990005_INSPECTIONS_20171231

/Y IKAYN4,5 ?
Type of Visit: P Compliance Inspection O Operation Review 0 Structure Evaluation 0 Technical Assistance
Reason for Visit: (YRoutine 0 Complaint 0 Follow-up 0 Referral 0 Emergency 0 Other 0 Denied Access
Date of Visit: 27 Arrival Time: ® Departure Time: SJ County: K-I I) Region: &J5k o
Farm Name: M E - - e -at r-M Owner Email:
Linco 1 n
Owner Name: t:f K 1 e-e- Phone:
Mailing Address: L6r i 5 * -Shannon (' IS-? - [. 315 U.5 I -I w tJ 2-1 V i L le � jc�
Physical Address: I ;_� U 5 14 w �a-1 ,* nt;o f'o to V i l l e, N L a 70a d a d
Facility Contact: C f L r 15 ®r ,5 ho n non Title:
C a5S
Onsite Representative:
Certified Operator: (% r in
Back-up Operator:
Location of Farm:
Np-2.U.. & h F.
Certification Number:
Certification Number:
Latitude: 310 n 3 d y Longitude:
4s6
7-000/
y Iz13111
1 N) Ntwy �I r
tL
Farm on 2
Design Current
-Swine @apacity Pop.
Wean to Finish
Wet Poultry
La er
Design
Capacity
Current
Pop.
Cattle
Dairy Cow
Design
Capacity
.$"O
Current
Pop.
Wean to Feeder
Non -La er
DairyCalf
� Z
I z
Feeder to Finish
Farrow to Wean
Farrow to.
Farrow to Finish
Dq P�oultr,
Layers
Design
Ca aci +
Current
P,o
DairyHeifer
D Cow
Non -Dairy
Beef Stocker
0
Gilts
Non -Layers
Beef Feeder
Boars
Pullets
Beef Brood Cow
Other
101 Other
Turke s
Turke Poults
Other
Discharges and 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 DW R)
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 DW R)
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
❑ Yes [-]No
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes 0 No
❑ Yes HNo
❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ NA ❑ NE
Page I of 3 21412015 Continued

[Facility Number: - s . 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 1 Structure 2 Structure 3 Structure 4 Structure 5 Structure 6
Identifier: -1(1 L 6 W4Ar_ -42— Up or L'i C+ :5 4-4440y)
Spillway?:
Designed Freeboard (in):
Observed Freeboard (in):
3©
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 ONo ❑ NA ❑ NE
If any of questions 4-6 were answered yes, and the situation poses an immediate public health or environmental threat, notify DWR
7. Do any of the structures need maintenance or improvement? ❑ Yes ONo ❑ NA ❑ NE
8. Do any of the structures lack adequate markers as required by the permit? ❑ Yes J�J'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 I x No ❑ NA ❑ NE
maintenance or improvement? J�'
Waste Application
10. Are there any required buffers, setbacks, or compliance alternatives that need ❑ Yes oNo ❑ NA ❑ NE
maintenance or improvement?
11. Is there evidence of incorrect land application? If yes, check the appropriate box below. ❑ Yes DdNo ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Excessive Ponding ❑ Hydraulic Overload ❑ Frozen Ground ❑ Heavy Metals (Cu, Zn, etc.)
❑ PAN ❑ PAN > 10% or 10 lbs. ❑ Total Phosphorus ❑ Failure to Incorporate Manure/Sludge into Bare Soil
❑ Outside of Acceptable Crop Window ❑ Evidence of Wind Drift ❑ Application Outside of Approved Area
12. Crop Type(s)
13. Soil Type(s):
14. Do the receiving crops differ from those designated in the CAW MP?
❑ Yes
rM No
❑ NA
❑ NE
15. Does the receiving crop and/or land application site need improvement?
❑ Yes
;KI'No
❑ NA
❑ NE
16. Did the facility fail to secure and/or operate per the irrigation design or wettable
❑ Yes
❑ No
O NA
❑ NE
acres determination?
17. Does the facility lack adequate acreage for land application?
❑ Yes
0 No
❑ NA
❑ NE
18. Is there a lack of properly operating waste application equipment?
❑ Yes
No
❑ NA
❑ NE
Required Records & Documents
19. Did the facility fail to have the Certificate of Coverage & Permit readily available?
❑ Yes
/
,PVNo
❑ NA
❑ NE
20. Does the facility fail to have all components of the CAWMP readily available? If yes, check
❑ Yes
IVI No
l`t'
❑ NA
❑ NE
the appropriate box.
❑WUP ❑Checklists ❑ Design ❑ Maps ❑ Lease Agreements ❑Other:
21. Does record keeping need i provement? l U Yes n No U NA U NE
El Waste Application [Weekly Freeboard ❑ Waste Analysis ❑ Soil Analysis ans ers ❑Weather Code
u,'Rainfall ❑ Stocking ❑ Crop Yield ❑ 120 Minute Inspections I�Monthly and I" Rainfall Inspections c' m,
, 0
22. Did the facility fail to install and maintain a rain gauge? ❑ Yes }+� I No ❑ NA ❑ NE
23. If selected, did the facility fail to install and maintain rainbreakers on irrigation equipment? ❑ Yes (�❑ No [)(NA ❑ NE
Page 2 of 3 21412015 Continued

Facili Number: 9- O jDate of inspection: 02 7
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 j3a'NA ❑ NE
the appropriate box(es) below.
❑ Failure to complete annual sludge survey ❑ Failure to develop a POA for sludge levels
❑ Non -compliant sludge levels in any lagoon
List structure(s) and date of first survey indicating non-compliance:
26. Did the facility fail provide documentation of an actively certified operator in charge?
27. Did the facility fail to secure a phosphorus loss assessments (PLAT) certification?
Other Issues
28. Did the facility fail to properly dispose of dead animals with 24 hours and/or document
and report mortality rates that were higher than normal?
29. At the time of the inspection did the facility pose an odor or air quality concern?
If yes, contact a regional Air Quality representative immediately.
30. Did the facility fail to notify the Regional Office of emergency situations as required by the
permit? (i.e., discharge, freeboard problems, over -application)
31. Do subsurface tile drains exist at the facility? If yes, check the appropriate box below.
❑ Application Field ❑ Lagoon/Storage Pond ❑ Other:
32. Were any additional problems noted which cause non-compliance of the permit or CAWMP?
33. Did the Reviewer/Inspector fail to discuss review/inspection with an on -site representative?
34. Does the facility require a follow-up visit by the same agency?
❑ Yes
w No
❑ NA
❑ NE
[—]Yes
jQ 'No
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Yes
Wo
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Yes _5j-No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes WNo ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes Wo ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes 9 No
❑ Yes A]"No
❑ Yes ti 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 drawings of facility to better explain situations (use additional pages as necessary).
7 a1„ j Upper w51' spro t1ed Z U)6kIV eAdk�ed I� -bYa-� D
(- ,Zbl(p Sall +esf 7 lIlogI'l.0(10- �^ r`^�-1 I11C?8�aot9
'�• �Ib &all 6ro-44 on — � LX0_ °--����--�� r� cols °
Covet �roP 4__aC6c�' .fo WUP ? U J
kAjd �
1 Ka -f
Reviewer/Inspector Name:
Reviewer/Inspector Signature:
Page 3 of 3
OF
Phone: EL-2 9
Date: (p/ 02 7 / 1 -J
21412015

'Type of Visit: OkCompliance Inspection U Operation Review U Structure Evaluation U Technical Assistance
Reason for Visit:: $11oouutine Q Complaint U Follow-up 0 Referral 0 Emergency 0 Other 0 Denied Access
Date of Visit: r/y/Zp// m Arrival Timee: Departure Timer County: K l 13 Region:
Farm Name: C—Ole,— ejaigo Farm Owner Email:
v �t
Owner Name: LF ttPJt/ Phone: t,.i�.y-l$�Ct.Bll�70�— q5-6- 76S�
Cysris� Sht►vtnon
ailin Addr S w to n
la-0 457
aro lef-
Physi I A dres oW Z I Q (. /� NG a %Q a
FacilityContact: �it j 5 ✓t Qt $� Title: Phone:
Onsite Representative:
Certified Operator: t_iytlr 1 5 &L $ 5
Back-up Operator:
Location of Farm:
Integrator:
1r5• y IZ 31 I�
Certification Num er:
Certification Number:
�/ /
Latitude: Sic nQ�J / 6 ( l Longitude: 700
"f j' p' 5 / Q p 11
l
,
Swine
can to Finish
Design Current
C+apacity Pop.
Design
Wet Poultry .Capacity
Layer
Current
.Pop.
Cattle
DairyCow
Design Current
Capacity Pop.
Q
Wean to Feeder
I INon-Layer
I
Dairy Calf
Z
Feeder to Finish
Farrow to Wean
Farrow to Feeder
Farrow to Finish
Design
D , $oul[ Ca a_ci_
Layers
Current
P,o ,
Dairy Heifer
Dry Cow
Non -Dairy
Beef Stocker
Gilts
Non -Layers
Beef Feeder
Boars
Pullets
I
lBeefBroodCow
DC(Other
ther
Turkeys
Turke Points
Other
Discharees and Stream Impacts
1. Is any discharge observed from any part of the operation?
Discharge originated at: ❑ Structure ❑ Application Field ❑ Other:
a. Was the conveyance man-made?
b. Did the discharge reach waters of the State? (If yes, notify DW R)
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 YNo ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes
❑ No
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Yes
❑ No
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Yes
❑ No
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Yes
el o
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Yes
To
❑ NA
❑ NE
Page I of 3
A
21412015 Continued
t'
y ' r

Facility Number: - f Date of Inspection.
Waste Collection & Treatment MW
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
3� Structure o_"Structure 2 Structure 3 Structure 4 Structure 5 Structure 6
/ p Identifier: l't �`�'On bOO(lCJ
Spillway?: Ie'j_ l 0 Vl r,�
f
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 ONo ❑ 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 11X No ❑ NA ❑ NE
(not applicable to roofed pits, dry stacks, and/or wet stacks) ,777,""",//
9. Does any part of the waste management system other than the waste structures require [—]Yes I N No ❑ NA ❑ NE
maintenance or improvement? 777""""`
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 WNo ❑ 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 Approved Area
12. Crop Type(s):
13. Soil Type(s):
14.
Do the receiving crops differ from those designated in the CAWMP?
1� Yes
❑ No
❑ NA
❑ NE
15.
Does the receiving crop and/or land application site need improvement?
❑ Yes
❑ NA
❑ NE
16.
Did the facility fail to secure and/or operate per the irrigation design or wettable
❑ Yes
'WNo
❑ No
NA
❑ NE
acres determination?
17.
Does the facility lack adequate acreage for land application?
❑ Yes
[2(No
❑ NA
❑ NE
18.
Is there a lack of properly operating waste application equipment?
❑ Yes
WJo
❑ 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
ON
❑ NA
❑ NE
the appropriate box.
❑ WUP ❑Checklists ❑ Design ❑ Maps ❑ Lease Agreements ❑Other:
21 oes record keeping need i rovement? Fete-bex-belew. ❑ Yes No ❑ NA ❑ NE
�,,_,, //Waste Applliic,/ation Weekly Freeboar Waste Analysis oil Analysis t Waste Transfers ❑ Weather Code
'Rainfall I stocking Crop Yield l20 Minute Inspections 1�Monthly and V Rainfall Inspections P_si rgntvep-
22. Did the facility fail to install and maintain a rain gauge? ❑ Yes JdNo ❑ NA ❑ NE
23. If selected, did the facility fail to install and maintain rainbreakers on irrigation equipment? ❑ Yes ❑ No 'Ege37C ❑ NE
Page 2 of 21412015 Continued

Facili Number: Date of 1nspection:q7'F_iirHo16
/Nc
24. Did the facility fail to calibrate waste app cation equipment as required by the permit?
❑ Yes
JN
❑ NE
25. Is the facility out of compliance with permit conditions related to sludge? If yes, check
❑ Yes
� No
—❑/NA
; NA
❑ NE
the appropriate box(es) below.
❑ Failure to complete annual sludge survey ❑ Failure to develop a POA for sludge levels
❑ Non -compliant sludge levels in any lagoon
List structure(s) and date of first survey indicating non-compliance:
26. Did the facility fail provide documentation of an actively certified operator in charge?
❑ Yes
M']No
❑ NA
❑ NE
27. Did the facility fail to secure a phosphorus loss assessments (PLAT) certification?
❑ Yes
11d"No
777"""
❑ NA
❑ NE
Other Issues
28. Did the facility fail to properly dispose of dead animals with 24 hours and/or document
❑ Yes
❑ NA
❑ NE
and report mortality rates that were higher than normal?
'�Ko
29. At the time of the inspection did the facility pose an odor or air quality concern?
If yes, contact a regional Air Quality representative immediately.
30. Did the facility fail to notify the Regional Office of emergency situations as required by the
permit? (i.e., discharge, freeboard problems, over -application)
31. Do subsurface tile drains exist at the facility? If yes, check the appropriate box below.
❑ Application Field ❑ Lagoon/Storage Pond ❑ Other:
❑ Yes MNo
❑ Yes IMI�_,/N/o
JQ ❑ Yes I No
❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ NA ❑ NE
32. Were any additional problems noted which cause non-compliance of the permit or CAWMP? ❑ Yes C2,11N�o ❑ NA ❑ NE
33. Did the Reviewer/Inspector fail to discuss review/inspection with an on -site representative? ❑ Yes ONo ❑ NA ❑ NE
34. Does the facility require a follow-up visit by the same agency? ❑ Yes allo ❑ NA ❑ NE
Comments (refer to question #): Explain any YES answers and/or any additional recommendations or any other comments.
Use drawings of facility to better explain situations (use additional pages as necessary).
A Z NA5e- iv- �►c 5 r cj..a,, 6 r ©0
oZ SO t 1 LXAA a.-1 y s 15 d U e. a o j b. N o'i �
Ca-11 bra * or\, d t: e a.0 16 . N OI Q� 1
14 3,2. Covim✓ a-roP aJ4ec4 +a coup ?sl�A
T- -7 q t4 ;L F - ] a a�ld �d (o w u ? I�(ot `1 e+' T�h .5pe e AMA'
Eo0IClW v1 ss
7e
v w s rzp (ID � ; I CC) C (3-- peX-n2 t +o
a_kt _fi°©6a 1 � al ne e! is loe� _MC lamed
ivy cx_'a'-Ae� tQf, ver - l a calves)�u�Cove d
131
30LO
5la► /cols = 3 3`i leis. /f . K"'
Reviewer/Inspector Name: b woc Phone: —1 1 b— q b L
Reviewer/Inspector Signature: W&ZA< Date: 7 o Zd l 4P
Page 3oj3 j/1 /a�1 = S5k-6— f% a� ✓� 2/4/2015
/ ,2. 7 s 31 c;
1,

for Visit: 0(koutine O
Ntructure r vamanon
Referral
Other O Denied Access
Date of Visit: J~ 3 t /► ArrivalTime:® : Departure TimeCounty:
Farm Name: Co le, — 6&1Qi 1 QC7 r WI Owner Email:
Owner Name: L F Ili 1.1e r Phone: 1✓L�Xrt 5 70 `f- I SQ - 7o SI
0tirisa Sha-r,r%on
Mailing Address: , 1 Q 114LOW a l , fan U < < I e NI a 76 ;t_o
Physical Address:
FacilityContact: e, 6 r i 'S �)a 5—p —Title:
OnsiteRepresentative: Li4IV-t6 alp �] C*JA VJ CiQ_Sei Integrator:
Phone:
Certified Operator: Carl-) O,QL55 Certification Number:
Back-up Operator:
Location of Farm:
Certification Number:
0411
Latitude: Longitude:
Region: (A.._Ld
0
-goo lis t 0 g i,
4LJ y 4 ,2,I N
ki W y a.l s) O n
Design
Swine Capacity
Wean to Finish
Curren[
Pop.
Wet Poultry
La er
Design
Capacity
C•ucrent
Pop.
Cattle
Dai Cow
Design
Capacity
"Q
Current
Pop.
Wean to Feeder
Non -La er
Dai Calf , 2 P
O
O- 0
Feeder to Finish
Dairy Heifer&
J?
Farrow to Wean
Farrow to Feeder
Farrow to Finish
Desigrt Current D Cow
I) , Poultry Ca aci Pao . Non -Dairy
La ers Beef Stocker
Gilts
Non -Layers
Beef Feeder
Boars
Pullets
Beef Brood Cow
Other
Other
Turkeys
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 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
o
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Yes
WNo
❑ NA
❑ NE
Page I of 21412014 Continued

