
FarmName: tA.1L.A.M..Fwilas....................................................................................... County: wmkg5 ............................................... WS.RQ........
Owner Name: lN.0.......................................... 1Yrsthat....................................................... Phone No: G3G1.9..........................................
Mailing Address: 1199
.Fa11.Y.ie.Ragd......................................................................... lloanner lY............................................................. 20.0
..6
Facility Contact: GleA.SAS.'t slaa.................................................. Title:................................................................ Phone No: 33b.9.2.7..QbQb..0 �11)...........
Onsite Representative: GleA.W..cstRu............................................................................... Integrator:
Certified Operator:Gtfdllt.SlA:efA......................... F'Y.CStl11a............................................. Operator Certification Number: 298.33..............................
Location of Farm:
Hwy. 18 South 10 miles form Moravian Falls. Turn left on Andrews Rd. Right at first fork and left at second fork.
❑ Swine [I Poultry ® Cattle ❑ Horse Latitude ®• Ol ` 6 Longitude 81 • 18 35
Design Current
Swine Canacitv Pnnulation
❑ Wean to Feeder
❑ Feeder to Finish
❑ Farrow to Wean
❑ Farrow to Feeder
❑ Farrow to Finish
❑ Gilts
❑ Boars
Design Current Design Current
Poultry Capacity Population Cattle Capacity Population
❑ Layer IDairy
❑ Non -Layer I I [ONon-Dairyl 600 1 140
❑ Other
Total Design Capacity
Total SSLW
Discharees R Stream Impacts
1. Is any discharge observed from any part of the operation? ❑ Yes ® No
Discharge originated at: ❑ Lagoon ❑ Spray Field ❑ Other
a. If discharge is observed, was the conveyance man-made? ❑ Yes ❑ No
b. If discharge is observed. did it reach Water of the State? (If yes. notify DWQ)
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: ......Waste.P.and.....
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes
❑ No
❑ Yes
® No
® Yes
❑ No
❑ Yes
® No
Structure 6
Freeboard (inches): 28
05103101 Continued
-#f3a "7

Facility Number: 97-3 • Date of Insp ction 06/18/2003 •
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 pan 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 Pending ❑ PAN ❑ Hydraulic Overload
❑ Yes
® No
12.
Crop type Com (Silage & Grain) Small Grain (Wheat, Barley,
13.
Do the receiving crops differ with those designated in the Certified Animal Waste Management Plan (CAWMP)?
❑ Yes
® No
14.
a) Does the facility lack adequate acreage for land application?
❑ Yes
® No
b) Does the facility need a wettable acre determination?
❑ Yes
® No
c) This facility is pended for a wettable acre determination?
❑ Yes
® No
15.
Does the receiving crop need improvement?
❑ Yes
® No
16.
Is there a lack of adequate waste application equipment?
❑ Yes
® No
Required
Records Documents
17.
Fail to have Certificate of Coverage & General Permit or other Permit readily available?
❑ Yes
® No
18.
Does the facility fail to have all components of the Certified Animal Waste Management Plan readily available?
(ie/ WUP, checklists, design, maps, etc.)
® Yes
❑ No
19.
Does record keeping need improvement? (ie/ irrigation, freeboard, waste analysis & soil sample reports)
❑ Yes
® No
20.
Is facility not in compliance with any applicable setback criteria in effect at the time of design?
❑ Yes
®No
21.
Did the facility fail to have a actively certified operator in charge?
❑ Yes
® No
22.
Fail to notify regional DWQ of emergency situations as required by General Permit?
(ie/ discharge, freeboard problems, over application)
❑ Yes
® No
23.
Did Reviewer/Inspector fail to discuss review/inspection with on -site representative?
❑ Yes
®No
24.
Does facility require a follow-up visit by same agency?
❑ Yes
® No
25.
Were any additional problems noted which cause noncompliance of the Certified AWMP?
❑ Yes
® No
113 No violations or deficiencies were noted during this visit You will receive no further correspondence about this visit.
Gomme(refrer to question #): Edam my YES answers and/or any recommendations or any other comments
Use'drawmgspof [aitilitylto better iplatnasttuatioas use addthottalU-ages as necessary : 4
❑ Field Copy ® Final Notes
3. and 8. High Rock Rd./Hwy. 18 farm site - sediment is washing into creek. Al least 6 inches of sediment was observed in the creek.
_
Operator is to work on fencing cattle out of the creek and establishing a buffer. Check next visit.
19. Operator did not obtain soil analyses for those fields that received animal waste in 2002. There is no record of any 2003 soil
nalyses yet, either. NOV for 2002.
27. One cattle carcass in pasture. To be buried today.
Reviewer/Inspector Name Mel• Rosebrnck
Reviewer/Inspector Signatur • h dd 4 TIA7 Date:
O5103101 r� 1 _ Continued

Facility Number: 97 3 0if Inspection I .
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?
QYes ❑No
2Yes ❑No
❑Yes ®No
❑Yes [:I No
❑Yes ®No
❑Yes ❑No
❑Yes ❑No
_Wd diti6& Mo mEffe n tsladifidl-64P Mwtngs:
05103101
05103101

qo J®ld7y0
Type of Visit / IC,ompliance Inspection 0 Operation Review 0 Lagoon Evaluation
Reason for VisitRoutine O Complaint Q Follow up O Emergency Notification O Other ❑ Denied Access
Facility Number Date of Visit: I [r►IT- Time: I o—r#y<
Not Operational 0 Below Threshold
Permitted 0 Certified OCConditionally Certified 0 Registered Date Last Operated' oa Above
, Threshold:
Farm Name: AN 4 W1- `rOa`T s County: YV I I Kees
Owner Name: UX Vjes+on 1/ PhoneNj l �/• 3�736T J"
Mailing Address: I I f I � Ft_ i 1 V �e o � o m t r Q JC / Y
Facility Contact: � ` W P-� oh Title: Ph CN'o `�—1 . o (oa
Onsite Representative: �Integrator:
Certified Operator: eA n Oren LK) - _ I 1 0 n Operator Certification Number:
Location of Farm:
wV. 18 $aAP\ 10 M_ S . bP►►! Narar,49rl ,a s orl n
r rvr F- j / e -r-r QZT S t? CMU -b r IL_
❑ Swine ❑ Poultry Cattle ❑ Horse Latitude o U�V• DTI- Longitude 13U:I' EM• U-Kl"
Design Current -_Design . _ Current - Design Current
Swine Capacity
Po�rulation Po
ukr 'Ca achy Po ulation `-. Cattle, _Ga`acitr Population
Wean❑ Wean to Feeder i � ❑ La er
❑ Feeder to Finish `: ❑Non -La er airyi
. nBoars
er ❑ Other h - Total DesigD;Capaiiii _ `I QQ
_ TotaLSSLW
Number ofLa Drains oons ! ❑ Subsurface Present ! g -- ®r. -❑ Lagoon Area ❑ S ray Field Area
Holding .Ponds/ Solid Traps:= ❑ No Liquid Waste Management System
Discharges & Stream Impacts
1. Is any discharge observed from any part of the operation? ❑ Yes t7L1 No
Discharge originated at: El Lagoon ❑ Spray Field El other T�
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) El Yes ❑ No
2. Is there evidence of past discharge from any part of the operation? ❑ Yes XNo
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 y� l �(
4. Is storage capacity (freeboard plus storm storage) less than adequate? 11t7 Spillway ❑ Yes I�No
--- a_ �trun c e 1 p Stmcture 2 Structure 3 0 Structure 4 Structure 5 Structure 6
Identifier: �/ u.J o
Freeboard (inches)'
05103101 - Continued

Facility Number: — 57• Date of Inspection •
5. Are there any immediate threats to the integrity of any of the structures observed? (ie/ trees, severe erosion,
seepage, etc.)
6. Are there structures on -site which are not properly addressed and/or managed through a waste management or
closure plan?
(If any of questions 4-6 was answered yes, and the situation poses an
immediate public health or environmental threat, notifv 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 smctures 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
12. Crop type TAM wto—k-R1'IGC.
13. Do the receiving crops differ with those Aignated, in the Certified
14. a) Does the facility lack adequate acreage for land application?
b) Does the facility need a wettable acre determination?
c) This facility is pended for a wettable acre determination?
15. Does the receiving crop need improvement?
❑ PA© [I Hydraulic Overload
FR�1(1
Waste Management Plan (CAWMP)?
16. Is there a lack of adequate waste application equipment?
Reguired Records & Documents
17. Fail to have Certificate of Coverage & General Permit or other Permit readily available?
18. Does the facility fail to have all components of the Certified Animal Waste Management Plan readily available?
(ie/ WUP, checklists, design, maps, etc.) V/ /
19. Does record keeping need improvement? (ie/ irrigation, free oUd, waste analysis & soil sample reports)Z60Z 2
20. Is facility not in compliance with any applicable setback criteria in effect at the time of design?
21. Did the facility fail to have a actively certified operator in charge?
22. Fail to notify regional DWQ of emergency situations as required by General Permit?
(ie/ discharge, freeboard problems, over application)
23. Did Reviewer/Inspector fail to discuss review/inspection with on -site representative?
24. Does facility require a follow-up visit by same agency?
25. Were any additional problems noted which cause noncompliance of the Certified AWMP?
❑ Yes m No
❑ Yes *o
❑ Yes No
o
Yes %r. �N
❑ Yes Lip No
❑ Yes 4j No
❑ Yes No
❑ Yes
❑ Yes
❑ Yes
❑ Yes
❑ Yes
❑ Yes
❑ Yes UNo
❑ Yes A No
XYes tr❑,�No
El Yes lip No
El Yes o
❑ Yes No
ElYes No
El Yes No
❑ Yes No
No violations or deficiencies were noted during this visit You will receive no further correspondence about this visit
Comments(refer,to question q): _Explain apy-YFS answers and/or any recommendations oT_._a_nv other:eumments. '_ _ _ -
"Use drawings of facility: to better explain situations. (vseaddtaonal pages as necessary) Field Conv _ ❑Final Notes
_F
kdReviewer/Inspector Name
Reviewer/Inspector Signature
mr- _ -
Date:
05103101 C 1 V --'
Continued

Facility Number: Date of Inspection I HISZ 1/7 LL
3.�
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?
✓•tom 7:��na��
Yes ❑ No
Yes \'o
S. f �`�
❑ Yes No
es o
f.+..�n.vua�cvmwvn�auu�ur urawrn),a'- -. •-...... -_ -s _ _._., �
19. aoo 0?a00-n)6 OC61
- NOV.
aO0 3 �
05103101
i