Facili Number: - . Date of Inspection: S MW
/S
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 1 Structure 2 Strucmr 3O p��Stgre(l
4 Structure 5 Structure 6
Identifienal (5matlea ) #/ Z y n
Spillway?:
Designed Freeboard (in):
Observed Freeboard (in):
5. Are there any immediate threats to the integrity of any of the structures observed? ❑ Yes t�No ❑ NA ❑ NE
(i.e., large trees, severe erosion, seepage, etc.) ``N//
6. Are there structures on -site which are not properly addressed and/or managed through a ❑ Yes INo ❑ NA ❑ NE
waste management or closure plan? 777777 ������
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 J�S(No ❑ NA ❑ NE
8. Do any of the structures lack adequate markers as required by the permit? [—]Yes W 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 P""' o ❑ NA ❑ NE
maintenance or improvement? J717"
Waste Application
10. Are there any required buffers, setbacks, or compliance alternatives that need ❑ Yes WNo ❑ NA ❑ NE
maintenance or improvement?
11. Is there evidence of incorrect land application? If yes, check the appropriate box below. ❑ Yes 0-'No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Excessive Ponding ❑ Hydraulic Overload ❑ Frozen Ground ❑ Heavy Metals (Cu, Zn, etc.)
❑ PAN ❑ PAN > 10% or 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)
t
13. Soil Type(s): u
CA)Ib
14. Do the receiving crops differ from those designated in the CAWMP?
XrYes
❑ No
❑ NA
❑ NE
15. Does the receiving crop and/or land application site need improvement?
❑ Yes
N](No
❑❑ NA
❑ NE
16. Did the facility fail to secure and/or operate per the irrigation design or wettable
❑ Yes
[:]No
I A
❑ NE
acres determination?
17. Does the facility lack adequate acreage for land application?
❑ Yes
01 No
❑ NA
❑ NE
18. Is there a lack of properly operating waste application equipment?
❑ Yes
No
11``''��tt
❑ NA
❑ NE
Reauired 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 mprovement? mom- ' '�Pr� _ _'_c ❑Yes �No ❑ NA ❑ NE
Waste Applic [ion e ly Freeboard Waste Analysis Soil Analysis �I� a " ❑Weather Code
Rainfall Stocking Crop Yield ❑ 120 Minute Inspections Monthly and 1" Rainfall Inspections
22. Did the facility fail to install and maintain a rain gauge? ❑ Yes No ❑ NA ❑ NE
23. If selected, did the facility fail to install and maintain rainbreakers on irrigation equipment? ❑ Yes ❑ No Iyl NA ❑ NE
Page 2 of 3 21412014 Continued

Facility Number: 10• Date of Inspection: $ 3 ` �YYY(/
24. Did the facility fail to calibrate waste application equipment as required by the permit? ❑ Yes X I 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-com ' 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 Io
27. Did the facility fail to secure a phosphorus loss assessments (PLAT) certification? ❑ Yes Io
Other Issues
28. Did the facility fail to property 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
P(NA ❑ NE
❑NA ❑NE
❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes V"No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes ba'�o ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes J)J'I�o ❑ NA ❑ NE
0 Yes [:]No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes [NrNo ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes Wo ❑ NA ❑ NE
'omments (refer to question #): Explain any YES answers and/or any additional recommendations or any other comments.
sq,4rawings of facility to better explain situations (use additional pages as necessary).
a . Catlrbra-+ion en"lef- ? rail a�1
a soil o�ulcL�y5i5 doe ;?_ol6 .
a-fpl i'P_j -tot sores( h "WL ? r�ohtr VoLa 20►�{ ,
7 owe -A ? �ea5e, Conk n ue�
-7 `t `( a- F- Zev too
o
LlDaoo- ice,vP,
11/-7 %lid = 1. 75— Los Pl =
Reviewer/Inspector Name:
Reviewer/Inspector Signature:
Page 3 of 3
Phone: tP — 9 (p 9
Date: S�13/z0/5
21412014

for Visit: G6 Routine
Structure
Referral U Emergencv U Other U Denied Access
If__ 101171f"r Date of Visit: It7, Arrival Time: OldIO,uJ Departure Time: '�-:DO County: \ YAdkt rI Region: WS90
Farm Name: At `i 1 & r g(o.5, �DI i - &/yt hvm Owner Email:
V
Owner Name: G! r / vl� � /pr
(P,,lr1- AA —
Mailing Address: / / Q / uf. t ,41, 2� ,
Physical Address:
Z
Phone: d"'"f '%�) 7 52Q —70 51
;nab ,1114e , NG 2702.O
Facility Contact: C11ri!{pC.1JS Title:
OnsiteRepresentative: t //Af11 4 .014A4en 6tff Integrator:
Phonef6'V2;1�7 y)'V67-00DI
Certified Operator: olfl/ 6-,JJ Certification Number:
Back-up Operator:
Location of Farm:
Certification Number:
Latitude: 00 3 1 n� /t Longitude: gd
41 1—Nwy
/
2-1 �S,1 On r, 1-, 0AW_5- h.r Zi s,
1
Swine
Wean to Finish
Design Current
Capacity Pop.
Design Current
Wet Poultry Capacity Pop.
Layer
Cattle
DairyCow
Design
Capacity
5V
Current
P.
2-11
Wean to Feeder
Non -Layer
DairyCalf
20
2D
Feeder to Finish
Dairy Heifer
3
Farrow to Wean
Farrow to Feeder
Farrow to Finish
Design Current
D . P,oWtr, C•_a aci + P,o
Layers
Dry Cow
Non -Dairy
Beef Stocker
Gilts
Non -Layers
Beef Feeder
Boars
Pullets
Beef Brood Cow
Other
El Other
Turkeys
Turkey Poults
Other
Discharges and Stream Impacts
1. Is any discharge observed from any part of the operation?
❑ Yes
No
❑ NA
❑ NE
Discharge originated at: ❑ Structure ❑ Application Field ❑ Other:
a. Was the conveyance man-made?
[:]Yes
[-]No
❑ NA
❑ NE
b. Did the discharge reach waters of the State? (If yes, notify DWQ)
❑ Yes
❑ No
❑ NA
❑ NE
c. What is the estimated volume that reached waters of the State (gallons)?
d. Does the discharge bypass the waste management system? (If yes, notify DWQ)
❑ Yes
No
❑ NA
❑ NE
2. Is there evidence of a past discharge from any part of the operation?
❑ Yes
,�❑..,,((
No
❑ NA
❑ NE
3. Were there any observable adverse impacts or potential adverse impacts to the waters
❑ Yes
No
❑ NA
❑ NE
of the State other than from a discharge?
Page of 21412011 Continued

Facili ` Number: p • Date of Inspection: o
1710
Waste Collection & Treatment
4. Is storage capacity (structural plus storm storage plus heavy rainfall) less than adequate? ❑ Yes No ❑ NA ❑ NE
a. If yes, is waste level into the structural freeboard? ❑ Yes ❑ No ❑ NA ❑ NE
Structure } "')Structure 2 Structy %1 Structure 4 Structure 5 Structure 6
It i $bfbn. o+
Identifier: 5m4 f2 u04Wi�.
1tl �
Spillway?: e"
Designed Freeboard (in):
Observed Freeboard (in): ok
5. Are there any immediate threats to the integrity of any of the structures observed? ❑ Yes No ❑ NA ❑ NE
(i.e., large trees, severe erosion, seepage, etc.)
6. Are there structures on -site which are not properly addressed and/or managed through a ❑ Yes No ❑ NA ❑ NE
waste management or closure plan?
If any of questions 4-6 were answered yes, and the situation poses an immediate public health or environmental threat, notify DWQ
7. Do any of the structures need maintenance or improvement? ❑ Yes No ❑ NA ❑ NE
8. Do any of the structures lack adequate markers as required by the permit? ❑ Yes No ❑ NA ❑ NE
(not applicable to roofed pits, dry stacks, and/or wet stacks) 9. Does any part of the waste management system other than the waste structures require ❑ Yes I,yl No ❑ NA ❑ NE
maintenance or improvement? 0
Waste Application
�[
10. Are there any required buffers, setbacks, or compliance alternatives that need
❑ Yes No
❑ NA
❑ NE
maintenance or improvement?
J�
11. Is there evidence of incorrect land application? If yes, check the appropriate box below.
❑ Yes No
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Excessive Ponding ❑ Hydraulic Overload ❑ Frozen Ground ❑ Heavy Metals (Cu, Zn, a c.
❑ 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): GorA �' (<t 50 I grata
V 10 TI
13. Soil Type(s):
14. Do the receiving crops differ from those designated in the CAWMP?
❑ Yes No
❑ NA
❑ NE
15. Does the receiving crop and/or land application site need improvement?
❑ Yes No
❑ NA
❑ NE
16. Did the facility fail to secure and/or operate per the irrigation design or wettable
❑ Yes ❑ No
NA
❑ NE
acres determination?
17. Does the facility lack adequate acreage for land application?
❑ Yes No
❑ NA
❑ NE
18. Is there a lack of properly operating waste application equipment?
❑ Yes No
❑ NA
❑ NE
Required Records & Documents
_(
19. Did the facility fail to have the Certificate of Coverage & Permit readily available?
❑ Yes ly I No
❑ NA
❑ NE
20. Does the facility fail to have all components of the CAWMP readily available? If yes, check
❑ Yes j7�i�Trj No
❑ NA
❑ NE
the appropriate box.
❑ WUP ❑Checklists ❑ Design ❑ Maps ❑ Lease Agreements ❑Other:
21. Does record keeping need improvement? If yes, check the appropriate box below. ❑ Yes 9 No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Waste Applicatio �❑ Weekly Freeboard ❑ Waste Analysis ❑ Soil Analysis ❑ Waste Transfers ❑ Weather Code
n,.. c..,.e,.
❑ Rainfall Sto!lto
Crop Yield ❑ 120 Minute Inspections ❑ Monthly and 1" Rainfall Inspections
22. Did the facilr install and maintain a rain gauge? ❑YesgNo
No ❑ NA ❑ NE
23. If selected, did the facility fail to install and maintain rainbreakers on irrigation equipment? ❑ Yes NA ❑ NE
Page 2 of 3 21412011 Continued

Facility Number: • Date of Ins ection: /
24. Did the facility fail to calibrate waste application equipment as required by the permit? ❑ Yes AI 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 to provide documentation of an actively certified operator in charge?
27. Did the facility fail to secure a phosphorus loss assessments (PLAT) certification?
Other Issues
28. Did the facility fail to properly dispose of dead animals with 24 hours and/or document
and report mortality rates that were higher than normal?
29. At the time of the inspection did the facility pose an odor or air quality concern?
If yes, contact a regional Air Quality representative immediately.
30. Did the facility fail to notify the Regional Office of emergency situations as required by the
permit? (i.e., discharge, freeboard problems, over -application)
31. Do subsurface tile drains exist at the facility? If yes, check the appropriate box below.
❑ Application Field ❑ Lagoon/Storage Pond ❑ Other:
❑ Yes
No
❑ Yes
No
❑ Yes
[�No
❑ Yes
No
❑ Yes
No
❑ Yes
[ No
❑ NA ❑ NE
❑NA ❑NE
❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ NA ❑ NE
❑NA ❑NE
❑ NA ❑ NE
32. Were any additional problems noted which cause non-compliance of the permit or CAWMP? ❑ Yes No ❑ NA ❑ NE
33. Did the Reviewer/Inspector fail to discuss review/inspection with an on -site representative? ❑ Yes No ❑ NA ❑ NE
34. Does the facility require a follow-up visit by the same agency? ❑ Yes No ❑ NA ❑ NE
Comments (refer to question #): Explain any YES answers and/or any additional recommendations or any otheccomments.
Use drawings of facilitytobetter explain situations (use additional pages as necessary).
l v�c it g l-.Yr on`% sor Lrkm� 4cU 40 WNP Sa��ecQ+ S n� /�Je,
�� // /P////�'' 9 � A sin A.� �
7, N"JJG�d �O rL `u�� QM� '� �?�dt fro 3z M.d../ l
say ,,!l
Wgf{e o,,;4y5',r tcf re en e4.A, 'Wca jf '5_11
7 i
l•VZ *2 = 1, 00 4t3 = 2,98
Reviewer/InspectorName: %�44rcl\ ��N,�7hi,(� Phone: J —
:6
S2gS�
Reviewer/Inspector Signature: Date: Z 7 Z 10
Page 3 of 3 21412011