Facility Number 97 3 Date ur Yisit: 1 10/30l2002 ,rhos: 10:45
0 Not Operational Q Below. Threshold
N Permitted ® Certified [3 Conditionally Certified E3Registered Date Last Operated or Above Threshold: .........................
Farm Name: A,.M.A..lX.Faruts....................................................................................... County: WAkC5 ............................................... !'k',SRQ........
OwnerName: \PaG........................................ 1...R5IQA....................................................... Phone No: 4i341.9;Zc3 68........................................................
Mailing Address: 1.1.4Q.F;t11..V.ie�t:.liaad................... :..................................................... U.Q.QM9jr..N.0 ............................................................ 28.fi.(.(..............
FacilityContact: ..............................................................................Title:................................................................ Phone No:...................................................
OnsiteRepresentative: .fxlP.tl.W...cAtjQQ............................................................................ Integrator:......................................................................................
Certified Operator:jGIUU.QrCR.........................WRStttIU............._......_..._..._........__ " Operator Certification Number:Z0,3,3
Location of Farm:
3wy. 18 South 10 miles form Moravian Falls. Turn left on Andrews Rd. Right at first fork and left at second fork.
❑ Swine ❑ Poultry ® Cattle ❑ Horse Latitude ®• 01 36 " Longitude 1F 81 • F 18 35
Discharees & 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): 96
05103101 Continued

Facility Number: 97-3 • Date of Inspection 10/30l2002 •
5. Are there any immediate threats to the integrity of any of the structures observed? (ie/ trees, severe erosion, ❑ Yes N No
seepage, etc.)
6. Are there structures on -site which are not properly addressed and/or managed through a waste management or
closure plan? ❑ Yes N No
(If any of questions 4-6 was answered yes, and the situation poses an
immediate public health or environmental threat, notify DWQ)
7. Do any of the structures need maintenance/improvement? ❑ Yes N No
8. Does any part of the waste management system other than waste structures require maintenance/improvement? ❑ Yes N No
9. Do any stuctures lack adequate, gauged markers with required maximum and minimum liquid level
elevation markings? ❑ Yes N No
Waste Application
10. Are there any buffers that need maintenance/improvement? ❑ Yes N No
11. Is there evidence of over application? ❑ Excessive Pending ❑ PAN ❑ Hydraulic Overload ❑ Yes N No
12. Crop type Corn (Silage & Grain) Small Grain (Wheat, Barley, Fescue (Graze) Fescue (Hay)
13. Do the receiving crops differ with those designated in the Certified Animal Waste Management Plan (CAWMP)? ❑ Yes N No
14. a) Does the facility lack adequate acreage for land application? ❑ Yes N No
b) Does the facility need a wettable acre determination?
c) This facility is pended for a wettable acre determination?
15. Does the receiving crop need improvement?
16. Is there a lack of adequate waste application equipment?
Required Records & Documents
17. Fail to have Certificate of Coverage & General Permit or other Permit readily available?
18. Does the facility fail to have all components of the Certified Animal Waste Management Plan readily available?
(ie/ WUP, checklists, design, maps, etc.)
19. Does record keeping need improvement? (ie/ irrigation, freeboard, waste analysis & soil sample reports)
20. Is facility not in compliance with any applicable setback criteria in effect at the time of design?
21. Did the facility fail to have a actively certified operator in charge?
22. Fail to notify regional DWQ of emergency situations as required by General Permit?
(ie/ discharge, freeboard problems, over application)
23. Did Reviewer/Inspector fail to discuss review/inspection with on -site representative?
24. Does facility require a follow-up visit by same agency?
25. Were any additional problems noted which cause noncompliance of the Certified AWMP?
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes N No
❑ Yes N No
❑ Yes N No
N Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes N No
❑ Yes N No
❑ Yes N No
❑ Yes N No
❑ Yes N No
❑ Yes N No
10 No violations or deficiencies were noted during this visit. You will receive no further correspondence about this visit.
Comments (refer to question A.: Explain any YES answers and/or any recommendations or any other comments
Use drawings of facility to Netter explain situations. (use additional'P—M-1QQe—Ce'Q9*'M ❑ Field Copy N Final Notes
19. Need to update the application records. i.e. freeboard records.
_
' Remember to get your soil samples for 2002. Mr. Weston is aware of the elevated copper levels in the application fields.
The waste plan has been updated to include field # 8 of tract 2400 and a table has been added with several crop options.
The stream work that has been done on the farm looks good. Cattle are out of the streams and water tanks are installed.
Reviewer/Inspector Name Rocky Durham
Reviewer/Inspector Signature: Date:
05103101 Continued

Facility NumDa&nspection 10/30/2002
46
Odor Issues
26. Does the discharge pipe from the confinement building to the storage pond or lagoon fail to discharge attor 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
analysis: 7-05-02 LSB 11.4 Ibs.N./1000 gals. B
05103101

Facility Number 97 3 Dale of Visit: 6/19/2002 Time
O Not Operational O Below Threshold
■ Permitted E Certified 0 Conditionally Certified 0 Registered Date Last Operated or Above Threshold: .........................
FarmName: t1.R.A.M.Farm....................................................................................... County: Y.Ugs............................................._. W,SRQ........
OwnerName: %C........................................ Y. 0jlQa.:...................................................... Phone No:(,33.602173]58...........................................:............
Mailing address: 1190.FmII.Y.ae..RQ&d.................................:....................................... Ro ma.B.C............................................................ 28.6.0.6 .............
Facility Contact:GlCtlu..Weston....................:..........................Title:................................................................ Phone No: 33.6SZIj.629 .......................
Onsite Representative: Gletto..W.mtQlj.......................:. ....... Integrator:......................................................................................
............................................
Certified Operator:Gletttt.0jr.ClA......................... W.C510 t............................................. Operator Certification Number: 9$33............... :..............
Location of Farm:
Hwy. 18 South 10 miles form Moravian Falls. Turn left on Andrews Rd. Right at first fork and left at second fork.
❑ Swine ❑ Poultry ® Cattle ❑ Horse Latitude ®• Ol - ®.. Longitude 81 • 18 35
I❑ Wean to Feeder 1 ❑Layer I ❑ Dairy
❑ Feeder to Finish ❑ Non -Layer ® Non -Dairy 1 600 200
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: ..... Waste.P.ond..... ................................... .................................... ................................... ......................................................................
Freeboard (inches): 108
05103101 Continued
1�

Facility Number: 97-3 • Date of Inspection 6/19/2002 •
11
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 maintenance/improvement? ❑ Yes ® No
11. Is there evidence of over application? ❑ Excessive Pending ❑ PAN ❑ Hydraulic Overload ❑ Yes ® No
12. Crop type Com (Silage & Grain) Small Grain (Wheat, Barley,
13. Do the receiving crops differ with those designated in the Certified Animal Waste Management Plan (CAWMP)? []Yes ® No
14. a) Does the facility lack adequate acreage for land application? []Yes ® No
b) Does the facility need a wettable acre determination?
❑ Yes
® No
c) This facility is pended for a wettable acre determination?
❑ Yes
® No
15. Does the receiving crop need improvement?
❑ Yes
® No
16. Is there a lack of adequate waste application equipment?
❑ Yes
® No
Required Records & Documents
17. Fail to have Certificate of Coverage & General Permit or other Permit readily available?
❑ Yes
® No
18.
Does the facility fail to have all components of the Certified Animal Waste Management Plan readily available?
(ie/ WUP, checklists, design, maps, etc.)
❑ Yes
® No
19.
Does record keeping need improvement? (ie/ irrigation, freeboard, waste analysis & soil sample reports)
® Yes
❑ No
20.
Is facility not in compliance with any applicable setback criteria in effect at the time of design?
❑ Yes
® No
21.
Did the facility fail to have a actively certified operator in charge?
❑ Yes
® No
22.
Fail to notify regional DWQ of emergency situations as required by General Permit?
(ie/ discharge, freeboard problems, over application)
❑ Yes
® No
23.
Did Reviewer/Inspector fail to discuss review/inspection with on -site representative?
❑ Yes
® No
24.
Does facility require a follow-up visit by same agency?
❑ Yes
® No
25.
Were any additional problems noted which cause noncompliance of the Certified AWMP?
® Yes
❑ No
0 No violations or deficiencies were noted during this visit. You will receive no further correspondence about this visit.
Comments refer to question # : xplain - answers and/or any recommendations or any other comments
lainsitany
Use drawings of facility to better expuations. use a ditional ages as necessary. ❑Field Copy ®Final Notes
15. Copper levels in several fields are greater than 1500 units.
19. Still need to obtain 2002 soil analysis. June 2002 slurry waste sample was sent off yesterday according to operator. Check next
inspection.
19. Sept. 2001 applications were a few days outside of 60 day window. Don't forget to take waste samples next Fall and winter!
19. Dry waste applied 4/2102 does not have a waste analysis yet. Operator says he will take dry manure sample this week and have
sent to WSRO-DWQ by first week of July to avoid NOV or NOD.
Iesults
5. Soybeans need to be added to CAWMP prior to any waste applications.
25. T-2400 F-8 5.1 acres? needs to be in CAWMP asoon as possible since waste was applied there on 413/02.
Reviewer/Inspector Name !Meli nlosebrock
Reviewer/Inspector Signature: Date: a'OL-
05103101 t Continued

Facility Number: 97.--3 Da•Inspection 6/19/2002
Odor Issues
26. Does the discharge pipe from the confinement building to the storage pond or lagoon fail to discharge at/or below ❑ Yes ❑ No
liquid level of lagoon or storage pond with no agitation?
27. Are there any dead animals not disposed of properly within 24 hours? ❑ Yes ® No
28. Is there any evidence of wind drift during land application? (i.e. residue on neighboring vegetation, asphalt, ❑ Yes ® No
roads, building structure, and/or public property)
29. Is the land application spray system intake not located near the liquid surface of the lagoon? ❑ Yes ❑ No
30. Were any major maintenance problems with the ventilation fan(s) noted? (i.e. broken fan belts, missing or
or broken fan blade(s), inoperable shutters, etc.) ❑ Yes ® No
31. Do the animals feed storage bins fail to have appropriate cover? ❑ Yes ❑ No
32. Do the flush tanks lack a submerged fill pipe or a permanent/temporary cover? ❑ Yes ❑ No
l.' - tto - LC6nu entslau .or7 raw�ngs:
20. Exemption granted in 1997.
Mitigation work is complete at the farm while other work is continuing near highway 18. Looks great!
05103101

No
Division of Water Quality
Division of Soil and Water Conservation
Other Agency
Type of Visit 4 Compliance Inspection O Operation Review O Lagoon Evaluation
Reason for Visit Routine O Complaint O Follow up O Emergency Notification O Other ❑ Denied Access
Facility Number Date of Visit:
Permitted )i Certified 0 Conditionally Certified 13Registered
Farm Name: A • W • d- 0 • FGLI- TY16
Owner Name: U-) •t.— IA f/)�
Mailing Address: I1 �I���,0, Fail Y If.0 PA.
Facility Contact: G Imp v "eJ +O 1n_ Title:
Onsite Representative: ( -0 6 y) �TO n
r
Time:
Date Last Operated or Above Threshold:
County: W I I Ve'4) •� / {f
Phone No: 7 a 3 3 tp to
ne'r . NCB
Integrator:
Phone No: 3 3 6.921.39 2-9
Certified Operator: f 0 64 y\ t l \a) QSion Operator Certification Number: ;z " 3
Location of Farm:
[]Swine ❑ Poultry VI Cattle ❑ Horse Latitude ®' EM71` ®- Longitude ®' E�Yl• 1:1�••
Design Current
Swine Capacity Po ulatioi
❑ Wean to Feeder
❑ Feeder to Finish
❑ Farrow to Wean
❑ Farrow to Feeder
❑ Farrow to Finish
❑ Gilts
❑ Boars
Number of Lagoons
Holding Ponds / Solid Traps Q
Design Current Design Current
Poultry Capacity Population Cattle Capacity Population
❑ La er I I ❑ Dairy
❑ Non -Layer I I IEXNon-Dairy
❑ Other
Total Design Capacity �jj 06
Total SSLW I H`60i 000
Present ❑ Lagoon Area IM Sorav Field Area
Discharges & Stream Imoacts
I. Is any discharge observed from any part of the operation?
Discharge originated at: ❑ Lagoon ❑ Spray Field ❑ Other
a. If discharge is observed, was the conveyance man-made?
b. 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
Struc e l Structure 2 Structure 3 Structure 4 Structure 5
Identifier. Q POh�
Freeboard (inches):
05103101
❑ Yes KNo
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes
❑ No
❑ Yes
No
❑ Yes
% No
❑ Yes
XNo
Structure 6
Continued

• •
Facili Number: —
tY Date of Inspection
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
o
8.
Does any part of the waste management system other than waste structures require maintenance/improvement?
❑ Yes
V No
9.
Do any smctures lack adequate, gauged markers with required maximum and minimum liquid level
elevation markings?
❑ Yes
XNo
Waste Application
10.
Are there any buffers that need maintenance/improvement?
❑ Yes
9No
11.
Is there evidence ofver appli ation? El Excessive Pending ❑ PAN ❑ Hydraulic Overload
El Yes
)(No
12.
Crop type t }il.L� E - AA
13.
Do the receiving crops differ with those designated in W Certified Animal Waste Management Plan (CAWMP)?
❑ Yes
No
14.
a) Does the facility lack adequate acreage for land application?
❑ Yes
ttt��Xttt
No
b) Does the facility need a wettable acre determination?
❑ Yes
No
c) This facility is pended for a wettable acre determination?
❑ Yes
[INo
15.
Does the receiving crop need improvement?
❑ Yes
XNo
16.
Is there a lack of adequate waste application equipment?
❑ Yes
>No
Reauired 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
kNo
19.
Does record keeping need improvement? (ie/ irrigation, freeboard, waste analysis & soil sample reports)
ZYes
❑ 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
o
22.
Fail to notify regional DWQ of emergency situations as required by General Permit?
(ie/ discharge, freeboard problems, over application)
❑ Yes
I R<O
23.
Did Reviewer/Inspector fail to discuss review/inspection with on -site representative?
❑ Yes
V/NNo
24.
Does facility require a follow-up visit by same agency?
ElYes
IkNo
25.
Were any additional problems noted which cause noncompliance of the Certified AWMP?
�Kcs
❑ No
10 No violations or deficiencies were noted during this visit. You will receive no further correspondence about this visit.
Commenis (refer to,gtiGshon #):.Ezplam any YES answers:and/orany recommendahons or any other",comments.
Use drawmgsyouf f e ityto"better ezplam situa ons (use adAonal_pages as necessary) Field Copy ❑ Final
,.., ;�.
_. .r �... ,. ,
a e.
19 - /x_'e�d `4
Qrw
Reviewer/Inspector Name I ..Sg_
Reviewer/Inspector Signature: Date:
O5103101
Continued

Facility Number: — 3 Date of Inspection O •
Odor Issues
26. Does the discharge pipe from the confinement building to the storage pond or lagoon fail to discharge attor 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 }lush tanks lack a submerged fill pipe or a permanent/temporary cover?
fl&fm
) s. 6p7obJ a ?
as . � n�% -�P ✓�u�n e t,aJ c a cv n.tto
as MoOL
lR
a
❑ Yes Nf No
❑ Yes WO

vision of Water Quality
e ision of Soil and Water Conservation
n Uther Agency
Type of Visit O Compliance Inspection 0. Operation Review O Lagoon Evaluation
for Visit O Routine O Complaint O Follow up O Emergency Notification O Other ❑ Denied Access
Facility Number 97 3 Date of -Visit 11/6/2001 Time: 13:30
O Not Operational O Below Threshold
® Permitted ® Certified E3 Conditionally Certified [3 Registered Date Last Operated or Above Threshold:
Farm Name: &.H...&.W—Farms....................................................................................... County:}!'ilAteS................................................ NY.SRQ........
Owner Name: NV.0..........................................W.jefijQ.R ....................................................... Phone No:(3.3.61.92,1-D6.8 .......................................................
Mailing Address: 119U.Falt......R9.Ad......................................................................... BQ.amgr..1N.C............................................................ 28bV.b..............
Facility Contact:
Title:
Onsite Representative: Gicun.Wes.9ta............................................................................ Integrator:
Phone No:
Certified Operator:Glenal.,QJCeO......................... W.CSIQla ............................................. Operator Certification Number:2,48..33 .............................
Location of Farm:
Hwy. 18 South 10 miles form Moravian Falls. Turn left on Andrews Rd. Right at first fork and left at second fork.
❑ Swine ❑ Poultry N Cattle [I Horse Latitude 36 • Ol ' 36 Longitude 81 • 18 35
Design Current
Swine Canacitv Population
❑ Wean to Feeder
❑ Feeder to Finish
❑ Farrow to Wean
❑ Farrow to Feeder
❑ Farrow to Finish
❑ Gilts
❑ Boars
Design Current Design Current
Poultry Capacity Population Cattle Capacity Population
❑ Laye I I JE] Dairy
❑ Non -Layer I I JSNon-Dairy600 1 600
❑ Other
Total Design Capacity 600
Total SSLW 480,000
I Number of Lagoons J❑ Subsurface Drains Present j[1 Lagoon Area I❑ Spray Field Area I
Holding Ponds / Solid Traps ❑ No Liquid Waste Management System
Discharees & Stream Impacts
1. Is any discharge observed from any part of the operation? ❑ Yes N 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 N No
3. Were there any adverse impacts or potential adverse impacts to the Waters of the State other than from a discharge? ❑ Yes N No
Waste Collection & Treatment
4. Is storage capacity (freeboard plus storm storage) less than adequate? ❑ Spillway ❑ Yes N No
Structure 1 Structure 2 Structure 3 Structure 4 Structure 5 Structure 6
Identifier: ...................................
Freeboard (inches): 144
05103101
Continued

Facility Number: 97-3 Date of Inspection
5. Are there any immediate threats to the inprity of any of the structures observed? (ie/ tre*vere erosion, ❑ Yes ® No
seepage, etc.)
6. Are there structures on -site which are not properly addressed and/or managed through a waste management or
closure plan? ❑ Yes ® No
(If any of questions 4-6 was answered yes, and the situation poses an
immediate public health or environmental threat, notify DWQ)
7. Do any of the structures need maintenance/improvement? ❑ Yes ® No
8. Does any part of the waste management system other than waste structures require maintenance/improvement? ❑ Yes ® No
9. Do any stuctures lack adequate, gauged markers with required maximum and minimum liquid level
elevation markings? ❑ Yes ® No
Waste ADDlication
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 Com (Silage & Grain) Small Grain (Wheat, Barley, Fescue (Graze)
13.
Do the receiving crops differ with those designated in the Certified Animal Waste Management Plan (CAWMP)?
® Yes
❑ 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?
15. Does the receiving crop need improvement?
16. Is there a lack of adequate waste application equipment?
Required Records & Documents
17. Fail to have Certificate of Coverage & General Permit or other Permit readily available?
18. Does the facility fail to have all components of the Certified Animal Waste Management Plan readily available?
(ie/ WUP, checklists, design, maps, etc.)
19. Does record keeping need improvement? (ie/ irrigation, freeboard, waste analysis & soil sample reports)
20. Is facility not in compliance with any applicable setback criteria in effect at the time of design?
21. Did the facility fail to have a actively certified operator in charge?
22. Fail to notify regional DWQ of emergency situations as required by General Permit?
(ie/ discharge, freeboard problems, over application)
23. Did Reviewer/Inspector fail to discuss review/inspection with on -site representative?
24. Does facility require a follow-up visit by same agency?
25. Were any additional problems noted which cause noncompliance of the Certified AWMP?
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes ® No
E� �4=
0 No violations or deficiencies were noted during this visit. You will receive no further correspondence about this visit.
Comments (refer to question #): Explain any YES answers and/or any recommendations or any other comments.
Use drawings of facility to better explain situations. (use additional pages as necessary): L❑ Field Copy ® Final Notes
# 13. Will need to have soybeans added to the waste plan if it will be part of the crop rotation.
# 19. Will need to start keeping the weekly levels on the waste pond per the general permit conditions.
Overall facility and records look good.
Facility is currently having stream restoration work done on two streams that run through the farm. The streams will be fenced out and
cattle waterers installed
o cattle were confined in the feeding barn today. All cattle were on pasture.
Reviewer/Inspector Name Rocky Durham r
Reviewer/Inspector Signature: Date:
O5103101 Continued