Evaluation O Technical
for Visit: (Z Routine 0 Complaint 0 Follow-up 0 Referral 0 Emergencv 0 Other 0 Denied Access
Date of Visit: l0 b! q� Arrival Time: 2: OD �, Departure Time: : 30 County: 1 cLlkfH Region: WSRD
Farm Name: to 1 1ler t/ rw,,, kol e - GG iit � M Owner Email: �I
Owner Name: L r 1" \i l lt',tr ,, II , I _ Phone: 64" f Cc 607) �SO — ` oSl
Mailing Address: atN I 1 n u.f Hivh 21 Tt��- A Vj I , 0 G 2-7020
Physical Address: 13 I S W 14W h 21
v l I e
Facility Contact: clkrl!f (Q%/ Title:
OnsiteRepresentative: art/ '- S�AMIOt, tAfl
Certified Operator: ('.rb CA3 f
Back-up Operator:
Location of Farm:
Ale - j"O —705/
Integrator:
Certification Number:
Certification Number:
Latitude: 36p fi a'o Longitude: goo q-5r l0 g I
14,,,E N21 y L Hwy 21 S,/ ®1205- hlwy
21 S-Ott+ ,
Swine
Wean to Finish
Design Current
Capacity Pop.
Wet Poultry
La er
Design
Capacity
Current
Pop.
Cattle
Da' Cow
Design
Capacity
1
Current
Pop.
'2-
Wean to Feeder
Non -La er
DairyCalf
/ 2-0
1-7-0
Feeder to Finish
Da Heifer
1 Ir
Sl
Farrow to Wean
Farrow to Feeder
Farrow to Finish
Dr. + P,oultr. +
Layers
Design
Ca aci +
Current
P,o ,
D Cow
Non -Dairy
Beef Stocker
Gilts
Non -Layers
Beef Feeder
Boars
Pullets
Beef Brood Cow
Other
Other
Turkeys
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 XNo ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes ❑ No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes ❑ No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes
❑ No
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Yes
No
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Yes
No
❑ NA
❑ NE
Page I of 21412011 Continued

acili y Number: • Date of Inspection: (b
Waste Collection & Treatment �/
4. Is storage capacity (structural plus storm storage plus heavy rainfall) less than adequate? ❑ YesXNo No ❑ NA ❑ NE
a. If yes, is waste level into the structural freeboard? ❑ Yes /❑ No ❑ NA ❑ NE
Structure
f I Structure
- 2 S cturrr3,,,/ Structure 4 Structure 5 Structure 6
identifier: 1 5l-AllEf �,f d',d'Fl
Spillway?: Yes Bs
Designed Freeboard (in):
Observed Freeboard (in): �� - N�
5. Are there any immediate threats to the integrity of any of the structures observed? ❑ Yes M No ❑ NA ❑ NE
(i.e., large trees, severe erosion, seepage, etc.) )��,,Sqq{{
6. Are there structures on -site which are not properly addressed and/or managed through a ❑ Yes No ❑ NA ❑ NE
waste management or closure plan?
If any of questions 4-6 were answered yes, and the situation poses an immediate public health or environmental threat, notify DWQ
7. Do any of the structures need maintenance or improvement? ❑ Yes No ❑ NA ❑ NE
8. Do any of the structures lack adequate markers as required by the permit? ❑ Yes o ❑ NA ❑ NE
(not applicable to roofed pits, dry stacks, and/or wet stacks)
9. Does any part of the waste management system other than the waste structures require ❑ Yes XNo ❑ NA ❑ NE
maintenance or improvement?
Waste Application
10. Are there any required buffers, setbacks, or compliance alternatives that need ❑ Yes XNo ❑ NA ❑ NE
maintenance or improvement?
11. Is there evidence of incorrect land application? If yes, check the appropriate box below. ❑ Yes � No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Excessive Ponding ❑ Hydraulic Overload ❑ Frozen Ground ❑ Heavy Metals (Cu, Zn, e ci )
❑ PAN ❑ PAN > 10% or 10 lbs. ❑ Total Phosphorus ❑ Failure to Incorporate Manure/Sludge into Bare Soil
❑ Outside of Acceptable Crop Window ❑ Evidence of Wind Drift ❑ Application Outside of Approved Area
12. Crop Type(s)
13. Soil Type(s):
14. Do the receiving crops differ from those designated in the CAWMP?
Yes
[:]No
❑ NA
❑ NE
15. Does the receiving crop and/or land application site need improvement?
❑ Yes
9No❑.,/NA
❑ NE
16. Did the facility fail to secure and/or operate per the irrigation design or wettable
❑ Yes
[:]No
17D 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
❑ Yes
No
❑ NA
❑ NE
the appropriate box.
❑ WUP ❑Checklists ❑ Design ❑ Maps ❑ Lease Agreements ❑Other:
21. Does record keeping need improvement? If yes, check the appropriate box below. ❑ Yes W No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Waste Application ❑ Weekly Freeboard ❑ Waste Analysis ❑ Soil Analysis ❑ Waste Transfers ❑ Weather Code
❑ Rainfall ❑ Stocking ❑ Crop Yield ❑ 120 Minute Inspections ❑ Monthly and 1" Rainfall Inspections
22. Did the facility fail to install and maintain a rain gauge? ❑ Yes W No ❑ NA ❑ NE
23. If selected, did the facility fail to install and maintain rainbreakers on irrigation equipment? ❑ Yes /❑ No >(NA ❑ NE
Page 2 of 3 21412011 Continued

I
Wacility Number: 0• Date of Inspection: 149Ol170 1
JJJ"" y ❑
24. Did the facility fail to calibrate waste application equipment as required by the permit? ❑ Yes }�(I No NA ❑ NE
25. Is the facility out of compliance with permit conditions related to sludge? If yes, check ❑ Yes ❑CCC No �Q ✓NA ❑ NE
the appropriate box(es) below. /�
❑ Failure to complete annual sludge survey ❑ Failure to develop a POA for sludge levels
❑ Non -compliant sludge levels in any lagoon
List structure(s) and date of first survey indicating non-compliance:
26. Did the facility fail to provide documentation of an actively certified operator in charge?
❑ Yes t�rNo
❑ NA ❑ NE
27. Did the facility fail to secure a phosphorus loss assessments (PLAT) certification?
❑ Yes )No
))YYYY�```""''"'CCSSSS/
❑ NA ❑ NE
Other Issues
28. Did the facility fail to properly dispose of dead animals with 24 hours and/or document
❑ Yes IXI No
X,
❑ NA ❑ NE
and report mortality rates that were higher than normal?
29. At the time of the inspection did the facility pose an odor or air quality concern?
❑ Yes No
❑ NA ❑ NE
If yes, contact a regional Air Quality representative immediately.
30. Did the facility fail to notify the Regional Office of emergency situations as required by the
❑ Yes No
❑ NA ElNE
permit? (i.e., discharge, freeboard problems, over -application)
31. Do subsurface tile drains exist at the facility? If yes, check the appropriate box below.
j�
❑ Yes �(J No
❑ NA ❑ NE
El Application Field ElLagoon/Storage Pond ❑ Other:
%%%���
32. Were any additional problems noted which cause non-compliance of the permit or CAWMP?
❑ Yes )S�No
❑ NA ❑ NE
33. Did the Reviewer/Inspector fail to discuss review/inspection with an on -site representative?
❑ Yes No
❑ NA ❑ NE
34. Does the facility require a follow-up visit by the same agency?
❑ Yes ANo
❑ NA ❑ NE
Comments (refer to question ft 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). "
Z/�
3Z
lJafj< qff)liw r pjt.TpMtn ia(ifimalbr,JILIC bl L 1,o1Z. �0^.
�ar W kQ � u �.tA ad y So; l d p✓s�r ? yes ADn.-- Sep k Za12 .
;r Iida;A
7, l�l � b�.'4 1✓�A -✓ + o� � -1 I< f- of !^lsP Z C`_P_ �.
21 So;U 5nf 0/I sir �t�1�A,
tt�7�,yllv(fss: Gnm-� 4A- r kif� Nvq-vX3t
11�201 - WP 1,rj2-- lbd Wsp 2,13j6d, P,,1c = 5,-13 A14
�12013— wsPil4 _3Yz l6r, W;pa2=y,2VI6N,pick =3,0SIdd
Reviewer/Inspector Name: �q jl GK /vl,�Il j
Reviewer/Inspector Signature:
Page 3 of 3
Phone: C�36
Date: /O Ol/2Ul3
21412011

I1 :�•
Type of Visit: A Compliance Inspection U Operation Review 0 Structure Evaluation 0 Technical Assistance I
Reason for Visit: Sd3 Routine 0 Complaint 0 Follow-up 0 Referral 0 Emergency ( Other W
0 Denied Access
Date of Visit: 1 S I Arrival Time: Departure Time: ; /Oq County: 7 iJ q kl.1 Region: S RO
Farm Name: !v`hh) I Ief ofcl, CDle - 6q; j. Film,\ Owner Email:
Owner Name:: M; ller Phone: fe-) �7OV-- ysU- %OSr'
cl I%1 ds/wn�n L �/ 1I
Mailing Address: U Q U-5 ]-Ft„ i y Z l 04 At�� m ✓' / e. Iv G Z % 0W
Physical Address: 3 5— LEIS µc y 2-
Facility Contact: 6'(Irf-5 or S�14nn.0/j Title:_
Onsite Representative: C, rTJ 4- AtA I neH C�.rs
n ✓ll (G. 1 1,
Integrator:
Phone: / (/ / 000 l
Certified Operator: 64 r i f LAs-5 Certification Number:
Back-up Operator:
Location of Farm:
Certification Number:
Latitude: d -7 n `l n Longitude:
az►
(9
IZos Nwy
-Zr Se)vg,
Swine
Wean to Finish
Design
Capacity
Current
Pop.
Wet Poultry
La er
Design Current
Capacity Pop.
Cattle
DairyCow
Design
Capacity
1,S
Current
Pop.
O
Wean to Feeder
Non -La er
DairyCalf
ZD
Z 0
Feeder to Finish
Da' Heifer
(�
Farrow to Wean
Farrow to Feeder
Farrow to Finish
Dr, P.oul_ .
Layers
Design C•uMent
Ca aci + P,o
Cow
Non-Dai
Beef Stocker
Gilts
Non -Layers
Beef Feeder
Boars
Pullets
Beef Brood Cow
Other
Other
I I
Turke s
Turkey Puuets
Other
$r07
Discharges and Stream Impacts
�/
1. Is any discharge observed from any part of the operation?
❑ Yes
IXI No
l`I-
❑ NA
❑ NE
Discharge originated at: ❑ Structure ❑ Application Field ❑ Other:
a. Was the conveyance man-made?
❑ Yes
❑ No
❑ NA
❑ NE
b. Did the discharge reach waters of the State? (If yes, notify DWQ)
❑ Yes
❑ No
❑ NA
❑ NE
c. What is the estimated volume that reached waters of the State (gallons)?
d. Does the discharge bypass the waste management system? (If yes, notify DWQ)
❑ Yes
❑ No
❑ NA
❑ NE
2. Is there evidence of a past discharge from any part of the operation?
❑ Yes
V No
❑ NA
❑ NE
3. Were there any observable adverse impacts or potential adverse impacts to the waters
❑ Yes
p(j No
x
❑ NA
❑ NE
of the State other than from a discharge?
Page l of 21412011 Continued

Facility Number: - Date of Inspection
Waste Collection & Treatment
4. Is storage capacity (structural plus storm storage plus heavy rainfall) less than adequate? XYes ❑ No
a. If yes, is waste level into the structural freeboard? /"❑ Yes ❑ No
tructure 1 cture 2 Structure 3
Identifier: #/ MA��Gr #
Spillway?: 6.57Gf
Designed Freeboard (in):
Observed Freeboard (in): g
❑ 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
IXI No
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Yes
IVNo❑
NA
❑ NE
If any of questions 4-6 were answered yes, and the situation poses an immediate public health or environmental threat, notify DWQ
7. Do any of the structures need maintenance or improvement? ❑ Yes ( No ❑ NA ❑ NE
8. Do any of the structures lack adequate markers as required by the permit? ❑ Yes / L 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 ANo ❑ NA ❑ NE
maintenance or improvement?
Waste Application
10. Are there any required buffers, setbacks, or compliance alternatives that need
❑ Yes
�No
❑ NA
❑ NE
maintenance or improvement?
11. Is there evidence of incorrect land application? If yes, check the appropriate box below.
❑ Yes ;No
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Excessive Ponding Hydraulic Overload ❑ Frozen Ground ❑ Heavy Metals (Cu, Zn, etc.)
❑ PAN ❑ PAN > 10% or 10 lbs. ❑ Total Phosphorus ❑ Failure to Incorporate Manure/Sludge into Bare Soil
❑ Outside of Acceptable Crop Window ❑ Evidence of Wind Drift ❑ Application Outside of Approved Area
12. Crop Type(s): KorA .Sc- sevQ/% jr-%Pn
13. Soil Type(s):
14. Do the receiving crops differ from those designated in the CAWMP?
❑ Yes
'T.IXI
❑ NA
❑ NE
15. Does the receiving crop and/or land application site need improvement?
yp��No
❑ 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?
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 I )fin No
❑ NA
❑ NE
Required Records & Documents
Ti
19. Did the facility fail to have the Certificate of Coverage & Permit readily available?
❑ YesA No
❑ NA
❑ NE
20. Does the facility fail to have all components of the CAWMP readily available? If yes, check
❑ Yes ANo
❑ NA
❑ NE
the appropriate box.
❑ WUP []Checklists ❑ Design ❑ Maps ❑ Lease Agreements ❑Other:
21. Does record keeping need im rovement. ❑ Yes
No ❑ NA ❑ NE
" Waste Application l Weekly Freeboard t� vaste Analysis Soil Analysis Wasteers Feather Code
Rainfall Stocking Crop Yield 120 Minute Inspections Q M nthly and V Rainfall Inspections
22. Did the facility fail to install and maintain a rain gauge? ❑ Yes No ❑ NA ❑ NE
23. If selected, did the facility fail to install and maintain rainbreakers on irrigation equipment? ❑ Yes No XNA ❑ NE
Page 2 of 3 21412011 Continued

Facility Number: SI Date of Inspection: y L
24. Did the facility fail to calibrate waste application equipment as required by the permit? ❑ Yes IXI 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. ```"` C(((((
❑ 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 IXI No ❑ NA ❑ NE
31. Do subsurface tile drains exist at the facility? If yes, check the appropriate box below. ❑ Yes No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Application Field ❑ Lagoon/Storage Pond ❑ Other:
32. Were any additional problems noted which cause non-compliance of the permit or CAWMP? IXI Yes ❑ No ❑ NA ❑ NE
33. Did the Reviewer/Inspector fail to discuss review/inspection with an on -site representative? YYY"`❑ttt"' Yes o No ❑ NA ❑ NE
34. Does the facility require a follow-up visit by the same agency? ❑ Yes No ❑ NA ❑ NE
Comments (refer to question II): Explain any YES answers and/or any additional recommendationsorany other comments.
Use drawings of facility to better explain situations (use additional pages as necessary).
30, JJd{� WSieD On S�/S//Z Ot �°2o ar0i S�f
3� 41f) �Yad,(-in lJe1Y�'�D / l Joe"'
1� 41d,
ht ✓ hl �n Con
Z ct�)� over ,���-. >4��q
27. Did the facility fail [o 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 lyl No
❑ NA
❑ NE
and report mortality rates that were higher than normal?
,/�"
29. At the time of the inspection did the facility pose an odor or air quality concern?
❑ Yes �No
❑ NA
❑ NE
If yes, contact a regional Air Quality representative immediately.
30. Did the facility fail to notify the Regional Office of emergency situations as required by the
��//
Yes �No
❑ NA
❑ NE
permit? (i.e., discharge, freeboard problems, over -application)
/btJ,,, aI��/"��' V�ZLf't�.nf -t-v �./�s� �Oo/✓t Z 9 /
�jyl�s.l�✓�
�Z �f � 1 Lza rt'taWed 1'aan
WQak A,-1
✓3,7
Reviewer/Inspector
Name:
Signature:
Page 3 of 3
Phone: �77L ) `% %Z— S%J?5�
Date: / %
214/20II
Reviewer/Inspector

Type of Visit: Compliance Inspection 0 Operation Review 0 Structure Evaluation 0 Technical Assistance
Reason for Visit: 6 Routine 0 Complaint 0 Follow-up 0 Referral 0 Emergency 0 Other 0 Denied Access
Dale of Visit: ^' Arrival Time:
/+ ; p q Departure Time: County: 1 �/1 /� Il.i ry Region: (�j ��
Farm Name: I` t Ilefrf B rDJ .5 Co (e-- 6 al 9 P- Fa rDQ Owner Email: �"�"'�'-"
Owner Name: _ L F M I t ler Phone: r ,h rt 5 Cam) % 0 Y. L1S6. 7 G T/
glAddre Shr�n�lCnl bt V / , f"fT1 UlA Jl 0f) vl Ile NC- a 76 2 n
Mailing Address:
Physical Addrress. 1 ,31 s- 1) .S Wi,-) a 71 hhXL410 fO h In t le : N C, a 7 o 0 0
Facility Contact: a,hri5 or 5b,�2=v)norl Title:
Onsite Representative: ( �r�[ �5 q' S 6cumon
O
Certified Operator: C'h r I S COLS5
Back-up Operator:
Location of Farm:
Integrator:
Certification Number:
Certification Number:
Latitude: 3 & 0 3 (3 � Longitude: Ap t/ ,S O y
+m u s 14t,-) y c, u`t-6 d a os gtu Y al s o c1�1 l�
Swine
Wean to Finish
Wean to Feeder
Design Current
Capacity Pbp. Wet Poultry
La er
Non -La er
Design
Capacity
IDai
IDai
Current
Pop.
Design Current
Cattle Capacity Pop.
Cow Q -
Calf �Q
Feeder to Finish
Dai Heifer
Farrow to Wean
Farrow to Feeder
Farrow to Finish
Dr, Poultry
La ers
Design
C•_a �acity
Current
P,o ,
D Cow
Non-Dai
Beef Stocker
Gilts
Non -Layers
Beef Feeder
Boars
I
Pullets
I Beef Brood Cow
Other
Other
I I
Turke s
Turke Poults
Other
Dischar¢es 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 ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes ❑ No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes ❑ No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes
❑ No
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Yes
'o
'j7��No
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Yes
❑ NA
❑ NE
Pagel of 21412011 Continued

[Facility Number: q q- Date of Inspection: $ /
Waste Collection & Treatment
4. Is storage capacity (structural plus storm storage plus heavy rainfall) less than adequate? ❑ Yes I No
a. If yes, is waste level into the structural freeboard? ❑ Yes 7❑� No
Structure 1 Structure 2 Structure 3 Structure 4
Identifier:IfnnOr SMQ�
Spillway?: "
Designed Freeboard (in):
Observed Freeboard (in): 10 A_
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?
❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ NA ❑ NE
Structure 5 Structure 6
❑ Yes 0 No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes 0 No ❑ NA ❑ NE
If any of questions 4-6 were answered yes, and the situation poses an immediate public health or environments 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 IILI No ❑ NA ❑ NE
(not applicable to roofed pits, dry stacks, and/or wet stacks) 7`"
9. Does any part of the waste management system other than the waste structures require ❑ Yes No ❑ NA ❑ NE
maintenance or improvement?
Waste Application
10. Are there any required buffers, setbacks, or compliance alternatives that need [—]Yes PeNo ❑ NA ❑ NE
maintenance or improvement?
11. Is there evidence of incorrect land application? If yes, check the appropriate box below. ❑ Yes �No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Excessive Ponding ❑ Hydraulic Overload ❑ Frozen Ground ❑ Heavy Metals (Cu, Zn, etc.)
❑ PAN ❑ PAN > 10% or 10 lbs. ❑ Total Phosphorus ❑ Failure to Incorporate Manure/Sludge into Bare Soil
❑ Outside of Acceptable Crop Window ❑ Evidence of Wind Drift ❑ Application Outside of Approved Area
12. Crop Type(s):
13. Soil Type(s): V\I
14. Do the receiving crops differ from those designated in the CAWMP? ❑ Yes JX(No ❑ NA ❑ NE
15. Does the receiving crop and/or land application site need improvement? ❑ Yes No E] NA ❑ NE
16. Did the facility fail to secure and/or operate per the irrigation design or wettable [—]Yes 7❑� No I xl NA ❑ NE
0 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 iii-] Yes &No ❑ NA ❑ NE
the appropriate box.
❑WUP ❑Checklists ❑Design ❑Maps ❑ Lease Agreements ❑Other:
2.,11/poes record keeping need i rovement? If yes, check th appropriate box be 0, Yes ❑ No ❑ NA ❑ NE
u aste Application eekly Freeboard check
Analysis Soil Analysis caste Transfers MV' eather Code
ainfall Stocking Q Crop Yield 20 Minute Inspections Monthly and 1"Rainfall Inspections �Ludge Snroe�
22. Did the facility fail to install and maintain a rain gauge? ❑ Yes [�fNo ❑ NA ❑ NE
23. If selected, did the facility fail to install and maintain rainbreakers on irrigation equipment? ❑ Yes ❑ No NA ❑ NE
Page 2 of 221201l Continued

Q
Facility Number: S Date of Inspection:
24. Did the facility fail to calibrate waste appmation equipment as required by the permit? ❑ Yes No ❑ NA ❑ NE
25. Is the facility out of compliance with permit conditions related to sludge? If yes, check ❑ Yes No [%NA ❑ NE
the appropriate box(es) below.
❑ Failure to complete annual sludge survey [—]Failure to develop a POA for sludge levels
❑ Non -compliant sludge levels in any lagoon
List structure(s) and date of first survey indicating non-compliance:
26. Did the facility fail provide documentation of an actively certified operator in charge? ❑ Yes C� No ❑ NA ❑ NE
27. Did the facility fail to secure a phosphorus loss assessments (PLAT) certification? ❑ Yes 19No ❑ NA ❑ NE
Other Issues
28. Did the facility fail to properly dispose of dead animals with 24 hours and/or document
and report mortality rates that were higher than normal?
29. At the time of the inspection did the facility pose an odor or air quality concern?
If yes, contact a regional Air Quality representative immediately.
30. Did the facility fail to notify the Regional Office of emergency situations as required by the
permit? (i.e., discharge, freeboard problems, over -application)
31. Do subsurface tile drains exist at the facility? If yes, check the appropriate box below.
❑ Application Field ❑ Lagoon/storage Pond ❑ Other:
32. Were any additional problems noted which cause non-compliance of the permit or CAWMP?
33. Did the Reviewer/Inspector fail to discuss review/inspection with an on -site representative?
34. Does the facility require a follow-up visit by the same agency?
❑ Yes IXI No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes No ❑ NA ❑ NE
[—]Yes /J�J'No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes
No
❑ NA
❑ NE
,Yes
❑ No
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Yes
No
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Yes
[Al No
[DNA
❑ NE
'Comments (refer to question #): Explain any YES answers and/or any additional recommendations or any other comments.,_ I
Use drawings of facility to better explain situations (use additional
pages as necessarv). .-.
Ueje4o4�on o n e,"a-n V n1e,V� , 2
oZDlo�-aDll Soil bests � �e.b. aotl �'Mpl��ec�. ao10 UtLissin
is e k� a 010
Fn�LI go 10 a-P P l�C�rons ?
3a &Me_ o-P �te(ASin t-eco+AS JO no-F Oka C-h rlet) WVP.
Ghe-� to't*h -'"C_("' She .
CT�t�At��"a� COC,r_uni-I
(n111"11
Smat► I.3
Sc�'lid �
Reviewer/Inspector Name:
Reviewer/Inspector Signature,
Page 3 of 3
Phone: '17) — Sof S 9
Date: j6l,Z_ q! l l
2/412011

Division of Water Quality
Q
Facility Number 1 /�•� Division ofrSoil and Water Cbnvation 4 nt q11
CI ('1thP' A9eePV l-
Type of Visit Compliance Inspection O Operation Review O Structure Evaluation O Technical Assistance
Reason for Visit y Routine O Complaint O Follow up O Referral O Emergency O Other ❑ Denied Access
Date of Visit:
$
Q
Arrival Time: 0 0
Departure Time:
County:
1 /a� �n
Farm Name: IIletr
i3rCOie-(oaigz
.)(.ttry
Owner Email:
7
Region: LL15P-0
Ownr roe: LE Miller Phone: il,:nf1S (20J)4,gQ-705�
M l I 0 I �� U .S 14 wy P-I ��V.t.rJiyT ny� AY Marti Address: -
Physical Addressvi 5+ 51 3 1 l� i S �N 011 E J uV i Ile, w )/
Facility Contact:
Onsite Represents
Phone No:
Certified Operator: 1�'11 r1 n cis Operator Certification Number:
Back-up Operator:
Location of Farm:
Back-up Certification Number:
1 O ;1-O
— 0001
Latitude: IW o I bA OA Longitude: I96I o W' I U 0
Us Norll to Us f�� a- 5ou`kh I�S towy al So "
L Fc�t4al
Design Current
Swine Capacity Population
Design Current
Wet Poultry Capacity Population
Design Current
Cattle Capacity Population
❑ Wean to Finish
❑ La er Ia
Cow
❑ Wean to Feeder
ILI Non -Layer I
Dairy Calf C20
❑ Feeder to Finish I
❑ Farrow to Wean
❑ Farrow to Feeder
El Farrow to Finish
El Gilts'
❑ Boars
Dry Poultry
El La ers
❑ Non -La ers
❑ Pullets
❑ Turke s
Dairy Heifer
DryCow
❑ Non-Dai
❑Beef Stocker
❑ Beef Feeder
❑Beef Brood Co
Other
❑ Other I
Number of Structures:
El Turkey Poults
Other
Discharges & Stream Impacts
1. Is any discharge observed from any part of the operation?
Discharge originated at: ❑ Structure ❑ Application Field ❑ Other
a. Was the conveyance man-made?
b. Did the discharge reach waters of the State? (If yes, notify DWQ)
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 4 No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes ❑ No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes ❑ No ❑ NA ❑ NE
0
❑ Yes ❑ No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes No ❑ NA ❑ NE
Page I of 3 12128104 Continued

(t
4
» Facility Number: — 0 • Date of Inspection •
Waste Collection & Treatment
4. Is storage capacity (structural plus storm storage plus heavy rainfall) less than adequate?
\ e 5
a. If yes, is waste level into the structural freeboard?
❑ Yes )�(No
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ NA ❑ NE
❑NA ❑NE
Strut nt der Y\ Structure 2 Structure Structure 4 Structure 5 Structure 6
Identifier:-- •5
Spillway?: e
Designed Freeboard (in):
Observed Freeboard (in):
5. Are there any immediate threats tote integrity of any of the structures observed? ❑ Yes >f 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 XNo El NA El 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 ElNE
(Not applicable to roofed pits, dry stacks and/or wet stacks) �',"`(/
9. Does any part of the waste management system other than the waste structures require ❑ YesXNo ❑ NA ❑ NE
maintenance or improvement?
Waste Application
10.
Are there any required buffers, setbacks, or compliance alternatives that need -
❑ Yes
L1_5,No ❑ NA
❑ NE
maintenance/improvement?
11.
Is there evidence of incorrect 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 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) { ,eA10 p +�Q /1 A Ot11
13.
Soil type(s) E
14.
Do the receiving crops differ from those designated in the CAWNIP?
❑ Yes
XNo ❑ NA
❑ NE
15.
Does the receiving crop and/or land application site need improvement?
❑ Yes
0 No ❑ NA
❑ NE
16.
Did the facility fail to secure and/or operate per the irrigation design or wettable acre determination ?
❑ Yes
❑ No ) NA
❑ NE
17.
Does the facility lack adequate acreage for land application?
❑ Yes
XNo ❑ NA
❑ NE
18.
Is there a lack of properly operating waste application equipment?
❑ Yes
XNo ❑ NA
❑ NE
4
Comments (refer to question ft `-Explain any, YES answers and/or any recommendations or any, other comments
Use,drawings of facility: to better explain situations.,(useadditional,pages as necessary)
- 9
0_7 Nb _L?Q9 . J�2'�nG�'t—pY�
* Q 4 LIP
Reviewer/Inspector Name 7SQ,
Phone: —1
Reviewer/Inspector Signatur 1144A.Date:
ELM
Page 2 of 3 . V 1 12129104 Continued

Facility Number: 9 9 — 66TOe of Inspection%' •
Required Records & Documents //
19. Did the facility fail to have Certificate of Coverage & Permit readily available? ❑ Yes I$No ❑ NA ❑ NE
20. Does the facility fail to have all components of the CAWMP readily available? If yes, check ❑ Yes P No El NA ❑ NE
the appropriate box.. �,
❑ WUP El Checklists El Design ❑Maps El Other
21. Do ecord keeping need imprgvement? If yes, check a appropriate box be w. Yes ek ❑ NA ❑ NE
Vaste App�li/_pLtion ee y Freeboard / ante Analysis Soil Ana ysis ante Transfers en
Rzinfall ky Stocking Crop Yield 6360 Minute Inspections outhly and 1" Rain Inspections eather Code
22. Did the facility fail to install and maintain a rain gauge?
23. If selected, did the facility fail to install and maintain rainbreakers on irrigation equipment?
24. Did the facility fail to calibrate waste application equipment as required by the permit?
25. Did the facility fail to conduct a sludge survey as required by the permit?
26. Did the facility fail to have an actively certified operator in charge?
27. Did the facility fail to secure a phosphorus loss assessment (PLAT) certification?
Other Issues
28. Were any additional problems noted which cause non-compliance of the permit or CAWMP?
29. Did the facility fail to properly dispose of dead animals within 24 hours and/or document
and report the mortality rates that were higher than normal?
30. At the time of the inspection did the facility pose an odor or air quality concern?
If yes, contact a regional Air Quality representative immediately
31. Did the facility fail to notify the regional office of emergency situations as required by
General Permit? (ie/ discharge, freeboard problems, over application)
32. Did Reviewer/Inspector fail to discuss review/inspection with an on -site representative?
33. Does facility require a follow-up visit by same agency?
❑Yes No
❑ Yes /❑ No
❑ Yes XNo
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes VNo
❑ Yes �(No
❑ NA ❑ NE
XNA El NE
❑ NA ❑ NE
XNA ❑ NE
❑ NA ❑ NE
El NA El NE
❑ Yes No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes KNo ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes f No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes [)(No ❑ NA ❑ NE
Additional Comments4nd/or,Drawings:
^^ /
.! . -
In
Page 3 of 3 C, 5 .p , - l = �. -) 145. N / To►J
1212VO4