Facility Number: 97-3 Date of Inspection 11/6/2001
Odor Issues • •
26. Does the discharge pipe from the confinement building to the storage pond or lagoon fail to discharge at/or below ❑ Yes N 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 N No
28. Is there any evidence of wind drift during land application? (i.e. residue on neighboring vegetation, asphalt, ❑ Yes N No
roads, building structure, and/or public property)
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 N No
31. Do the animals feed storage bins fail to have appropriate cover? ❑ Yes N No
32. Do the flush tanks lack a submerged fill pipe or a permanent/temporary cover? ❑ Yes ❑ No
to analysis: 7-3-01 LSB 13.2 lbs.N/ton B
test indicates some fields are in the warning track on copper levels.
O5103101

ivision of Water Quality
ivision of Soil and Water Conservation
O Other Agency
Type of Visit O Compliance Inspection O Operation Review O lagoon Evaluation
Reason for Visit O Routine O Complaint O Follow up O Emergency Notification O Other ❑ Denied Access
Facility Number 97 3 Date of Visit: S/26/2001 'rime a930 Printed on: 6/29/2001
0 Not Operational 0 Below Threshold
E3 Permitted 0 Certified [3 Conditionally Certified E3 Registered Date Last Operated or Above Threshold: 5/VZ.Q(11.......
FarmName: A,.H._dc.H..F.acros....................................................................................... County:Wjkcs ............................................... WSRQ........
OwnerName: 3Y.0........................................ KRSlatl....................................................... Phone No: G3}k1.921:8........................................................
Mailing Address: 1.1.94.FaA..Y.it:tt:.liead......................................................................... 8.99M AKC............................................................ 28M .............
Facility Contact: Gleuft.W..aesWa.............................................Title:................................................................ Phone No: 3J.6.9ZLM29 .......................
OnsiteRepresentative:.Cxj4=.W...C5tpR............................................................................ Integrator:......................................................................................
Certified Operator:GlclmGon ..................................... W.C51en ............................................. Operator Certification Number: 2M.33..............................
Location of Farm:
Hwy. 18 South 10 miles form Moravian Falls. Turn left on Andrews Rd. Right at first fork and left at second fork.
❑ Swine ❑ Poultry H Cattle []Horse Latitude ®• 0I ®11 Longitude 81 • 18 35
Design Current
Swine Capacity Population
❑ Wean to Feeder
❑ Feeder to Finish
❑ Farrow to Wean
❑ Farrow to Feeder
❑ Farrow to Finish
❑ Gilts
❑ Boars
Design Current
Poultry Capacity Population
❑ Layer
❑ Non -Layer
❑ Other
Design Current
Cattle Capacity Population
❑ Dairy
INNon-Dairyl 600 1 94
Total Design Capacity 600
Total SSLW 480,000
Number of Lagoons 1 0 IU Subsurface Drains Present 1U Lagoon Area JU Spray Field Area
Holding Ponds / Solid Traps ❑ No Liquid Waste Management System
Discharges _& Stream Impacts
1. Is any discharge observed from any part of the operation? ❑ Yes ® No
Discharge originated at: ❑ Lagoon ❑ Spray Field ❑ 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): 108
05103101 !1L %S� Continued
11h_�

Facility Number: 97-3 ' . Date of Inspection 6/26/2001 Printed on: 6/29/2001 ' .
5. Are there any immediate threats to the integrity of any of the structures observed? (ie/ treesvVere 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 stmahon 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 (Graze) Corn, Soybeans, Wheat Fescue (Hay)
13.
Do the receiving crops differ with those designated in the Certified Animal Waste Management Plan (CAWMP)?
® Yes
❑ No
14.
a) Does the facility lack adequate acreage for land application?
❑ Yes
® No
b) Does the facility need a wettable acre determination?
❑ Yes
® No
c) This facility is pended for a wettable acre determination?
❑ Yes
® No
15.
Does the receiving crop need improvement?
❑ Yes
® No
16.
Is there a lack of adequate waste application equipment? — -
❑ Yes
❑ No
Reunited Records & Documen
17.
Fail to have Certificate of Coverage & General Permit or other Permit readily available?
❑ Yes
❑ No
18.
Does the facility fail to have all components of the Certified Animal Waste Management Plan readily available?
(ie/ WUP, checklists, design, maps, etc.)
❑ Yes
® No
19.
Does record keeping need improvement? (ie/ irrigation, freeboard, waste analysis & soil sample reports)
® Yes
❑ No
20.
Is facility not in compliance with any applicable setback criteria in effect at the time of design?
® Yes
❑ No
21.
Did the facility fail to have a actively certified operator in charge?
❑ Yes
® No
22.
Fail to notify regional DWQ of emergency situations as required by General Permit?
(ie/ discharge, freeboard problems, over application)
❑ Yes
® No
23.
Did Reviewer/Inspector fail to discuss review/inspection with on -site representative?
❑ Yes
® No
24.
Does facility require a follow-up visit by same agency?
❑ Yes
® No
25. Were any additional problems noted which cause noncompliance of the Certified AWMP? ❑ Yes ® No
0 No violations or deficiencies were noted during this visit- You will receive no further correspondence about this visit
Field Copy ® Final Notes
Any silage run-off appears to be contained in diversion around waste storage pond. Stockpiled, uncovered dry waste is approximately
)' from creek. needs to be applied soon. Still getting some run-off of waste and sediment from pasture lots and stock trail. Looks
ter this year. Contine efforts to establish more vegetation near creek. Keep cattle out as much as possible. DO in creek ranges 7.2-7.`
13. Waste was applied to soybeans which are not in the WUP. This needs to be updated.
19. 2000 Soil samples not taken. Last waste sample was dated Sept. 2000. Operator had receipt for seven soils and one waste sample
that were sent off 6125/01. Need to check for these at next inspection. If not available, DWQ needs to send NOV/NOL
Reviewer/Inspector Name
Reviewer/Inspector Signal
Dale:
05103101 ' Continued

Facility Num6 of Inspection (✓26/2001 • printed on: 6/29/2001
Odor Issues
26. Does the discharge pipe from the confinement building to the storage pond or lagoon fail to discharge at/or below ❑ Yes ® No
liquid level of lagoon or storage pond with no agitation?
27. Are there any dead animals not disposed of properly within 24 hours? ❑ Yes ® No
28.
Is there any evidence of wind drift during land application? (i.e. residue on neighboring vegetation, asphalt,
❑ Yes
® No
roads, building structure, and/or public property)
29.
Is the land application spray system intake not located near the liquid surface of the lagoon?
❑ Yes
®No
30.
Were any major maintenance problems with the ventilation fan(s) noted? (i.e. broken fan belts, missing or
or broken fan blade(s), inoperable shutters, etc.)
❑ Yes
® No
31.
Do the animals feed storage bins fail to have appropriate cover?
❑ Yes
® No
32.
Do the flush tanks lack a submerged fill pipe or a permanent/temporary cover?
❑ Yes
❑ No
"ilditi •otumeu au o wmgs:
21. Operator needs six credits by 12/2003.
27. Burying dead cattle at end of ban nearest creek, approx. 330' from creek.
05103101

Type of Vlsit tkCompliance Inspection O Operation Review O Lagoon Evaluation I
Reason for Visit 4 Routine O Complaint O Follow up O Emergency Notification O Other ❑ Denied Access
Facility Number Date of Visit: — Time:
0 Permitted 0 Certified 0 Conditionally Certified 0 Registered Date Last Operated or Above Threshold:
Farm Name:..11..'.L!.:_v:_w........FGLf,IY),5...._................................................... County: ... lA..31G..1.. 5...'........................
OwnerName:......./W/��.:_Gl_......................_.....n.LLN`..'..`..:.'...f......................................... Phone No:....+..l�l..fb......1...'....._/3n��b......2__.._.^..�Q:.
Facility Contact: ....1%..•`•S....rt.-x•t....L1iJ .t1 Qn............Title:................................................................ /Phone No: 10 ;'b�'!•J �`/
�I.�p.TVAdMailing Address: .... - ...................\iC.....................a....._ g..
�0�00
�]00LAOnsiteRepre......................... Integrator:................................_...6
LN
Certified Operator:---- .j;e,}1. ............... ..... „.................:........................ Operator Certification Number:.....p; 03 `�
Location of Farm:
H i � From 1vbr ian Fads • Tale _Vf- 07-46 Nnvi mazy Pd .
Rar —{�r5+ �rILA-le-'+ a + Secol-A Rr� •
❑ Swine ❑ Poultry Cattle ❑ Horse Latitude ® • EM' F—,"3111, Longitude F-_JM' ®1 =11
((("' Desigtt, Current Design Current Design Current
Canacitb Ponulation Poultry CHn9[ity.POnulation Cattle Canacity:Population`sw
❑ Wean to Feeder ❑Layer ❑Dairy "r
Feeder to Finish -- ❑ Non -Layer Non -Dairy Op
❑ Farrow to Wean
:. ❑ Farrow to Feeder ❑ Other
El Farrow to Finish Total Design Capacity D�
❑ Gilts
❑ Boars Total SSLW
Number of Lagoons ' ❑Subsurface Drains Present ❑ Lagoon Area ❑ Spray Field A;QjF
Holding Ponds /'Solid Traps, ® ❑ No Liquid Waste Management System
Discharges & Stream Impacts
1. Is any discharge observed from any part of the operation? ❑ Yes 1111 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 DW Q) ❑ 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 L)" o
Waste Collection & Treatment
4. Is storage capacity (freeboard plus storm storage) less than adequate? Spillway ❑ Yes XNo
St`ru�lure 1 Stru - re 2 Structure 3 Structure 4 Structure-5 • Structure-6
Identifier"4u rE`�r.c .>~...._ rx1.......................................................
Freeboard (inches): (b t+
5/00 Continued on back

Facility Number: 4T— Date of Inspection
5. Are there any immediate threats to the'flftegrity 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 KNo
(If any of questions 4-6 was answered yes, and the situation poses an
immediate public health or environmental threat, notify DWQ)
7. Do any of the structures need maintenance/improvement? ❑ Yes XNo
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 PNo
Waste Application
10. Are there any buffers that need maintenance/improvement? ❑ Yes jVNo
11. Is there evidence of over application? ❑ Excessive Ponding ❑ PAN ❑ Hydraulic Overload ❑ Yes �j No
12. Crop type 6 rn fQ A. 1 /
13. Do the receiving crops differ with those designated in the Uified Animal Waste anagement PI/(CAWMP)? Yes ❑ No
14. a) Does the facility lack adequate acreage for land application? elSCU e_�1 � � ❑ Yes 19 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 KNo
16. Is there a lack of adequate waste application equipment? ❑ Yes A No
Required Records & Documents
17. Fail to have Certificate of Coverage & General Permit readily available? ^Et•Yes—B-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.) ❑ YesKNo
No
19. Does record keeping need improvement? (ie/ irrigation, freeboard, waste analysis &fcpi],/�'�am.5�ple reports) �] Yes
20. Is facility not in compliance with any applicable setback criteria in effect at the time of design? ,Yes ❑ No
21. Did the facility fail to have a actively certified operator in charge? ❑ Yes X No
22. Fail to notify 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 KNo
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
iVo•0001 igtjs;oF il¢fjcpenciM •wire pgCed-i1ohii 4hjs:vjsjt' • You wiij•Secgiye tjo fuith$r.:: /
6ririsiD ridei►&aboufthuvisit:::::::::::::•:•:•:•:•:•:.:.:.:.:•:•:•:•:
a O. i a 7 Sn +et a9en i ran+ed an t? X p� Ce v i ov)
5 ,6� rul o oaf A u3 us+ 07,199�*
13 P ";4
to 1.JuP-
Name

Facility Number: 'f — 3 �te of Inspection .r�%]�L.%/� •
Odor Issues �f
26. Does the discharge pipe from the confinement building to the storage pond or lagoon fail to discharge at/or below [I 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 flNo
roads, building structure, and/or public property) /!
29. Is the land application spray system intake not located near the liquid surface of the lagoon? ❑ Yes XNo
30. Were any major maintenance problems with the ventilation fan(s) noted? (i.e. broken fan belts, missing or
or broken fan blade(s), inoperable shutters, etc.) ❑ Yes No
31. Do the animals feed storage bins fail to have appropriate cover? ❑ Yes No
32. Do the flush tanks lack a submerged fill pipe or a permanent/temporary cover? p-

9ftision of Water Quality
4PIPHsion of Soil and Water Conservation
d Other Agency
Type of Visit O Compliance Inspection O Operation Review O Lagoon Evaluation
Reason for Visit O Routine O Complaint O Follow up O Emergency Notification O Other ❑ Denied Access
Facility Number 97 3 Date of Visit: 17J5/2000 Time: 15:30
Not Operational C Below Thresl
0 Permitted E Certified Q Conditionally Certified [3 Registered Date Last Operated or Above Threshold:
FarmName: t1R.A.M..FU-M.......................................................................................
Owner Name: \l.0........................................
Facility Contact:
Title:
County: WJUceS................................................ WSSQ........
Phone No:(.3341.921..33N..................................................... -
Phone No:
Mailing Address: 1.t9Q.Fall.Y.iezr..li.Rad............... :......................................................... 119.9mu.N.0 ............................................................ MW .............
Onsite Representative:
Integrator:
Certified Operator:Q01111..................................... wvatoxt............................................. Operator Certification Number: Z,.W3 .............................
I.nrntian of Farm!
Hwy. 18 South 10 miles form Moravian Falls. Turn left on Andrews Rd. Right at first fork and left at second fork.
❑ Swine ❑ Poultry ® Cattle ❑ Horse Latitude ®• 01 6 longitude 81 • 18 . 1 35
Design Current
Swine Canacitv Population
❑ Wean to Feeder
❑ Feeder to Finish
❑ Farrow to Wean
❑ Farrow to Feeder
❑ Farrow to Finish
❑ Gilts
❑ Boars
Number of Lagoons
Holding Ponds / Solid Traps
Design Current Design Current
Poultry Capacity Population Cattie Ca aci Po ulation
❑ Layer I
10 Dairy
❑ Non -Layer I JIM Non -Dairy 1 600 1 400
❑ Other
Total Design Capacity 600
No Liquid Waste
Total SSLW
Area I❑ Spray Field Area
Discharges & Stream Impacts
1. Is any discharge observed from any part of the operation?
Discharge originated at: ❑ Lagoon ❑ Spray Field ❑ Other
a. If discharge is observed, was the conveyance man-made?
b. If discharge is observed, did it reach Water of the State? (If yes, notify DWQ)
c. If discharge is observed, what is the estimated flow in gal/min?
d. Does discharge bypass a lagoon system? (If yes, notify DWQ)
2. Is there evidence of past discharge from any part of the operation?
3. Were there any adverse impacts or potential adverse impacts to the Waters of the State other than from a discharge?
Waste Collection & Treatment
4. Is storage capacity (freeboard plus storm storage) less than adequate? ❑ Spillway
Structure l Structure 2 Structure 3 Structure 4 Structure 5
Identifier: .............WSP......................................................................................................................................................
Freeboard (inches): 84
5/00
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes ® No
Structure 6
Continued on back

r
Facilit Number: 97-3 Date of Inspection 12/5/2000
5. Are there any immediate threats to the0grity of any of the structures observed? f e/ trosevere 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 Anulication
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 Com (Silage & Grain) Fescue (Hay) Small Grain (Wheat, Barley,
13. Do the receiving crops differ with those designated in the Certified Animal Waste Management Plan (CAWMP)? ❑ Yes ® No
14. a) Does the facility lack adequate acreage for land application? ❑ Yes ® No
b) Does the facility need a wettable acre determination? ❑ Yes ® No
c) This facility is pended for a wettable acre determination?
15. Does the receiving crop need improvement?
16. Is there a lack of adequate waste application equipment?
Required Records & Documents
17. Fail to have Certificate of Coverage & General Permit readily available?
18. Does the facility fail to have all components of the Certified Animal Waste Management Plan readily available?
(ie/ WUP, checklists, design, maps, etc.)
19. Does record keeping need improvement? (ie/ irrigation, freeboard, waste analysis & soil sample reports)
20. Is facility not in compliance with any applicable setback criteria in effect at the time of design?
21. Did the facility fail to have a actively certified operator in charge?
22. Fail to notify regional DWQ of emergency situations as required by General Permit?
(ie/ discharge, freeboard problems, over application)
23. Did Reviewer/Inspector fail to discuss review/inspection with on -site representative?
24. Does facility require a follow-up visit by same agency?
25. Were any additional problems noted which cause noncompliance of the Certified AWMP?
V t10 violatiotis:or tleficieneies-were ;nbted :during this: visit.:Ytu:will receive no further
correspondence Aouf this.visit.::. . ...... .. .
appears to be in good shape
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes ®No
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes ® No
Reviewer/Inspector Name Daphne Cartner
Reviewer/Inspector Signature: Date: 5100

t,:
acility Number: 97-3 D Inspection 12/5/2000 •
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 IN No
28. Is there any evidence of wind drift during land application? (i.e. residue on neighboring vegetation, asphalt,
❑ Yes ® No
roads, building structure, and/or public property)
29. Is the land application spray system intake not located near the liquid surface of the lagoon?
❑ Yes ® No
30. Were any major maintenance problems with the ventilation fan(s) noted? (i.e. broken fan belts, missing or
or broken fan blade(s), inoperable shutters, etc.)
❑ Yes IN 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
5/00

Facility Number 97 3 Date of Visit: 7l20/2000 Time: 1010 Printed on: 7/21/2000
Not Operational O Below Threshold
E3 Permitted ■ Certified 0 Conditionally Certified 0 Registered Date Last Operated or Above Threshold: .........................
FarmName: A,.k1..&...FU1M....................................................................................... County: Wj%gs ............................................... WSR.0........
OwnerName: W...0........................................ WRAQA ....................................................... Phone No: Q73G).92J13.]b8...............:........................................
Facility Contact: Glext..W.o:Ioxt..................................................Title:................................................................ Phone No: 33.6.9.2.1,3.62,9 .......................
Mailing Address: 1194.Fad1.Y.ietr.liaad......................................................................... BAamRF.N.C............................................................. 2B6U6..............
Onsite Representative:
Certified Operator.GlgO,.W!RStRM.......................
Location of Farm:
Integrator:
Operator Certification Number: M.33.............................
❑ Swine ❑ Poultry ® Cattle ❑ Horse Latitude ®• 01 6 Longitude F 81 • F 18 35
Discharges ¢t Stream Impacts
1. Is any discharge observed from any part of the operation?
Discharge originated at: ❑ Lagoon ❑ Spray Field ❑ Other
a. If discharge is observed, was the conveyance man-made?
b. If discharge is observed, did it reach Water of the State? (If yes, notify DWQ)
c. If discharge is observed, what is the estimated flow in gal/min?
d. Does discharge bypass a lagoon system? (If yes, notify DWQ)
2. Is there evidence of past discharge from any part of the operation?
3. Were there any adverse impacts or potential adverse impacts to the Waters of the State other than from a discharge?
Waste Collection & Treatment
4. Is storage capacity (freeboard plus storm storage) less than adequate? ❑ Spillway
Structure 1 Structure 2 Structure 3 Structure 4 Structure 5
Identifier:.......WAste.pand..............................................................................................................................................
Freeboard (inches):, 74 = 3 a ov
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes ® No
Structure 6
Continued on back

Facility Number: 97-3 Date of Inspection 7/20/2000 Printed on: 7/21/2000
5.
Are there any immediate threats to the i�grity of any of the structures observed? (ie/ treevere erosion,
❑ Yes
® No
seepage, etc.)
6.
Are there structures on -site which are not properly addressed and/or managed through a waste management or
closure plan?
❑ Yes
® No
(If any of questions 4-6 was answered yes, and the situation poses an
immediate public health or 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 Com (Silage & Grain)
13. Do the receiving crops differ with those designated in the Certified Animal Waste Management Plan (CAWMP)? ❑ Yes ® No
14. a) Does the facility lack adequate acreage for land application? ❑ Yes ® No
b) Does the facility need a wettable acre determination? ❑ Yes ® No
c) This facility is pended for a wettable acre determination? ❑ Yes ® No
15. Does the receiving crop need improvement?
16. Is there a lack of adequate waste application equipment?
Required Records & Documents
17. Fail to have Certificate of Coverage & General Permit readily available?
18. Does the facility fail to have all components of the Certified Animal Waste Management Plan readily available?
(ie/ WUP, checklists, design, maps, etc.)
19. Does record keeping need improvement? (ie/ irrigation, freeboard, waste analysis & soil sample reports)
20. Is facility not in compliance with any applicable setback criteria in effect at the time of design?
21. Did the facility fail to have a actively certified operator in charge?
22. Fail to notify regional DWQ of emergency situations as required by General Permit?
(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 Yiolatiotis or deticiencie$ were noted :duriitgthis: Ytiu:wilt deceive . fiirth' .
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes ® No
Pasture lots need to have vegetation established.
Need to keep nitrogen balance in form of PAN (i.e. 200-90=110). Waste samples sent in last week. Soil samples to be taken in
Reviewer/Inspector Name !Meli4s? Rost

Facility Number: 97-3 �of Inspection 7/20/2000 • Printed on: 7/21/2000
Odor Issues
26.
Does the discharge pipe from the confinement building to the storage pond or lagoon fail to discharge at/or below
❑ 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