Division of Water Quality
Facility Number �� Division of Soil and Water Conservation J? Q
- - 0 Other Agency
(Type of Visit Compliance Inspection 0 Operation Review 0 Structure Evaluation 0 Technical Assistance I
Reason for Visit Routine Complaint 0 Follow up 0 Referral 0 Emergency 0 Other ❑ Denied Access
Date of Visit: Arrival Time:: Departure Time:
Time: C
Farm Name: Ml ✓ MS •1 (nlC — 66QIQe ,I )n
Owner Name: LF Millet
Mailing Ad_ dSes�
'Physitai•-Address:
Facility Contact:
Onsite Representative:
County:
Owner Email:
Phone:
Region: WS
-IW 4S-0_1W/
8K.& e w, 3 36 46 3 - bmo
Certified Operator: ey 44 1 (j, AJO Operator Certification Numb
Back-up Operator:
Location of Farm:
Swine
Other
❑ Other
Back-up Certification Number:
IDS 4-6 1-1s Ck a 1 . I as 9
to Feeder
to
Design Current Design Current
Capacity Population Wet Poultry Capacity Population
❑ Laver
I❑ Non -Layer
Dry Poultry
❑ Layers
❑ Non -Layers
❑ Pullets
❑ Turkeys
❑ Turkey Poults
❑ Other
Discharges & Stream Impacts
1. Is any discharge observed from any part of the operation?
Discharge originated at: ❑ Structure ❑ Application Field ❑ Other
a. Was the conveyance man-made?
b. Did the discharge reach waters of the State? (If yes, notify DWQ)
Longitude: ®°
Design Current
Cattle Capacity Population
`n V
10
Dairy Cows'
0
Dairy Calf
Dairy Heife
5-0
Dry Cow
❑ Non -Dairy
❑ Beef Stocker
❑ Beef Feeder
❑ Beef Brood Co
Number of Structures: EQ
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
El Yes X ElNA ElNE
❑ Yes L]d No ❑ NA ❑ NE
12128104 Continued

Facility Number: — d • Date of Inspection
Waste Collection & Treatment '1TT
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 tructure 3 fracture 4 Structure 5 Structure 6
Identifier: ��Z
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 PiNo ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes t�No ❑ NA ❑ NE
If any of questions 4-6 were answered yes, and the situation poses an immediate public health or environmental threat, notify DWQ
7. Do any of the structures need maintenance or improvement? El Yes ITT No ❑ NA ❑ NE
8. Do any of the stuctures lack adequate markers as required by the permit? ❑ Yes No ❑ NA ❑ NE
(Not applicable to roofed pits, dry stacks and/or wet stacks)
9. Does any part of the waste management system other than the waste structures require Yes ❑ No ❑ NA ❑ NE
maintenance or improvement?
Waste Application
10. Are there any required buffers, setbacks, or compliance alternatives that need ❑ Yes No ❑ NA ❑ NE
maintenance/improvement?
11. Is there evidence of incorrect application? If yes, check the appropriate box below. ❑ Yes X
No ElNA ❑NE
❑ Excessive Ponding ❑ Hydraulic Overload ElFrozen Ground ElHeavy 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 ❑l Evidence of Wind Drift ❑ Application Outside of Area
RI
12. Crop type(s) AA A 0 Q V /11A. J. /I Al ��
13. Soil type(s) 1l/
14. Do the receiving crops differ from those designated in the CAWMP?
❑ Yes
IblNo
❑ NA
[I NE
15. Does the receiving crop and/or land application site need improvement?
El Yes
//KNo
NA
❑ NE
16. Did the facility fail to secure and/or operate per the irrigation design or wettable acre determination?[] Yes
El No
���❑,,
IjSJ NA
❑ NE
17. Does the facility lack adequate acreage for land application?
❑Yes
I]I 1
/❑ NA
❑ NE
18. Is there a lack of properly operating waste application equipment?
❑ Yes
-{dj, 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):
lAf
IReviewet/InspecthrName ( Phone: %:2
Reviewer/Inspector Signature: Q t yljj A 9 L At, / Date: 7;1 I 1 A<4

I
Facility Number: qq— Q At of Inspection
Required Records & Documents
19. Did the facility fail to have Certificate of Coverage & Permit readily available? ❑ Yes o ❑ NA ❑ NE
20. Does the facility fail to have all components of the CAWMP readily available? If yes, check ❑ Yes No ❑ NA ❑ NE
the appropriate box. ❑ WUp ❑ Checklists ❑ Design El Maps El Other
21. Doe record keeping need 1 rovement? 'ate-b�. ❑ Yes �No ❑ NA ❑ NE
i
�ante App�liJcp[ion Wee y Freeboard Waste Analysis S,oiil,/A�alysis Waste Transfers n
ainfall E Stocking top Yield 120 Minute Inspections L1� Monthly and V Rain Inspections Weather Code
22. Did the facility fail to install and maintain a rain gauge?
23. If selected, did the facility fail to install and maintain rainbreakers on irrigation equipment?
24. Did the facility fail to calibrate waste application equipment as required by the permit?
25. Did the facility fail to conduct a sludge survey as required by the permit?
26. Did the facility fail to have an actively certified operator in charge?
27. Did the facility fail to secure a phosphorus loss assessment (PLAT) certification?
Other Issues
28. Were any additional problems noted which cause non-compliance of the permit or CAWMP?
29. Did the facility fail to properly dispose of dead animals within 24 hours and/or document
and report the mortality rates that were higher than normal?
30. At the time of the inspection did the facility pose an odor or air quality concern?
If yes, contact a regional Air Quality representative immediately
31. Did the facility fail to notify the regional office of emergency situations as required by
General Permit? (ie/ discharge, freeboard problems, over application)
32. Did Reviewer/Inspector fail to discuss review/inspection with an on -site representative?
33. Does facility require a follow-up visit by same agency?
❑ Yes
No
[,I NA
❑ NE
❑ Yes
❑ N
Lb NA
`NA
❑ NE
❑ Yes
�
[L❑
❑ NE
❑ Yes
❑ No
IXNA
❑ NE
❑ Yes
Ste' Io
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Yes
VNo
[INA
❑ NE
es
No
El NA
El NE
❑ Yes
No
El NA
❑ NE
❑ Yes
����((((
No
[I NA
❑ NE
El Yes
,,0
L7� No
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Yes
No
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Yes
ZO
VNo
❑ NA
❑ NE
A ' ' nal''Comments and/or Drawings.-
,., ... ....,. _,. . _ .Marc..
O T- !'��3 1� /l�d� 7U -lie tJv�o �7l
I�l�OSf wsP �=�.0
Page 3 of 3 u u-GV ', _ S �
E-1 � 1
�• 0
12128104

Number
Division of Water Qualitlt
Division of Soil and Water
Other Agency
10,30-
1 1: 001
Type of Visit �( Compliance Inspection 0 Operation Review 0 Structure Evaluation 0 Technical Assistance
Reason for Visit Routine 0 Complaint 0 Follow up O Referral 0 Emergency 0 Other ❑ Denied Access
erry -
Date of Visit: Arrivalvalt Time: O : Departure Time: /, � . ,/ VnY){,ounty: 1�. Region: �w
Farm Name: r � e- `' \ Owner Email: ,(I 1 p
Owner Name: 1- 41D DF l l I Q-Ir I Phone: - Z W o 3
Mailing Address: IoA0�? U ( l V�h'eAUAAPjdnV.1Ili KZ)L
Ifl 5 4 1 3 1 S 1 ! 1 1
P-bysiwal Add,ress: � l� � �T W /IAAb=Ln n
Facility Contact: 0- krlu .5 O f S�a h nAryitle:
Onsite Representative: Q 1 44) + . ) h4.Vt n nn
Certified Operator: t^_ IZI 5 Oa 5 5
Back-up Operator:
Integrator:
Phone o:y ())q5 % N-� QS
S i' axl l+�t 07 - Door
Operator Certification Number:
Back-up Certification Number:
Location of Farm: Latitude: ®0 n ' O, 0 Longitude: � [DrEr
us Owl q91 N to 05 1 y aI 50�th. L 9 NIA.) a1 S.
(on ri4hl) AAA-_
Swine
Wean to Finish
Wean to Feeder
Feeder to Finish
Farrow to Wean
Farrow to Feeder
Farrow to Finish
Other
❑ Other
Design Current Design Current
Capacity Population Wet Poultry Capacity Population
❑ La er
❑ Non - Layer
Dry Poultry
❑ Layers
❑ Non -Layers
❑ Pullets
❑ Turkeys
❑ Turkey Poults
❑ Other
Cattle
Design Current
Capacity Population
❑ Dai Cow +) t1r
❑ Dairy Calf
❑ Dairy Heifer
❑ Dry Cow
❑ Non -Dairy
❑ Beef Stocker
❑ Beef Feeder
❑ Beef Brood Co
Number of Structures: ©.
Discharges & Stream Impacts
1. Is any discharge observed from any part of the operation?
Discharge originated at: ❑ Structure ❑ Application Field ❑ Other
a. Was the conveyance man-made?
b. Did the discharge reach waters of the State? (If yes, notify DWQ)
c. What is the estimated volume that reached waters of the State (gallons)?
d. Does discharge bypass the waste management system? (If yes, notify DWQ)
2. Is there evidence of a past discharge from any part of the operation?
3. Were there any adverse impacts or potential adverse impacts to the Waters of the State
other than from a discharge?
❑ Yes 1KNo ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes
❑ No
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Yes
❑ No
❑ Yes
(XNo
❑ NA
❑ NE
XYes
❑ No
❑ NA
❑ NE
12128104 Continued

Facility Number: 05 • Date of Inspection 1 D 0
Waste Collection & Treatment
4. Is storage capacity (structural plus storm storage plus heavy rainfall) less than adequate?
❑ Yes WNo
❑ NA ❑ NE
a. If yes, is waste level into the structural freeboard?
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ NA ❑ NE
' 1 Structure I Structure 2 Structure 3 Structure 4
Structure 5
Structure 6
Identifier:�.�.-
Spillway?:
Designed Freeboard (in):
Observed Freeboard (in):
5. Are there any immediate threats to the integrity of any of the structures observed?
❑ Yes A 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 XNo
❑ NA ❑ NE
8. Do any of the stuctures lack adequate markers as required by the permit?
❑ Yes XNo
❑ NA ❑ NE
(Not applicable to roofed pits, dry stacks and/or wet stacks)
9. Does any part of the waste management system other than the waste structures require
❑ yes ❑ No
❑ NA ❑ NE
maintenance or improvement?
Waste Application
10. Are there any required buffers, setbacks, or compliance alternatives that need ❑ Yes >(No ❑ NA ❑ NE
maintenance/improvement?
11. Is there evidence of incorrect application? If yes, check the appropriate box below. ❑ Yes t5VNo ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Excessive Ponding ❑ Hydraulic Overload ❑ Frozen Ground ❑ Heavy Metals (Cu, Zn, etc.)
❑ PAN ❑ PAN > 10% or 10 lbs ❑ Total Phosphorus ❑ Failure to Incorporate Manure/Sludge into Bare Soil
❑ Outside of Acceptable Crop Window ❑ Evidence of Wind Drift ❑ Application Outside of Area
p
e 'I ,
12. Croptype(s) i)Ary) 51 Qcpe Fe.5r-ue lieu y5�(�� QI'C21la SI OLQ
IF
13. Soil type(s)
14. Do the receiving crops differ from those designated in the CAWMP? ❑ YesNo
❑ 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
gNA
❑ 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 VNo ❑ NA ❑ NE
Comments (refer to question #): Explain any YES answers and/or any recommendations or any other comments.
Use drawings of facility to better explain situations. (use additional pages as necessary):
OIKIch M4.4-ILes'- 15 dorreaf. 00n5U0 56DG_
o0 1 3 zs% 300 t<.e C opY t- beep i h ya4 Ki � (�eco
IILL P PoSf -Im /Yxa
UU
Reviewer/Inspector Name i c-.<a Mse k f-(Y-7 Phone:
0
1 =�# 7 i I . ;P/

Facility Number: 0 Ote of Inspection •
Required Records & Documents
/
19.
Did the facility fail to have Certificate of Coverage & Permit readily available?
El Yes
No
❑ NA
El NE
20.
Does the facility fail to have all components of the CAWMP readily available? If yes, check
El Yes
,
L�y1Vo
❑ NA
❑ NE
the appropirate box. ❑ WUP ❑ Checklists ❑ Design ❑ Maps
g p El Other
21.
Does cord keeping need imp vement? If yes, check a appropriate box below. ❑ Yes ,(No
as[e Application Weekly Freeboard Waste Analysis Soil,, Analysis Waste Transfers
ainfall Stocking ❑ Crop Yield �20 Minute Inspections l)�tt2onthly and 1" Rain Inspections
❑ NA ❑ NE
Weather Code
22.
Did the facility fail to install and maintain a rain gauge?
❑ Yes
[(No
❑ NA
❑ NE
23.
If selected, did the facility fail to install and maintain rainbreakers on irrigation equipment?
❑ Yes
❑ No
Y NA
❑ NE
24.
Did the facility fail to calibrate waste application equipment as required by the permit?
❑ Yes
MNo
❑ NA
❑ NE
25.
Did the facility fail to conduct a sludge survey as required by the permit?
❑ Yes
❑ No
NINA
❑ 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
❑ NA
❑ NE
Other Issues
28. Were any additional problems noted which cause non-compliance of the permit or CAWMP? ❑ Yes ,�.W/No ❑ NA ❑ NE
29. Did the facility fail to properly dispose of dead animals within 24 hours and/or document ❑ Yes [ No ❑ NA ❑ NE
and report the mortality rates that were higher than normal? %.,(
30. At the time of the inspection did the facility pose an odor or air quality concern? ❑ Yes Il(I No ❑ NA ❑ NE
If yes, contact a regional Air Quality representative immediately ,7,��..`,{{
31. Did the facility fail to notify the regional office of emergency situations as required by ❑ Yes 0 No ❑ NA ❑ NE
General Permit? (ie/ discharge, freeboard problems, over application)
7T'
32. Did Reviewer/Inspector fail to discuss review/inspection with an on -site representative? ❑ Yes VNo ❑ NA ❑ NE
33. Does facility require a follow-up visit by same agency? ❑ Yes A No ❑ NA ❑ NE
Additional Comments and/or Drawings:
a4 0 A. aoo$
,fie... **to at ve role. Last la m o .
�D Slli �- So�iD
m� t7.w4-tg C
o . �—
WA

0 Division of Water Quality
❑ Division of Soil and Water Conservation
❑ Other Agency
Facility Number: 990005 Facility Status: Active Permit:,AWC990005 ❑ Denied Access
Inspection Type: Compliance Inspection Inactive or Closed Date:
Reason for Visit Routine County: Yadkin Region: Winston-Salem
Date of Visit: 02/24/2006 Entry Time: 01:10 PM Exit Time: 03:25 PM Incident #:
Farm Name: Miller Brothers Farts Owner Email:
Owner.
Phone: [phone]
Mailing Address: 1205 US .0 .,u• •r - . r_r
Physical Address:
Facility Status: ❑ Compliant ❑ Not Compliant Integrator:
Location of Farts: Latitude: 36.03'04" Longitude: 80"45'08"
Take Hwy. 21 South off of Hwy. 421. The farm will be on the right approx. one mile before the Iredell Co. line. Farm address is: 1209
Hwy 21 South, Hamptonville, NC 27020
Question Areas:
Discharges & Stream Impacts
Records and Documents
Certified Operator: Christopher Cass
Secondary OIC(s):
Waste Collection & Treatment Waste Application
Other Issues
Operator Certification Number: 985502
On -Site Representative(s): Name Title Phone
On -site representative Chris Cass Phone: [phone]
24 hour contact name Chris Cass Phone: [phone]
Primary Inspector. Melissa Rosebrock Phone:
Inspector Signature: � // �" AS / Z� Date:
Secondary Inspector(s):
Inspection Summary:
4. The marker for the upper (smaller) WSP may be set incorrectly. It did not appear, visually, to be out of compliance today.
14. Need to add 25 acre hay field to WUP.
21. 2006 soil samples to be obtained in the Fall.
21. Need waste analysis for January 2006 applications. Check next visit. The "Francis Farm" fields are to be planted the first of
February 2006 in oats, followed by soybeans. Check SLUR-2 fors next visit.
21. Records look great.
24. Calibration was completed 2/23/06. Not required again until October 2008.
Paget