Facility Number
Permitted Certified E3 Conditionally Certified
Farm Name: ...A.:II.a..°i ...U' 6',C-, ,^ ..Lo,..._Far..� 5 ...............................
{ Ge—
Owner Name:... _!_Lr .........5 r%
Facility Contact: d1t°y.j.... 64)e5fO.Y.) ......................... Title:.........................,
aT
Mailing Address:„�..I,1.0...... FO-11..... V.ateo ............:....................................
Onsite Representative: .... 61w ..... f0.P.j ..................................................
Certified Operator: ,_�6..... U_)P_5+0yj..........................................................
Location of Farm: n _
Date of Inspection
Time of Inspection 24 hr. (hh:mm)
13 Registered 0 Not O erational Date Last Operated: ............ _............
County: ...... Wi .. .............................
Phone No: .... 33k...... 1.;- ..'.._ ..` o_f!........................
.................................... Phone No: 331�...,...q.l....3..bo� /
Integrator: .......... N.Qre........................................................
Operator Certification Number:..Q..4,.,p 3 -3
.......................
Latitude ®• �' ®" Longitude �• ®' ©"
Discharges & Stream Impacts
1. Is any discharge observed from any part of the operation? )y,..
❑Yes�rvo
Discharge originated at: [I Lagoon El 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 V4'ltlo
3. Were there any adverse impacts or potential adverse impacts to the Waters of the State other than from a discharge? ❑ Yes
Waste Collection & Treatment
4. Is storage capacity (freeboard plus storm storage) less than adequate? ❑ Spillway ❑ Yes , <o
`,
Structure I Structure 2
Identifier: WG.6to' POna
^l
Freeboard (inches): ,,,,,___(
.11
...............................................
Structure 3 Structure 4 Structure 5
Structure 6
5. Are there any immediate threats to the integrity of any of the structures observed? (ie/ trees, severe erosion, ❑ Yes
seepage, etc.)
3/23/99 Continued on back

a ity Number:q-7—j I of Inspection
6.
Are there structures on -site which are nbl"properly addressed and/or managed through a waste management or
T�—
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 o
8.
Does any part of the waste management system other than waste structures require maintenance/improvement?
Ayes to
9.
Do any stuctures lack adequate, gauged markers with required maximum and minimum liquid level
elevation markings?
❑ Yes lrib No
Waste Application
10.
Are there any buffers that need maintenance/improvement?
❑ Yes *0
11.
Is there evidence of over application? ❑ Excessive Ponding ❑ PAN
❑ Yes XNo
B
[[1ll
12.
Crop type
13.
Do the receiving crops di fer with tIWe designated in the Certified Animal Waste Management Plan (CAWMP)? ❑ Yes o
14.
a) Does the facility lack adequate acreage for land application?
❑ Yes DtNo
b) Does the facility need a wettable acre determination?
❑ Yes CR'No
c) This facility is pended for a wettable acre determination?
❑ Yes JXNo
15.
Does the receiving crop need improvement?
❑ Yes XNo
16.
Is there lack of adequate waste application equipment?
❑ Yes Nl�o
Required Records & Documents
17. Fail have Certificate Coverage & General Permit
5�10
to of readily available?
❑ Yes
18.
Does the facility fail to have all components of the Certified Animal Waste Management Plan readily available?
(ie/ WUP, checklists, design, maps, etc.)
❑ Yes *o
19.
Does record keeping need improvement? (ie/ irrigation, freeboard, waste analysis & soil sample reports)
❑ Yes 4No
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'_�Vo
22.
Fail to notify regional DWQ of emergency situations as required by General Permit?
(ie/ discharge, freeboard problems, over application)
❑ Yes ,414o
23.
Did Reviewer/Inspector fail to discuss review/inspection with on -site representative?
❑ Yes 1 '90
24.
Does facility require a follow-up visit by same agency?
❑ Yes *0
25.
Were any additional problems noted which cause noncompliance of the Certified AWMP?
❑ Yes
IXNo
i!To •YiQlati¢Ifs:oi: dgGciendicg -were pbted- during this:visit; - Yob 3w711•Sebgiye qd further.'
:•:•ctiriesporidence:abotitithisvisit:�::•::•:•:•:•:•::•::::•:::•::•:•::•::::-:::•::•:::::
�I
arm o4
w Oz+e,
{wp
6 OA "� p.'- Pt e.id •1 n
LO0
Reviewer/Inspector Name �,�, `x °
/t;'_`_`
Reviewer/Inspector Signature �///1/1 6 11.1 A/1i J",, II1 h �_ i Date: � A 100

• Facility Number. — �of Inspection MM06 •
Odor Issues .
26.
Does the discharge pipe from the confinement building to the storage pond or lagoon fail to discharge attor below
liquid level of lagoon or storage pond with no agitation? OM
f l 1 T
27.
Are there any dead animals not disposed of properly within 24 hours?
❑ Yes
28.
Is there any evidence of wind drift during land application? (i.e. residue on neighboring vegetation, asphalt,
pppy���,,�'''N""""o
❑ Yes Q�V0
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?
32.
Do the flush tanks lack a submerged fill pipe or a permanent/temporary cover? Q m 1 1

r�
Facility Number p Date of Inspection
D
Time of Inspection I'� ; 10 24 hr.
a► II�1 ��
Q Permitted [3 Certified Q Conditionally Certified 113'Registered 0 Not O erational Date Last Operated:
Farm Name:....... PH --- L.W........Fp.g..Ms. County: ....... rYi.�KIzS. �I[61.w
..........
Owner Name: ...... Wt...Ct.!.................................WES..T..o/N........................................... Phone No: ....... 3.3f?... 9....'... .?AY........................
Facility Contact: .... G k1(...........W.ES.TQ.!U.................p... Title: ............ �1.4t/..d!.Ek......p......................... Phone No:... _36..-.9�.......�6a.`l
Mailing Address:........�.�.` 0..........�.�/./�:4L.11.l.�Lt/.........IR*. ........................................D..0..4C�?,F�.......................................................n�:.�(�.(aa...
Onsite Representative:
Integrator:
Certified Operator: ...... G(•,u ..............................v ..$.',y,N.............................. Operator Certification Number: ... h4T.... kA%t Fi80
Location of Farm:
:... ... ...... i.u2.L...............`./..P...:........... ......
,...�r tt7..ctkc.................... ..... ..... ..... ........
ex ......................................... ... :............ .....................
... c..... ... .... .. .... .. ... .. �...�.. _ ... .- .... ........................
Latitude ©• ©` 3 7 `• Longitude 76 • 0` ="
Design Current'
Swtne Capacity Population
❑ Wean to Feeder
❑ Feeder to Finish
❑ Farrow to Wean
❑ Farrow to Feeder
❑ Farrow to Finish
❑ Gilts,
❑ Boars
Namber'of Lagoons
:- HoldtrigPonds / Solid Traps
- ❑ Other I-
Total Desigu Capacity
Total SSLW
❑ Subsurface Drair
❑ No Liquid Waste
Discharges & Stream Impacts
1. Is any discharge observed from any part of the operation?
Discharge originated at: ❑ Lagoon ❑ Spray Field ❑ Other
a. If discharge is observed, was the conveyance man-made?
b. If discharge is observed, did it reach Water of the State'? (If yes, notify DWQ)
esign Current
pacity Population
F00 DO
V00
640, ODO
❑ Spray Field Area
❑ Yes M40
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
Identifier: Lli4061p
Freeboard (inches): ........M0........................................................................................................................ ..
..........................
5. Are there any immediate threats to the integrity of any of the structures observed? (ie/ trees, severe erosion,
seepage, etc.)
❑ Yes
UKO
❑ Yes
EkKo
N t,
❑ Yes
,�,`
w{1 tvo
❑ Yes
a,..W`10 .
❑ Yes
9? o
❑ Yes 02,KO
Structure 6
❑ Yes M-Ko
Continued on back ��fl
3/23/99

-91
Facility Number: q'% — 03 0 of Inspection 6--/1i-`/
6: Are there structures on -site which are no properly addressed and/or managed through a waste management or
�,- closure plan? ❑ Yes ILKO
(If any of questions 4-6 was answered yes, and the situation poses an
immediate public health or environmental threat, notify DWQ) ,�c �
7. Do any of the structures need maintenance/improvement? l!d'yes [Ovo
8. Does any part of the waste management system other than waste structures require maintenance/improvement? ❑ Yes (4o
9. Do any stuctures lack adequate, gauged markers with required maximum and minimum liquid level !
elevation markings? ❑ Yes ji 46
Waste Application 10. Are there any buffers that need maintenance/improvement? []Yes U<O
11. Is there evidence of over application? ❑ Excessive Pending ❑ PAN ❑Yes ll!'Pto
12. Crop type nnu) a, 13nktaY . GI2r4Gt
13. Do the receiving crops differ with those designated in the Certified Animal Waste Management Plan (CAWMP)? ❑ Yes 09,<o
14. a) Does the facility lack adequate acreage for land application?
❑ Yes
Rgo
b) Does the facility need a wettable acre determination?
❑ Yes
0?1�o
c) This facility is pended for a wettable acre determination?
❑ Yes
[fKO
15. Does the receiving crop need improvement?
❑ Yes
2<0
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?
19. Does the facility fail to have all components of the Certified Animal Waste Management Plan readily available?
(ie/ WUP, checklists, design, maps, etc.)
19. Does record keeping need improvement? (ie/ irrigation, freeboard, waste analysis & soil sample reports)
20. Is facility not in compliance with any applicable setback criteria in effect at the time of design?
21. Did the facility fail to have a actively certified operator in charge?
22. Fail to notify regional DWQ of emergency situations as required by General Permit?
(ie/ discharge, freeboard problems, over application)
23. Did Reviewer/Inspector fail to discuss review/inspection with on -site representative?
24. Does facility require a follow-up visit by same agency?
25. Were any additional problems noted which cause noncompliance of the Certified AWMP?
0' iV6 •viol... . of .... e.... were . Ofet7• ditring this:visit; - Yoit :will-i•ece6ye titi fut ftf -
correspondeitce: abutiti this visit: � :: .: .::::::::::
47Jyy�t.A, nM. •c.L�. 1�-�o,nn.
#Z/) . :� A atG G )t t�4,t,
Reviewer/Inspector Name k-
❑ Yes ][ d
W,Y'es ❑ No
❑ Yes 21`Io
2-fe-s ❑ No
❑ Yes t.U'rxo
❑l Yes EWO,
gores EW-0
❑ Yes ©1I�o
Reviewer/Inspector Signature:
Date: / -
3/23/99

Facility Number: 477— b �of Inspection s •
Odor Issues
"26. Does the discharge pipe from the confinement building to the storage pond or lagoon fail to discharge at/or below ❑ Yes 2<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 apo
28. Is there any evidence of wind drift during land application? (i.e. residue on neighboring vegetation, asphalt, ❑ Yes Ili O
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 EGIKo
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 W'No
31. Do the animals feed storage bins fail to have appropriate cover? ❑ Yes 0'�No
32. Do the flush tanks lack a submerged fill pipe or a permanent/temporary cover? ❑ Yes ILKO
3/23/99

''8+. .aa�„ �
[ Divtsion of So d Water Conservation (3Other
51,
Division of Water Quality
10 Routine O Complaint p Follow-up of DWQ inspection O Follow-up of DSWC review O Other
Facility Number—•_ p Date of inspection
R`ZZAO 1763 Time of Inspection t0: `l s 24 hr. (hh:mm)
GI Registered 0 Certified D Applied for Permit [] Permitted 113Not Operational Date Last'Operated:
..........................
AN"-W '`
Farm Nante:......
....................... .............. G�?n,?+4�t............................................................ County:......... .XY ............................ _�.✓. .. Q....
Owner Name: .........,...... Cr.�..................... y..-.....fY. e4 �1V..................................... Phone No:.......a� 36..-..9L�...1..-_3_36 ........................
Facility Contact: 2�f !LC......_ 4�.,`.a....T......................... Title: .......... t n.................................... Phone No:._ui6 9236 29..
Mailing Address:........�.� 90 �kwG�!/... .1................................ ....a 91666
..............
OnsiteRepresentative: ........................................................................................................... Integrator:......................................................................................
Certified Operator:............................................................................................................... Operator Certification Number:.........................................
Location of Farm:
.............. .....Z..... ... ............................................)...�r.P...../Q.................................................................0.!k............................... ..... .... ....:..... ? ....... ... ......
on-L.........t A ........ •L...,-_...... CDa ^ti.......................................................
Latitude �'= 3- `° Longitude 76 3©' F 13 "
E , Design Current-
Design Current
Resign Current_ <.
Swine Capacity,, Population_
Poultry, CapacityPopulation Cattle
Capacity Population
❑ Wean to Feeder
` ❑ Layer ❑ Dairy
'.
.-
❑ Feeder to Finish
❑ Non -Layer Non-Dairy6(> O
❑ Farrow to Wean
-
z ;=
❑ Farrow to Feeder
_ ❑ Other
-
❑ Farrow to Finish
Total Design Capaci
goo''
❑ Gilts
❑Boars
' Total SSLW
(� p Opp
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? ❑ Yes i[}'14o
2. Is any discharge observed from any part of the operation? ❑ Yes CkNo
Discharge originated at: ❑ Lagoon ❑ Spray Field ❑ Other
a. If discharge is observed, was the conveyance man-made? ❑ Yes ®'No
b. If discharge is observed, did it reach Surface Water? (If yes, notify DWQ)
❑ Yes
ONO
c. If discharge is observed, what is the estimated Flow in gallmin?
Ni�n
d. Does discharge bypass a lagoon system? Of yes, notify DWQ)
❑ Yes
❑-No
3. Is there evidence of past discharge from any part of the operation?
❑ Yes
U<o
4. Were there any adverse impacts to the waters of the State other than from a discharge?
❑ Yes
5. Does any part of the waste management system (other than lagoons/holding ponds) require
❑ Yes
r,Q''f;0
U Igo
maintenance/improvement?
6. Is facility not in compliance with any applicable setback criteria in effect at the time of design?
❑ Yes
❑ No
7. Did the facility fail to have a certified operator in responsible charge?
ZKes
❑ No
7/25/97

r-
Facility Number: q 7 — 03 •
a` 8.
Are there lagoons or storage ponds o• which need to be properly closed?
❑ Yes
U40
Structures (LaEoons.Holding Ponds. Flush Pits. etc.)
9.
Is storage capacity (freeboard plus storm storage) less than adequate?
❑ Yes
II 40
Structure I Structure 2 Structure 3 Structure 4 Structure 5
Structure 6
Identifier: ............ ...........................................................................................................................
......................................................................
Freeboard(ft):_................................................................................
10.
Is seepage observed from any of the structures?
❑ Yes
93'Ko
11.
Is erosion, or any other threats to the integrity of any of the structures observed?
❑ Yes
MWO
12.
Do any of the structures need maintenance/improvement?
❑ Yes
[�Wo
(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?
93 Y es
❑ No
Waste ADDlication
14.
Is there physical evidence of over application?
❑ Yes
[EKo
(If in excess of WMP, or runoff entering waters of the State, notify DWQ)
15.
Crop type .�... `... .......... ...._...................... .......
16.
Do the receiving crops differ with those designated in the Animal Waste Management Plan (AWMP)?
❑ Yes
,......�....
IyNo
17.
Does the facility have a lack of adequate acreage for land application?
❑ Yes
al -KO
18.
Does the receiving crop need improvement?
ii Yes
�o
19.
Is there a lack of available waste application equipment?
tld Y es
❑ No
20.
Does facility require a follow-up visit by same agency?
❑ Yes
[[),Ko
21.
Did Reviewer/Inspector fail to discuss review/inspection with on -site representative?
❑ Yes
22.
Does record keeping need improvement?
❑ Yes
�(_,<O
gk<
For Certified or Permitted Facilities Only
23.
Does the facility fail to have a copy of the Animal Waste Management Plan readily available?
❑ Yes
❑ No
24.
Were any additional problems noted which cause noncompliance of the Certified AWMP?
❑ Yes
❑ No
25.
Were any additional problems noted which cause noncompliance of the Permit?
❑ Yes
❑ No
No.viulatioitsoi deficiencies. were h6ted during this.visit. Yoil.wilt ieceive iro•f irtl er
:::::::
correspotideitce WOW this:visit:,: :::::.::
�,% ,�y�-� ,•,,�.•>. Coo �c ,�-A�e-s-m, l �v"t✓' .ir�-e n�lirr•�- �c ��,e.(,
r�) ° atic �.. �1 Gad v d— �•,L f , G,� m-rZ 7/25/97
Reviewer/Inspector Name
Reviewer/Inspector Signature: _e<;Le_v� Date: Q —G —

i"
0 Routine 0 Complaint 0 Follow-up of DWQ inspection 0 Follow-up of DSWC review 0 Other
Facility Number
Date of Inspection O —I
Time of Inspection a ;3Q 24 hr. (hh:mm)
Total Time (in fraction of hours
Farm Status: Registered ❑ Applied for Permit (ex:1.25 for 1 hr 15 min)) Spent on Review
❑ Certified ❑ Permitted or Inspection includes travel and rocessin
❑ Not Operational
- 'Date Last Operated: ... .....
—..---- �.... �_..—._. .._—+._..'—�..—....— _.—_..—....—....� _._ ....
Farm Name: __...I �.s._I7.. .1!1G.... F1i.RLtAS.—._.__....__...._....._—...... County: .... .... Kl .. __..___....__.... __....._....__.
Land Owner Name:.. r._�t a .._.__..., _..... VES r!P'ba.....—................. Phone No: _U0= ?_1 _..22.49.__....._....._...
Facility Conctact:... Mal._£S.2QbL._.—....—.. Title: _... _.... —....—...._...._ PhoneNo;
Mailing Address:
OnsiteRepresentative: ... 5?LE/J.}�/ �rYkfe.I@Al_....__. ..... Integrator:.__.....__.
Certified Operator: ... ._.... _..... — .... ._..... __...... .... �....__....__....__..___....._ .. Operator Certification Number:
Location of Farm:
Latitude ®�` ®« Longitude
�Vnerat•
1. Are there any buffers that need maintenance/improvement? ❑ Yes ❑ No
2. Is any discharge observed from any part of the operation?
Discharge originated at: ❑ Lagoon ❑ Spray field ❑ Other
a. If discharge is observed, was the conveyance man-made?
b. If discharge is observed, did it reach Surface Water? (If yes, notify DWQ)
c. If discharge is observed, what is the estimated flow in gal/min?
d. Does discharge bypass a lagoon system? (If yes, notify DWQ)
3. Is there evidence of past discharge from any part of the operation?
4. Were there any adverse impacts to the waters of the State other than from a discharge?
5. Does any part of the waste management system (other than lagoons/holding ponds) require
4/30/97 maintenance/improvement?
❑ Yes M No
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes 0 No
❑ Yes
No
❑ Yes
No
❑ Yes
C9 No
❑ Yes
❑ No
Continued on back

facility Number:...Qx_. —..._
► 6. Is facility not in compliance with any cable setback criteria in effect at the time olOgn?
❑ Yes ❑ No
7. Did the facility fail to have a certified operator in responsible charge?
8. Are there lagoons or storage ponds on site which need to be properly closed?
Structures (Lagoons and/or Holding Ponds)
9. Is storage capacity (freeboard plus storm storage) less than adequate?
Freeboard (ft): Structure 1 Structure 2 Structure 3 Structure 4 Structure 5
10. Is seepage observed from any of the structures?
1 I. Is erosion, or any other threats to the integrity of any of the structures observed?
12. Do any of the structures need maintenance/improvement?
(If any of questions 9-12 was answered yes, and the situation poses an
immediate public health or environmental threat, notify DWQ)
13. Do any of the structures lack adequate minimum or maximum liquid level markers?
Waste Application
14. Is there physical evidence of over application?
(If in excess of WMP, or runoff entering waters of the State, notifyy DWoQ)
15. Crop type _�iJ� EI�..yr 7lL_.a �A.sl�lci t....�A!►^5
16. Do the receiving crops differ with those designated in the Animal Waste Management Plan (AWMP)?
17. Does the facility have a lack of adequate acreage for land application?
18. Does the receiving crop need improvement?
19. Is there a lack of available waste application equipment?
20. Does facility require a follow-up visit by same agency?
21. Did Reviewer/Inspector fail to discuss review/inspection with on -site representative?
For Certified Facilities Only
22. Does the facility fail to have a copy of the Animal Waste Management Plan readily available?
23. Were any additional problems noted which cause noncompliance of the Certified AWMP?
24. Does record keeping need improvement?
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes X No
❑ Yes ❑ No V!19
Structure 6
❑ Yes ❑ No N fA
❑ Yes ❑ No r�-
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes ❑ No N /A
❑Yes ❑No N/A
❑ Yes
® No
❑ Yes
50 No
❑ Yes
1?1 No
❑ Yes
❑ No �— F.
❑ Yes
IRjNo
❑ Yes
50 No'.-'
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes ❑ No
Z_
6 • �•I,, f �xl-�Syvey .t..:cll a,:�.�, l a o `,.,,. � �v-+,c.r.u� ,P-,.�1 „�. d.�ey�.al dn.��
Reviewer/Inspector Name
Reviewer/Inspector Signature:
�Mkw
cc: Division of Water Quality, Water Quality Section, Facility Assessment Unit 4/30/97