40
Permit: AWC990005 Owner - Facility: L F Miller
Inspection Date: 02/24/2006 Inspection Type: Compliance Inspection
Facility Number: 990005
Reason for Visit: Routine
Regulated Operations Design Capacity Current Population
Cattle
� Cattle - Dairy Heifer 914 1,156
Total Design Capacity: 914
Total SSLW: 914,000
Type Identifier Closed Date Start Date Designed Freeboard Observed Freeboard
Neste Pond
LOWER
36.00
54.00
Neste Pond
UPPER (SMALL)
45.60
32.00
Page:2

r�
�J
n
L�
Permit: AWC990005 Owner- Facility: L F Miller
Facility Number: 990005
Inspection Date: 02/24/2006 Inspection Type: Compliance Inspection Reason for Visit: Routine
Discharges & Stream Impacts Yes No NA NE
1. Is any discharge observed from any part of the operation? 110011
Discharge originated at
Structure
❑
Application Field
❑
Other
❑
a. Was conveyance man-made?
❑
■
❑
❑
b. Did discharge reach Waters of the State? (if yes, notify DWQ)
❑
■
❑
❑
c. Estimated volume reaching surface waters?
d. Does discharge bypass the waste management system? (if yes, notify DWQ)
❑
■
❑
❑
2. Is there evidence of a past discharge from any part of the operation?
❑
■
❑
❑
3. Were there any adverse impacts or potential adverse impacts to Waters of the State other than from a
❑
■
❑
❑
discharge?
Waste Collection, Storage & Treatment
Yes
No
NA
NE
4. Is storage capacity less than adequate?
❑
■
❑
❑
If yes, is waste level into structural freeboard?
❑
5. Are there any immediate threats to the integrity of any of the structures observed (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 aitematives that need maintenance or
❑
■
❑
❑
improvement?
11. Is there evidence of incorrect application?
❑
■
110
If yes, check the appropriate box below.
Excessive Ponding?
❑
Hydraulic Overload?
❑
Frozen Ground?
❑
Heavy metals (Cu, Zn, etc)?
❑
Page: 3

Permit: AWC990005 Owner- Facility: L F Miller
Facility Number: 990005
Inspection Oats: 02/2412006 Inspection Type: Compliance Inspection
Reason for Ash: Routine
Waste Application
Yes No NA NE
PAN?
❑
Is PAN > 100/6/10 lbs.?
❑
Total P205?
❑
Failure to incorporate manure/sludge into bare soil?
❑
Outside of acceptable crop window?
❑
Evidence of wind drift?
❑
Application outside of application area?
❑
Crop Type 1
Fescue (Hay)
Crop Type 2 -
Com (Grain)
Crop Type 3
Small Grain (Wheat,
Barley, Oats)
Crop Type 4-- -- _ --
- -
Crop Type 5
Crop Type 6
Soil Type 1
Soil Type 2
Soil Type 3
Soil Type 4 -
Soil Type 5
Soil Type 6
14. Do the receiving crops differ from those designated in the Certified Animal Waste Management
■ ❑ ❑ ❑
Plan(CAWMP)?
15. Does the receiving crop and/or land application site need improvement?
❑ ■ ❑ ❑
16. Did the facility fail to secure and/or operate per the irrigation design or wettable acre determination? ❑ ❑ ■ Cl
V. Does the facility lack adequate acreage for land application?
❑ ❑ ❑
18. Is there a lack of properly operating waste application equipment?
❑ ❑ ❑
Records and Documents
Yes No NA NE
19. Did the facility fail to have Certificate of Coverage and Permit readily available?
❑ ■ ❑ ❑
20. Does the facility fail to have all components of the CAWMP readily available?
Cl 0 Cl ❑
If yes, check the appropriate box below.
WUP?
❑
Page: 4

Permit: AWC990005 Owner- Facility: L F Miller Facility Number:
990005
Inspection Date: 02/2412006 Inspection Type: Compliance Inspection Reason for Visit: Routine
Records and Documents
Yes
No
NA
NE
Checklists?
❑
Design?
❑
Maps?
❑
Other?
❑
21. Does record keeping need improvement?
❑
■
❑
❑
If yes, check the appropriate box below.
Waste Application?
❑
120 Minute inspections?
❑
Weather code?
❑
Weekly Freeboard?
Cl
Transfers?
❑
Rainfall?
❑
Inspections after > 1 inch rainfall & monthly?
❑
Waste Analysis?
❑
Annual soil analysis?
❑
Crop yields?
❑
Stocking?
❑
Annual Certification Form (NPDES only)?
❑
22. Did the facility fail to install and maintain a rain gauge?
❑
■
❑
❑
23. If selected, did the facility fail to install and maintain a rainbreaker on irrigation equipment (NPDES only)?
❑
■
❑
❑
24. Did the facility fail to calibrate waste application equipment as required by the permit?
❑
■
❑
❑
25. Did the facility fail to conduct a sludge survey as required by the permit?
❑
■
❑
❑
26. Did the facility fail to have an actively certified operator in charge?
❑
■
❑
Cl
2T Did the facility fail to secure a phosphorous loss assessment (PLAT) certification?
❑
■
❑
❑
Other Issues
Yes
No
NA
NE
28. Were any additional problems noted which cause non-compliance of the Permit or CAWMP?
❑
■
❑
❑
29. Did the facility fail to property dispose of dead animals within 24 hours and/or document and report those
❑
■
❑
❑
mortality rates that exceed normal rates?
30. At the time of the inspection did the facility pose an air quality concern? If yes, contact a regional Air
❑
■
❑
❑
Quality representative immediately.
Page: 5

Permit: AWC990005 Owner- Facility: L F Miller Facility Number: 990005
Inspection Date: 02242006 Inspection Type: Compliance Inspection Reason for Visit: Routine
Otherlssues Yes No NA NE
31. Did the facility fail to notify regional DWQ of emergency situations as required by Permit?
32. Did Reviewer/Inspector fail to discuss review/inspection with on -site representative?
33. Does facility require a follow-up visit by same agency?
❑ ■ ❑ ❑
❑ ■ Cl ❑
Page: 6

Division of Water Quality
Facility Number Division of Soil and Water Conservation
- - - 0 Other Agency
Type of Visit Compliance Inspection 0 Operation Review 0 Structure Evaluation 0 Technical Assistance
Reason for Visit Routine 0 Complaint 0 Follow up 0 Referral 0 Emergency 0 Other ❑ Denied Access
Date of Visit: _oZ Arrival Time: ® Departure Time: County: Region: 1,06
Farm Name: J-1 I IlYY, IaO& eo 1: rm / N_ q1VOer Email:
Owner Name: LE M 1 1�t1K
Mailing Address:
Physical Address:
Facility Contact:
Onsite Representative: r-1 ,dnW '-
Certified Operator: [A'j4 C0,55
Back-up Operator:
Location of Farm:
i
Phone: `f M D -
Phone No:
Integrator:
0
Operator Certification Number: S6 Z
Back-up Certification Number:
D? t
d
l�
Latitude: ®o�' Longitude: eTo FTT
F
p
,
►It-t->y 4dj Nor- `at uS 4w al 5cuj* .
-
1 a6a kv. a.
-
- :Design Current
Design. Current
' Destgn4"Curren
.Swine Capacity Population
Wet Poultry Capacity Population
Cattle
Capacity `Populatton��.
?
❑ Wean to Finish
❑ Layer
I
i❑ Dairy Cow
❑ Wean to Feeder 1
10 Non -Layer I!`
Dairy Calf
IWE) TTU
❑ Feeder to Finish I
Dairy Heifer
-194
❑ Farrow to Wean
Dry Poultry
D Cow'.
K�
❑ Farrow to Feeder
❑
_ ❑ Non-Dai
f El Farrow to Finish
! La ers
- ❑ Beef Stocker
El Gilts
❑Non -Layers
❑ Beef Feeder
--: ❑ Boars
❑ Pullets
❑Beef Brood Cow
t'
4'=
-- - - --- - -- - -- -
" El Turkeys
4 �.
-Other
0 Turkey Puults
❑ Other
❑Other
Number of Structures.:
Discharges & Stream Impacts
1. Is any discharge observed from any part of the operation?
Discharge originated at: ❑ Structure ❑ Application Field ❑ Other
a. Was the conveyance man-made?
b. Did the discharge reach waters of the State? (If yes, notify DWQ)
c. What is the estimated volume that reached waters of the State (gallons)?
d. Does discharge bypass the waste management system? (If yes, notify DWQ)
2. Is there evidence of a past discharge from any part of the operation?
3. Were there any adverse impacts or potential adverse impacts to the Waters of the State
other than from a discharge?
❑ Yes )(No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes
❑ No
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Yes
❑ No
❑ NA
❑ NE
0
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Yes
❑ No
❑ Yes �i ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes ❑ NA ❑ NE
Page 1of3 12128104 Continued

Facility Num• Date of Inspection •
Waste Collection & Treatment
4. Is storage capacity (structural plus storm storage plus heavy rainfall) less than adequate?
❑ Yes LEI 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: 1 bw"?r ncQI�
Spillway?:
Designed Freeboard (in):
Observed Freeboard (in): _ J
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
❑ YesNo ❑ 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 *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)
9. Does any part of the waste management system other than the waste structures require
❑ Yes No ❑ NA ❑ NE
maintenance or improvement?
Waste Application
10. Are there any required buffers, setbacks, or compliance alternatives that need
❑ Yes �No ❑ NA ❑ NE
maintenance/improvement?
11. Is there evidence of incorrect application? If yes, check the appropriate box below.
❑ Yes No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Excessive Ponding ❑ Hydraulic Overload ❑ Frozen Ground [:1 Heavy Metals (Cu,
Zn, etc.)
❑ PAN ❑ PAN > 10% or ] 0 Ibs ❑ Total Phosphorus ❑ Failure to Incorporate Manure/Sludge
into Bare Soil
❑ Outside of Acceptable Crop Window ❑ Evidence of Wind Drift ❑ Application utside of Area,
0 0
12. Crop type(s)
13. Soil type(s)
14.
Do the receiving crops differ from [hose designated in the CAWMP?
Yes
r^-
No
[INA
❑ NE
15.
Does the receiving crop and/or land application site need improvement?
❑ Yes;[M]
No
❑.,/NA
❑ NE
16.
Did the facility fail to secure and/or operate per the irrigation design or wettable acre determination ?
❑ Yes
No
LjQ NA
El 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
IComments (refer to question#): Explain any YES answers and/or any recommendations or any other comments.. I
Use drawings of facility to better explain situations. (use additional pages as necessary):
'eLu?�- LADL) P&
0 /
Reviewer/InspectorName 110 rQ n I Phone: j]— S I
Reviewer/InspectorSignature._ A01"L0 )r arj Date: A1a11 Q(rj

Facility Number: — Ste 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 ❑ Yes No ❑ NA ❑ NE
the appropriate box. ❑ WUP ❑ Checklists ❑ Design El Maps [I Other
21. Do record keeping need im 'rovement? iel�ezltelew-- �, `/ ❑ Yes No ❑ NA ❑ NE
WWaste AppG� ion �W.e/eJ�ly Freeboard Waste Ana oil A alysis E3 aste Transfer —�^/
Rainfall ❑v Stocking pZ Crop Yield �onthly and 1" Rain Inspections 0Weather 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 *A ❑ 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? El Al No h NA ❑ NE
26. Did the facility fail to have an actively certified operator in charge? ❑ Yes ❑ No ,6NA ❑ NE
27. Did the facility fail to secure a phosphorus loss assessment (PLAT) certification? ❑ Yes ❑ No t�NA ❑ NE
Other Issues
28. Were any additional problems noted which cause non-compliance of the permit or CAWMP? ❑ Yes iNo ❑ NA ❑ NE
29. Did the facility fail to properly dispose of dead animals within 24 hours and/or document ❑ Yes No ❑ NA ❑ NE
and report the mortality rates that were higher than normal?
30. At the time of the inspection did the facility pose an odor or air quality concern? ❑ Yes ❑ No XNA ❑ 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 0 No ❑ NA ❑ NE
33. Does facility require a follow-up visit by same agency? ❑ Yes V No ❑ NA ❑ NE
Additional Comments and/or Drawings:
MW
C
Page 3 of 3 12128104

Division of Water Quality
❑ Division of Soil and Water Conservation
❑ Other Agency
Facility Number: 990005 Facility Status: Active Permit: AWC990005 ❑ Denied Access
Inspection Type: Compliance Inspection - Inactive or Closed Date:
Reason for Visit: Routine County: Yadkin Region: Winston-Salem
Date of Visit: 09/01/2005 Entry Time: 09,55 AM Exit Time: 12:30 PM Incident #:
Farm Name: Miller Brothers Farm Owner Email:
Owner:
Phone: [phone]
Mailing Address: 1205 US Hwy 21
Hamptonville NC27020
Physical Address:
Facility Status: ❑ Compliant ❑ Not Compliant Integrator:
Location of Farm: Latitude:
36°03'04" Longitude: 80°45'08"
Take Hwy. 21 South off of Hwy. 421. The farm will be on the right approx. one mile before the Iredell Co. line. Farm address is:
1209 Hwy 21 South, Hamptonville, NC 27020
Question Areas:
Q Discharges & Stream Impacts 0 Waste Collection & Treatment
0 Waste Application
Q Records and Documents Other Issues
Certified Operator: Christopher Cass
Operator Certification Number. 985502
Secondary OIC(s):
On -Site Representative(s): Name
Title Phone
On -site representative Shannon Cass
Phone:
24 hour contact name Chris Cass
Phone: [phone]
Primary Inspector: M lisse Rosebrock
Phone: [phone]
Exl.3
Inspector Signature: 1 ( d A, Q k .K7
Date:
Secondary Inspector(s):
Phone:
Phone:
Inspection Summary:
5/3/05 waste analysis: Upper-2.7 lbs. N/1000 gal. and Lower-1.7 lbs. N/1000 gal.
21. Recent waste analysis has been sent to Raleigh and operator is awaiting results. Check PAN balance next visit for August 2005
applications.
21. 30 loads (112,500 gal) of waste were hauled by another farmer to use on his land this June/July/August. Mr. Cass provided the
hauler a copy of the waste analysis and recorded the date, name, and phone number of hauler. Land is NOT in the WUP yet.
28. Operator is using new waste plan dated may 2005. Neither he nor I could tell if the plan was N or P based and if so, which fields.
Check with tech specialist for guidance regarding allowable PAN or P and acreages.
Page: 1

Permit: AWC990005
Owner - Facility:
L F Miller
Facility Number: 990005
Inspection Date: 09/01/2005
Inspection Type:
Compliance Inspection
Reason for Visit: Routine
Regulated Operations
Design Capacity
Current Population
Cattle
Cattle - Dairy Calf
180
O Cattle -Dairy Heifer
720
❑ Cattle -Milk Cow
450
Waste Structures
Type Identifier
Total Design Capacity: 450
Total SSLW: 630,000
Closed Date Start Date Designed Freeboard Observed Freeboard
aste Pond
LOWER
36.00
36.00
asle Pond
UPPER (SMALL)
45.60
84.00
Page: 2

n
U
Permit: AWC990005 Owner- Facility: L F Miller
Facility Number: 990005
Inspection Date: 09/01/2005 Inspection Type: Compliance Inspection Reason for Visit: Routine
Di�rhames & Stream Imnncts Yes No NA NF
1. Is any discharge observed from any part of the operation? ❑ 0 ❑ ❑
Discharge originated at:
Structure
❑
Application Field
❑
Other
❑
a. Was conveyance man-made?
❑
0 ❑
❑
b. Did discharge mach Waters of the State? (if yes, notify DWQ)
❑
0 ❑
❑
c. Estimated volume reaching surface waters?
d. Does discharge bypass the waste management system? (if yes, notify DWO)
❑
E ❑
❑
2. Is there evidence of a past discharge from any part of the operation?
❑
0 ❑
❑
3. Were there any adverse impacts or potential adverse impacts to Waters of the State other than from a discharge?
❑
Yes
0 ❑
No NA
❑
NF
Waste CnIlpction. Starane R Treatment
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 trees, severe erosion,
❑
E ❑
❑
seepage, etc.)?
6. Are there structures on -site that are not property addressed and/or managed through a waste management or
❑
E ❑
❑
closure plan?
7. Do any of the structures need maintenance or improvement?
❑
0 ❑
❑
8. Do any of the structures lack adequate markers as required by the permit? (Not applicable to roofed pits, dry stacks
❑
0 ❑
❑
and/or wet stacks)
9. Does any part of the waste management system other than the waste structures require maintenance or
❑
E ❑
❑
improvement?
Yes
No NA
NF
Wastp Application
10. Are there any required buffers, setbacks, or compliance alternatives that need maintenance or improvement?
❑
0 ❑
❑
11. Is there evidence of incorrect application?
❑
s ❑
❑
If yes, check the appropriate box below
Excessive Ponding?
❑
Hydraulic Overload?
❑
Frozen Ground?
❑
Heavy metals (Cu, Zn, etc)?
❑
PAN?
❑
Is PAN > 10%110 tbs.?
❑
Total P205?
❑
Failure to incorporate manure/sludge into bare soil?
❑
Outside of acceptable crop window?
❑
Evidence of wind drift?
❑
Application outside of application area?
❑
Crop Type 1
Com (Silage)
Crop Type 2
Soybeans
Crop Type 3
Small Grain (Wheat,
Barley, Oats)
Crop Type 4
Crop Type 5
Page: 3

Permit: AWC990005 Owner • Facility: L F Miller
Facility Number: 990005
Inspection Date: 09/0112005 Inspection Type: Compliance Inspection
Reason for Visit: Routine
Ype No NA NF
Waste Aonliratinn
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 ❑
❑
15. Does the receiving crop and/or land application site need improvement?
❑
0 ❑
❑
16. Did the facility fail to secure and/or operate per the Irrigation design or wettable acre determination?
❑
N ❑
❑
17. Does the facility lack adequate acreage for land application?
❑
0 ❑
❑
18. Is there a lack of property operating waste application equipment?
❑
Yes
E ❑
No NA
❑
NF
Recnrde_ and Documents
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?
❑
■ ❑
❑
If yes, check the appropriate box below. f
WUP?
❑
Checklists?
❑
Design?
❑
Maps? _
❑
Other?
❑
21. Does record keeping need improvement?
❑
moo
If yes, check the appropriate box below.
Waste Application?
❑
120 Minute inspections?
❑
Weather code?
❑
Weekly Freeboard?
❑
Transfers?
❑
Rainfall?
❑
Inspections atter> 1 inch rainfall & monthly?
❑
Waste Analysis?
❑
Annual soil analysis?
❑
Crop yields?
❑
Stocking?
❑
Annual Certification Form (NPDES only)?
❑
22. Did the facility fail to install and maintain a rain gauge?
❑
❑
❑
23. If selected, did the facility fail to install and maintain a rainbreaker on irrigation equipment (NPDES only)?
❑
0 ❑
❑
24. Did the facility fail to calibrate waste application equipment as required by the permit?
❑
N ❑
❑
25. Did the facility fail to conduct a sludge survey as required by the permit?
❑
a ❑
❑
26. Did the facility fail to have an actively certified operator in charge?
❑
0 ❑
❑
27. Did the facility fail to secure a phosphorous loss assessment (PLAT) certification?
❑
E ❑
❑
Page: 4

r1
L-A
Permit: AWC990005 Owner - Facility: L F Miller
Facility Number: 990005
Inspection Date: 09/01/2005 Inspection Type: Compliance Inspection Reason for Visit: Routine
Other IeaLes Yen No NA N
28. Were any additional problems noted which cause noncompliance of the Permit or CAWMP? ❑ E ❑ ❑
29. Did the facility fail to property dispose of dead animals within 24 hours and/or document and report those mortality ❑ E ❑ ❑
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 0000
representative immediately.
31. Did the facility fail to notify regional DWQ of emergency situations as required by Permit?
32. Did Reviewer/tnspector fail to discuss reviewlinspection with on -site representative?
33. Does facility require a follow-up visit by same agency?
Page: 5

I1 ype of visit (-)Compliance Inspection U Operation Review U Structure Evaluation U Technical Assistance I
Reason for Visit 0 Routine 0 Complaint 0 Follow up 0 Referral 0 Emergency 0 Other ❑ Denied Access
Date of Visit: H / 1 1 DM I Arrival Time: ® Departure Time: a M) County: ILL
Farm Name: _ N1 1 I tex- B (-OS . Farm Owner Email:
Region: LLrIRD
Owner Name: _ M'10 4-ir Phone: 1 10 O ` -2/n 10 3
Mailing Address: 1 of 1
LIP-"0`st-e, 1315 7 Physical Address: /1
Facility Contact:S;KQ 1nOY1 Or l.�Kt- - l-el- Ste.
Onsite Representative:
,t 11,! A*&
Certified Operator: Lhr is 0Q4ci
Back-up Operator:
Location of Farm:
uS RWv qi o
Swine
Wean to Finish
Wean to Feeder
Feeder to Finish
Farrow to Wean
Farrow to Feeder
Farrow to Finish
Gilts
Other
❑ Other
i.i Ue I r.X. a 7 0 010
Phone No: Doq asp %(y-'
Integrator:
Operator Certification Number:
Back-up Certification Number:
Latitude: ®o
-Wy a► 'SC)3w'
Design Current Design Current
Capacity Population Wet Poultry Capacity Population
❑ Layer
�I ❑ Non -La et
Dry Poultry
❑ La ers
❑ Non -Layers
❑ Pullets
❑ Turkeys
❑ Turkey Poults
❑ Other
Discharges & Stream Impacts
1. Is any discharge observed from any part of the operation?
Discharge originated at: ❑ Structure ❑ Application Field ❑ Other
a. Was the conveyance man-made?
Longitude:
aurm On rl
Design Current
Cattle Capacity Population
❑ Dairy Cow
❑ Dairy Calf
I
I
❑ Dairy Heifer
❑ Dry Cow
❑ Non -Dairy
❑ Beef Stockei
❑ Beef Feeder
❑ Beef Brood Co
b. Did the discharge reach waters of the State? (If yes, notify DWQ)
e. What is the estimated volume that reached waters of the State (gallons)?
Number of Structures:
d. Does discharge bypass the waste management system? (If yes, notify DWQ)
2. Is there evidence of a past discharge from any part of the operation?
3. Were there any adverse impacts or potential adverse impacts to the Waters of the State
other than from a discharge?
❑ Yes No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes
❑ No
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Yes
❑ No
❑ NA
❑ NE
0
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Yes
❑ No
❑ Yes
XNo
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Yes
)1"No
❑ NA
❑ NE
�1
12128104 Continued

Facility Number: — Q S • Date of Inspection 't t"�" •
Waste Collection & Treatment
4. Is storage cgppgity (structural plus storm storage plus heavy rainfall) less than adequate? ❑ Yes [ No [I NA [I NE
I"�bb �LJ la a. If yes, is waste level into the structural freeboard? ❑ Yes No ElNA ❑ NE
c�*
�l''� Structure 1 Structure 2 StructtQurre�3 Structure 4 Structure 5 Structure 6
Identifier: Lo Veit Grp:e r (� J
Spillway?:
Designed Freeboard (in):
Observed Freeboard (in):_
5.
Are there any immediate threats to the integrity of any of the structures observed?
❑ Yes
0 No
❑ NA
❑ NE
(ie/ large trees, severe erosion, seepage, etc.)
6.
Are there structures on -site which are not properly addressed and/or managed
❑ Yes
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
4No
❑ NA
❑ NE
8.
Do any of the stuctures lack adequate markers as required by the permit?
❑ Yes
No
ElNA
[INE
(Not applicable to roofed pits, dry stacks and/or wet stacks)
9.
Does any part of the waste management system other than the waste structures require
❑ Yes
No
❑ NA
❑ NE
maintenance or improvement?
Waste Application
10. Are there any required buffers, setbacks, or compliance alternatives that need ❑ Yes] No ❑ NA ❑ NE
maintenance/improvement?
11. Is there evidence of incorrect application? If yes, check the appropriate box below. ❑ Yes No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Excessive Ponding ❑ Hydraulic Overload ❑ Frozen Ground ❑ Heavy Metals (Cu, Zn, etc.) '
❑ PAN ❑ PAN > 10% or 10 lbs ❑ Total Phosphorus ❑ Failure to Incorporate Manure/Sludge into Bare Soil
❑ Outside of Acceptable Crop Window ❑ Evidence of Wind Drill ❑ Application Outside of Area
12. Crop type(s)
13. Soil type(s)
14.
Do the receiving crops differ from those designated in the CAWMP?
❑ Yes
No
❑ NA
❑ NE
15.
Does the receiving crop and/or land application site need improvement?
❑ Yes
No
❑//////''NA
El 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
)dNo
❑ NA
❑ NE
18.
Is there a lack of properly operating waste application equipment?
❑ Yes
13�No
❑ NA
❑ NE
Reviewer/Inspector Name - � ,'" ,;,,`;11 Phone: O
Reviewer/Inspector Signatur • ,d#,l.IIMA 3 9A&.A&&/ Date: of 4 I p-s—
Continued

Facility Number: — Djef Inspection I C)1 L •
Required Records & Documents
19. Did the facility fail to have Certificate of Coverage & Permit readily available? ❑ Yes [���..(No ❑ NA ❑ NE
20. Does the facility fail to have all components of the CAWMP readily available? If yes, check ❑ Yes No ❑ NA ❑ NE
the appropirate box. ❑ WUP ❑ Checklists ❑ Design ❑ Maps ❑ Other /
21. Does ecord keeping need i ovement? if yes, chec a appropriate box b ow. Oyes No ❑ NA ❑ NE
(�as[e Applic/ation Wee Freeboard Waste Analysis Soil Ary�lysis LS(Waste Transfers
ainfall Stocking Crop Yield 'ons IldMon[hly and 1"Rain Inspections Weather Code
22. Did the facility fail to install and maintain a rain gauge? ❑ Yes
23. If selected, did the facility fail to install and maintain rainbreakers on irrigation equipment? ❑ Yes
24. Did the facility fail to calibrate waste application equipment as required by the permit? OCI ,040 ❑ Yes
25. Did the facility fail to conduct a sludge survey as required by the permit? ❑ Yes
26. Did the facility fail to have an actively certified operator in charge?
27. Did the facility fail to secure a phosphorus loss assessment (PLAT) certification?
Other Issues
28. Were any additional problems noted which cause non-compliance of the permit or CAWMP?
29. Did the facility fail to properly dispose of dead animals within 24 hours and/or document
and report the mortality rates that were higher than normal?
30. At the time of the inspection did the facility pose an odor or air quality concern?
If yes, contact a regional Air Quality representative immediately
31. Did the facility fail to notify the regional office of emergency situations as required by
General Permit? (ie/ discharge, freeboard problems, over application)
32. Did Reviewer/Inspector fail to discuss review/inspection with an on -site representative?
33. Does facility require a follow-up visit by same agency?
❑ Yes
❑ Yes
6No
El NA
El NE
No
I &A
❑ NE
No
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ No
gNA
❑ NE
�No
ElNE.
❑ No
ttttttr❑,,,,,,,NA
VNA
❑ NE
❑ Yes o ElNA ❑ NE
ElYesr;"o ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes )jNo ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes Z No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes ) No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes )�o ❑ NA ❑ NE
Additional Commentsi Drawings:
l'
ff
V — I I U U 1 12/2(Oj

❑ Division of Water Quality
❑ Division of Soil and Water Conservation
❑ Other Agency
Facility Number: 990005 Facility Status: Active Permit: AWC990005 ❑ Denied Access
Inspection Type: Compliance Inspection Inactive or Closed Date:
Reason for Visit: Routine County: Yadkin Region: Winston-Salem
Date of Visit: 01/11/2005 Entry Time: 09:30 AM Exit Time: 12:30 PM
Farm Name: Miller Brothers Farm Owner Email:
Owner. L F Miller
Phone: [phone]
Mailing Address: 1205 US Hwy 21 Hamotonville NC 27020
Physical Address:
Facility Status: ❑ Compliant ❑ Not Compliant Integrator.
Location of Farm: Latitude: 36.05 Longitude: -80.75
Take Hwy. 21 South off of Hwy. 421. The farm will be on the right approx. one mile before the Iredell Co. line. Farm address is:
1209 Hwy 21 South, Hamptonville, NC 27020
Question Areas:
0 Discharges & Stream Impacts Waste Collection & Treatment 0 Waste Application
Q Records and Documents 0 Other Issues
Certified Operator: Christopher Cass Operator Certification Number: 985502
Secondary OIC(s):
On -Site Representative(s):
Name
Title Phone
24 hour contact name
Shannon Cass
Phone:
24 hour contact name
Chris Cass
Phone: [phone]
On -site representative
Chris Cass
Phone: [phone]
Primary Inspector: Mary M Rosebrock
Phone:[phone]
Ext.383
Secondary Inspector(s):
Phone:
Phone:
Page: 1