4/30/97

Facility Number
Farm Status: 0 Registered p Applied for Permit
13 Certified 13 Permitted
Time of Inspection r-76739-1 24 hr. (hh:mm)
in)) Spent on Review
in Not OperationalDate Last Operated:
Farm Name: A.H. & W Farms County:..W.ilkes................................................ .W.SRO........
OwnerName: W.C........................................ Weston ....................................................... Phone No: 92j,-.,33.68 ...................................................................
Facility Contact: Glenn..Weston................................................Title:............................................................... Phone No: 9111-921-3b29........................
MailingAddress: RLI..BoaL138......................................................................................... BominerAC ........................................................... 28kOb..............
Onsite Representative:
Certified Operator:
Location of Farm:
Integrator:
Operator Certification Number:
Latitude ® • g
' " Longitude • '
Type of Operation ; "Design ; Current _ Design Current Design Current
Swine_ _Capacity Eopulation; Poultry- Capacity Population- ..Cattle. Capacity Population
13 canto ee er c3 Layer [3 Darry
p ee er to F mts [3 Non -Layer I In on- airy
13 arrow to can
13 Farrow to FeeTer Total'Destgn Capacity800
p Farrow to Finis
___.., __ _ TotalvSSLW640,000
jp Other
Number of Lagoons /Holding Ponds;: ❑ Subsurface rams resent p Lagoon Area 113 Spray Held ArE.,
General
1. Are there any buffers that need maintenance/improvement? p Yes ❑ No
2. Is any discharge observed from any part of the operation? p Yes ®No
Discharge originated at: p Lagoon p Spray Field p Other
a. If discharge is observed, was the conveyance man-made? p Yes ®No
b. If discharge is observed, did it reach Surface Water? (If yes, notify DWQ) p 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) 0 Yes ®No
3. Is there evidence of past discharge from any part of the operation? p Yes ®No
4. Were there any adverse impacts to the waters of the State other than from a discharge? p Yes ®No
5. Does any part of the waste management system (other than lagoons/holding ponds) require p Yes ❑ No
maintenance/improvement?
4/30/97

acr r y Number: 97_03
6. Is facility not in compliance with any applicable setback criteria in effect at the time of design?
[]Yes p No
7. Did the facility fail to have a certified operator in responsible charge?
8. Are there lagoons or storage ponds on site which need to be properly closed?
Structures (Lagoons and/or Holding Ponds)
9. Is storage capacity (freeboard plus storm storage) less than adequate?
Freeboard (R): Structure I Structure 2 Structure 3 Structure 4
10. Is seepage observed from any of the structures?
11. Is erosion, or any other threats to the integrity of any of the structures observed?
12. Do any of the structures need maintenance/improvement?
(If any of questions 9-12 was answered yes, and the situation poses an
immediate public health or environmental threat, notify DWQ)
13. Do any of the structures lack adequate minimum or maximum liquid level markers?
Waste Application
14. Is there physical evidence of over application?
(If in excess of WMP, or runoff entering waters of the State, notify DWQ)
p Yes []No
p Yes ® No
p Yes p No
Structure 5 Structure 6
p Yes p No
p Yes p No
p Yes p No
p Yes p No
p Yes p No
15.
Crop type .......Corn.(Silage.&..Grain)...........................Soybeans.................... Sma1l.Grain.(Wheat,.BBrley,........................Fescus.......................
16.
Milo pats)
Do the receiving crops differ with those designated in the Animal Waste Management Plan (AWMP)?
p Yes
®No
17.
Does the facility have a lack of adequate acreage for land application?
p Yes
®No
18.
Does the receiving crop need improvement?
p Yes
®No
19.
Is there a lack of available waste application equipment?
p Yes
p No
20.
Does facility require a follow-up visit by same agency?
p Yes
®No
21.
Did Reviewer/Inspector fail to discuss review/inspection with on -site representative?
❑ Yes
®No
For Certified Facilities Onlv
22.
Does the facility fail to have a copy of the Animal Waste Management Plan readily available?
p Yes
p No
23.
Were any additional problems noted which cause noncompliance of the Certified A WMP?
p Yes
p No
24. Does record keeping need improvement? p Yes p No
Reviewer/Inspector Name 'George SmithRon tiinwlle
Reviewer/Inspector Signature: Date:

Facility Num er: 97_03 Da. inspection •

State of North Caro
Department of Environment,
Health and Natural Resources
Mooresville Regional Office
James B. Hunt, Jr., Governor
Jonathan B. Howes, Secretary
Mr. Glenn Weston
1190 Fallview Road
Boomer, North Carolina 28606
Dear Mr. Weston,
iXwi �wl
�lllll�
IDEHNR
Division of Soil and Water Conservation
June 12,1997
SUBJECT: Operation Review Summary
A. H. & W Farms
Facility No. 29-03
Wilkes County
RECEIVE0
N.C. Dept. of EHNR
J U N 1 61997
Winston-Salem
Regional Office
On June 10, an Operation Review was conducted of A. H. & W Farms, facility no. 29-03. This Review,
undertaken in accordance with G.S. 143-215.1 OD, is one of two visits scheduled for all registered livestock
operations during the 1997 calendar year. The Division of Water Quality will conduct a second site inspection.
It was determined that no corrective actions are necessary as the result of this Review, since waste was not
being discharged to the waters of the State, and the animal waste collection, treatment, storage and disposal systems
were being maintained at an acceptable level.
Please remember that you are required to obtain and implement an approved animal waste management
plan by the end of this year. The plan must be certified by either a designated technical specialist or a professional
engineer. For additional assistance with the plan, please contact your local Soil and Water Conservation District
Office or local Cooperative Extension Service Office.
The Division of Soil and Water Conservation appreciates your cooperation with this Operation Review.
Please do not hesitate to call me at 704/663-1699 ext. 277, if you have any questions, concerns or need additional
information.
Sincerely,
INui i/ c
v
J h umri
I? vir ental E gineer I
Enclosure
cc: Wilkes Soil and Water Conservation District
George Smith, DWQ Winston-Salem Regional Office
DSWC Regional Files
919 North Main Street, �`y� FAX [phone]
Mooresville, North Carolina 28115 N � C An Equal Opportunity/Affirmative Action Employer
Voice704-663-1699 50% recycled/10% post -consumer paper

®DSWC Anitnaftedlot Operation Review
',,:[]DWQ Animal edlot Operation Site Inspectio ti <4�
� K
10
eYe=•t� i , h r-1 � ��a �r —<e 3-."i� -v x& .S F'P.,.'i v ' E. �%
Routine 0 Complaint 0 Follow-up of DWQ inspection 0 Follow-up of DSWC review 0 Other
Date of Inspection 6/10/97
Facility Number 97 3
Time of Inspection 14:40 24 hr. (hh:mm)
Total Time (in fraction of hours
Farm Status: ®Registered ❑ Applied for Permit (exA.25 for 1 hr 15 min)) Spent on Review 2.5
0 Certified ❑ Permitted or Inspection (includes travel and processing)
Not Operational Date Last Operated:......_.............................. _..... -.................................................................................................
FarmName: AjL.&..W.Far=.......................................................................................... County:WjWs ............................................... 11S Q........
OwnerName: W...0........................................%CSloo........................................................ Phone No: 911r.336.8 ....................................................................
Facility Contact: laleaa...r,5IQXt................................................ Title:................................................................ Phone No: 92,1..3.629 ................................
]`tailing Address: I191l.FallvilW.Road............... _......... _............................................... Balmer.J1.IG........ _................................................ 28.60.6 .............
Onsite Representative: Glem.W..stan............................................................................ Integrator:
Certified Operator:
Location of.Farm:
Operator Certification Number:
Latitude F 36 • 19 37 Longitude F76 • 34 13
pe of Operation
Swine
Design Current Design Current
Capacity Population Poultry Capacity Population
❑ Layer
❑ Non -Layer
❑ Wean to Feeder
❑ Feeder to Finish
Farrow to Wean
Farrow to Feeder
Farrow to nns
❑ Other
Design Current
Cattle Capacity Population
❑ Dairy
® Non -Dairy 1 800 1 0
Total Design Capacity goo
Total SSLW 640,000
INumber of Lagoons / Holding Ponds 0 ❑ Subsurface Drains Present 10 Lagoon Area JE3 Spray Field Area '
General
1. Are there any buffers that need maintenance/improvement? ❑ Yes H 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? ❑ Yes H No
b. If discharge is observed, did it reach Surface Water? (If yes, notify DWQ) ❑ Yes H 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 H No
3. Is there evidence of past discharge from any part of the operation? ❑ Yes H No
4. Were there any adverse impacts to the waters of the State other than from a discharge? ❑ Yes H No
5. Does any part of the waste management system (other than lagoons/holding ponds) require ❑ Yes H No
maintenance/improvement?
4/30/97 Continued on back

`Facility Number: 97-3
6.
Is facility not in compliance with any appliis setback criteria in effect at the time of desi�
❑ Yes
N No
7.
Did the facility fail to have a certified operator in responsible charge?
❑ Yes
N No
„8.
Are there lagoons or storage ponds on site which need to be properly closed?
❑ Yes
® No
Structures (Lagoons and/or Holding Ponds)
9.
Is storage capacity (freeboard plus storm storage) less than adequate?
❑ Yes
® No
Freeboard (ft): Structure 1 Structure 2 Structure 3 Structure 4 Structure 5
.................. _..................
...............................
Structure 6
10.
................................................................................................................... .......................................
Is seepage observed from any of the structures?
❑ Yes
.
N No
11.
Is erosion, or any other threats to the integrity of any of the structures observed?
❑ Yes
N No
12.
Do any of the structures need maintenance/improvement?
❑ Yes
N No
(If any of questions 9-12 was answered yes, and the situation poses an
immediate public health or environmental threat, notify DWQ)
13.
Do any of the structures lack adequate minimum or maximum liquid level markers?
❑ Yes
N No
Waste Application
14.
Is there physical evidence of over application?
❑ Yes
N No
(If in excess of WMP, or runoff entering waters of the State, notify DWQ)
15.
Crop type .......Gam (Silage.Bc.Gaain)....... . ........................................................................................................................
16.
Do the receiving crops differ with those designated in the Animal Waste Management Plan (AWMP)?
❑ Yes
N No
17.
Does the facility have a lack of adequate acreage for land application?
❑ Yes
N No
18.
Does the receiving crop need improvement?
❑ Yes
N No
19.
Is there a lack of available waste application equipment?
❑ Yes
N No
20.
Does facility require a follow-up visit by same agency?
❑ Yes
N No
21.
Did Reviewer/Inspector fail to discuss review/inspection with on -site representative?
❑ Yes
N No
For Certified Facilities Only
22.
Does the facility fail to have a copy of the Animal Waste Management Plan readily available?
❑ Yes
❑ No
23.
Were any additional problems noted which cause noncompliance of the Certified AWMP?
❑ Yes
❑ No
24.
Does record keeping need improvement?
❑ Yes
❑ No
IComments (refer to question-q: Explain any YES answers and/or any recommendations or any other comments. I
Use drawings of facility to better explainsituations. (use additional pages as neeessary):..
,omments: Operation is currently not stocking animals. Operation has had problems in the past and was told by DWQ to correct
vater quality problems. Operation has reseeded old feed lots and is in the process of upgrading. The operation is planning to
onstruct a new total confinement bam. DSWC Engineer Jeff Young was at operation during the review with drawings and plans
or the operator to review. Operation is following through with certification process. If you have questions please call me at
104-663-1699 ext. 277.
Reviewer/Inspector Name Joseph mine
Reviewer/Inspector Signature: LAI < late: G /Z
cc: Division of Water Quality, Water,QivaI4 Sk&n, Facility Assessment Unit 4/30/97