Permit: AWC990005 Owner -Facility: LF Miller Facility Number: 990005
Inspection Date: 01/1112005 Inspection Type: Compliance Inspection Reason for Visit: Routine
Inspection Summary:
3. Small amount of overflow from junction box at calf bam. Not a WO concern today.
3. and 9. Suggest that operator repair lowest point of stocktrail and the stocktrail at the upper end (far end) near pasture. There is
some evidence of sediment /manure starting to wash from the stocktrail.
9. Suggest repair/replacement of berm at #2 barn to help contain waste.
10. Need to establish heavier, permanent vegetation in buffer below pasture, near creek. Suggest fescue and to be seeded by April
15,2005.
11. and 17. Cannot confirm/deny until new CAWMP is completed.
19. At the time of the inspection, the facility had not received their new permit and COC. Has applied for permit using current CAWMP.
21. Operator is awaiting waste analysis to complete SLUR-2 form for applications made in NOWDEC 2004 and JAN 2005.
28. "Francis farm" fields received waste in 2004. These fields are being added to the new CAWMP being developed at this time.
Per operator's request, staff of the Yadkinviile Field Office (NRCS,SWCD,Coop Ext.) were also onsite during the inspection. Tech.
spec. is awaiting NCDA soil test results to complete PLAT assessment for the new CAWMP. Fields, acreages, and waste
application method will be updated.
Page: 2

Permit: AWC990005 Owner- Facility: L F Miller
Inspection Date: 01/112005 Inspection Type: Compliance Inspection
Regulated Operations
Cattle
Facility Number: 990005
Reason for Visit: Routine
Design Capacity Current Population
❑ Cattle -Dairy Calf
O Cattle -Dairy Heifer
936
O Cattle - Milk Cow
450
0
Total Design Capacity: 450
Total SSLW: 630,000
Page: 3

Permit: AWC990005 Owner -Facility: L. F Miller Facility Number: 990005
Inspection Date: 01111/2005 Inspection Type: Compliance Inspection Reason for Visit: Routine
Waste Structures
Num Desc Close Dt Start Dt Designed Freeboard Observed Freeboard
LOWER Waste Pond 38.00
UPPER (SM Waste Pond 36.00
Page: 4

n
U
Permit; AWC990005
Owner- Facility: L F Miller
Facility Number: 990005
Inspection Date: 01/11/2005 Inspection Type: Compliance Inspection Reason for Visit: Routine
Discharges P. Stream Impacts Yee No NA NF
1. is any discharge observed from any part of the operation? ❑ 0 ❑ ❑
Discharge originated at:
Structure
❑
Application Field
❑
Other
❑
a. Was conveyance man-made?
❑
■
❑
❑
b. Did discharge reach Waters of the State? (if yes, notify DWO)
❑
0
❑
❑
c. Estimated volume reaching surface waters?
d. Does discharge bypass the waste management system? (if yes, notify DWQ)
❑
N
❑
❑
2. Is there evidence of a past discharge from any part of the operation?
❑
N
❑
❑
3. Were there any adverse impacts or potential adverse impacts to Waters of the State other than from a discharge?
❑
Yes
0
No
❑
NA
❑
NF
Waste Collection_ Storage & Treatment
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 trees, severe erosion,
❑
0
❑
❑
seepage, etc.)?
6. Are there structures on -site that are not properly addressed and/or managed through a waste management or
❑
0
❑
❑
closure plan?
7. Do any of the structures need maintenance or improvement?
❑
N
❑
❑
8. Do any of the structures lack adequate markers as required by the permit? (Not applicable to roofed pits, dry stacks
❑
0
❑
❑
and/or wet stacks)
9. Does any part of the waste management system other than the waste structures require maintenance or
E
❑
❑
❑
improvement?
Yes
No
NA
NF
Waste Application
10. Are there any required buffers, setbacks, or compliance alternatives that need maintenance or improvement?
0
❑
❑
❑
11. Is there evidence of incorrect application?
❑
❑
❑
0
If yes, check the appropriate box below.
Excessive Ponding?
❑
Hydraulic Overload?
❑
Frozen Ground?
❑
Heavy metals (Cu, Zn, etc)?
❑
PAN?
❑
Is PAN > 10%/10 lbs.?
❑
Total P2057
❑
Failure to incorporate manure/sludge into bare soil?
❑
Outside of acceptable crop window?
❑
Evidence of wind drift?
❑
Application outside of application area?
❑
Crop Type 1
Small Grain (Wheat,
Barley, Oats)
Crop Type 2
Corn (Silage)
Crop Type 3
Fescue (Hay, Pasture)
Crop Type 4
Crop Type 5
Page: 5

Peril: AWC990005 Owner- Facility: L F Miller
Inspection Date: 01/11/2005 Inspection Type: Compliance Inspection
Facility Number: 990005
Reason for Visit: Routine
Waste Application
Crop Type 6
Yen
No NA
NE
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)? 00
❑
❑
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 deterination?
❑
❑ 0
❑
17. Does the facility lack adequate acreage for land application?
❑
0 ❑
❑
18. Is there a lack of properly operating waste application equipment?
❑
Vg
N ❑
No NA
❑
N
R - nrdc and On - im nts
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?
❑
E ❑
❑
If yes, check the appropriate box below.
WUP?
❑
Checklists?
❑
Design?
❑
Maps? --- -
❑
Other?
❑
21. Does record keeping need improvement?
❑
E ❑
❑
If yes, check the appropriate box below.
Waste Application?
❑
120 Minute inspections?
❑
Weather code?
❑
Weekly Freeboard?
❑
Transfers?
❑
Rainfall?
❑
Inspections after> 1 inch rainfall & monthly?
❑
Waste Analysis?
❑
Annual soil analysis?
❑
Crop yields?
❑
Stocking?
❑
Annual Certification For (NPDES only)?
❑
22. Did the facility fail to install and maintain a rein gauge?
❑
N ❑
❑
23. If selected, did the facility fail to install and maintain a minbreaker on irrigation equipment (NPDES only)?
❑
M ❑
❑
24. Did the facility fail to calibrate waste application equipment as required by the permit?
❑
N ❑
❑
25. Did the facility fail to conduct a sludge survey as required by the peril?
❑
❑ 0
❑
26. Did the facility fail to have an actively certified operator in charge?
❑
0 ❑
Cl
27. Did the facility fail to secure a phosphorous loss assessment (PLAT) certification?
❑
❑ N
❑
Page: 6

Permit: AWC990005
Owner • Facility: L F Miller
Facility Number: 990005
Inspection Date: 01111/2005 Inspection Type: Compliance Inspection Reason for Visit: Routine
Other Issues yes No NA NE
28. Were any additional problems noted which cause non-compliance of the Permit or CAWMP? N ❑ ❑ ❑
29. Did the facility fail to property dispose of dead animals within 24 hours and/or document and report those mortality ❑ ❑ ❑
rates that exceed nomwl rates?
30. At the time of the inspection did the facility pose an air quality oonoem? If yes, contact a regional Air Quality ONOO
representative immediately.
31. Did the facility fail to notify regional DWQ of emergency situations as required by Peril?
32. Did Reviewer/Inspector fail to discuss reviewfinspection with on -site representative?
33. Does facility require a follow-up visit by same agency?
Page: 7

of Visit iQ Compliance Inspection O Operation Review O Lagoon Evaluation
for Visit A Routine O Complaint O Follow up O Emergency Notification O Other ❑ Denied Access
Facility Number Date of Visit:
Permitted [3 Certified 0 Conditionally Certified 0 Registered
Farm Name: _ 1"I L� �PX �rOS . Ear
Owner Name: ti L eS+P� l I tX
Mailing Address: Ia��� I �h WaAk I 1 �irM,I��-
Facility Contact:
Onsite Representative:
Certified Operator: 0�
Location of Farm:
Date Last Operated or Above Threshold: —
County: _ ]( �� I h
1 Phone No: _
-i-onvlllP.,f�C� a�0�0
Phone No: _I;! - qS-0- 105-1LG�
Integrator.
Operator Certification Number. _,_•—__,
rt�
❑ Swine ❑ Poultry 6 Cattle [3 Horse Latitude �' � �� Longitude �' � ��
Swine
Feeder to Finish
Uqjg
Non Layer I
i
I '�
Non Dairy
l
1913
�0
f
Farrow to Wean
-
j =
h�Qt S V
Farrow to Feeder
Other
1;E'AI
Farrow to Finish
Totai Desig><t Capacity
p
Gilts
1' - f - ;
7Totai SSI.W_ "
�% 0 DO O
Boars
.N®rberofI.agaons �
s.
v
,�
Discharees & Stream Impacts
1. Is any discharge observed from any part of the operation?
0 /
❑ Yes [4No
Discharge originated at ❑ Lagoon ❑ Spray Feld ❑ Other
7777"``
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 XNo
Structure 1 Structure 2 S cture 3 Structure 4 Structure 5 Structure 6
Identifier: _LO lypQ-� 5rna l __---• —_— _
--_ __ __
Freeboard (inches): 3 349
12112103
Contbwed

Facility Number: C161 — Q Date of Inspection •
5. Are there any immediate threats to the iWgrity of any of the structures observed? (jet 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 XNo
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 maintenanceimpmvementY t'iV ') Yes ❑ No
9. Do any stuctures lack adequate, gauged markers with required maximum and minimum liquid level [[I❑� Yes No
elevation markings?
Waste Annlication
10. Are there any buffers that need maintenancelimprovement? a Yes ❑ No
11. Is there evidence of over application? If yes, check the appropriate box below.[ _an inc O ({ � r M 1 Yes ❑ No
❑ Excessive Ponding ❑PAN ❑ Hydraulic Overload ❑ Frozen Ground ❑ Copper and/or -Zinc W
12. Crop type 5 ca r h re r ea
13. Do the receiving crops differ 4 those designated in the Certified Animal Waste Man gement Plan (CA SIP)? ❑ 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 00
15. Does the receiving crop need improvement? ❑ Yes 9No
16. Is them a lack of adequate waste application equipment? ❑ Yes Po
Odor Issues
17. Does the discharge pipe from the confinement building to the storage pond or lagoon fail to discharge attar below_*,*,,
liquid level of lagoon or storage pond with no agitation?
18. Are there any dead animals not disposed of properly within 24 hours? ❑ Yes No
19. Is there any evidence of wind drift during land application? (i.e. residue on neighboring vegetation, asphalt, ❑ Yes No
roads, building structure, and/or public property)
20. At the time of the inspection did the f� pose an odor or air quality concern? If yes, contact a regional El YesYNo
Air Quality representativeimmediately.(3)SM0J1 &moon+ toi rwpx-+tno Qnm ,onC�on % L
Feld
3. Sv Vr�e_
Te__
Iott,e5-E- Poi n+ of 5foc4�4-ral
and s�oLI-+ral I a-+ uppe -end Lfoc ,r ena) necaIr
pas-k u rre m T hie r-e_ t s bome yyeviJtn c--e- o secl Me,�i-f-/mangy
5bw- (r) h t~rom C`'1 Sao �-tL �rcZ t „
berM a-t '4 a Barn 4--
h Con �a ir1 t�xS1 e B o
Io Named lish ht?avier-, P-e�r-man �nt� v�q� ek4io►�
in b4-� below pc�-Ivre, I near Cr�K- - S" �9est �escu�
i I an��e�e1r b F��t- I l n u v� n e�\ O A LOU P i.) d0vPlei
Name
O
Reviewer/Inspector
Date:
12/12/03 1Continued

Facility Number: _ Date of Inspection •
Required Records & Documents L�G
21.
Fail to have Certificate of Coverage & General Permit or other Permit readily available? q
❑ Yes
0 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
XNo
23.
Does record keeping need improvement? If yes, check the appropriate box below.
❑ Yes
XNo
❑ asu Application ❑reeboard ❑ y/asu Analysis ❑Soil Sa6
mpling
24.
Is facility not in compliance with any applicable setback criteria in effect at the time of design?
❑ Yes
*0
25.
Did the facility fail to have a actively certified operator in charge?
❑ Yes
XNo
26.
Fail to notify regional DWQ of emergency situations as required by General Permit?
(ie/ discharge, freeboard problems, over application)
❑ Yes
XNo
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
kNo
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
XNo
31.
If selected, did the facility fail to install and maintain rainbreakers on irrigation equipment?
❑ Yes
❑ No
32.
Did the facility fail to install and maintain a rain gauge?
❑ Yes
❑ No
33.
Did the facility fail to conduct an annual sludge survey?
❑ Yes
❑ No
34.
Did the facility fail to calibrate waste application equipment?
❑ Yes
❑ No
35.
Does record keeping for NPDES required forms need improvement? If yes, check the appropriate box below.
❑ Yes
❑ No
❑ Stocking Form ❑ Crop Yield Form ❑ Rainfall ❑ Inspection After 1" Rain
❑ 120 Minute Inspections ❑ Annual Certification Form
0 No violations or deficiencies were noted during this visit You will receive no further correspondence about this vi9t
U �f-I%e i�me t 'l-P�e ii�sPeclion,61; A
I had ncr4
rEce`iveCi n,�to permi%/ Cow, ctpPlie-d %t
Yp'rm l� us I r-\ �v rre �1 CAA I,J MP �;-e d n I wa)
�OPero-:L(i5 aLL)aig1'n w a-4 4e. ov,c�t 5�s eow�Ie{�
s�u2- �f m q�I'� cec�i�dr� rn d� i ►� Nov )e-c\
`' Fra nc'l5 Far m e t retie l vej w 0.5ie- in I/ e,5e-
el e �b b� added -�� rle�t� Cal LOnip h, nj
d�velmea
Per0p2,r 4-or5 r Ue,5�I 5ia�' o Ih� YaDLl4ir�v
Q��"�e �N(eC5 1 5LO 1 Co -op Ex+) LLv-,, e- a150 an54e-- du t-1 n
e cns on, ie�hn cAl,Specla11st 1saLOd(44r11
t 172/I2/03 neLk.D Ojq LOIU1° L�Ur�er>f bet I J'i ,IC./� Jo Rvddivtarr(-e �j)
.u— k4c "Pltc"on me+h(v iA)t I h� u a - o !J

of Visit Q Compliance Inspection O Operation Review O lagoon Evaluation
(Reason for Visit P Routine O Complaint O Follow up O Emergency Notification O Other ❑ Denied Access I
Facility Number Date of Visit Time:
O Not Operational C Below Threshold
Permitted E3 Certified 0 Conditionally Certified 0 Registered Date Last Operated or Above Threshold:
Farm Name: _L_I L11y�' . R rU `T .. (72 �r J4 County: _ Qj164
Owner Name: _ �25 '—:—"tl�p ._ Phone No• t i�ojg. `il% � G r L169,. a /0 6,3
Mailing Address:
Facility Contact: Sbt?nnon Or
OnsiteRepresentative: PL1Qra��_�jfiS FN0.(l�„
Certified Operator:_—
Location of Farm: C 5^
vs v4w\q + .2-I nor-41 qz Us t+wy )-i 50u-Hi . F
4IL( AInn vt / /2 , NX� c2 7(ia{',
Phone No:-70,tf'SO• SOS I�GI
Integrator.
Operator Certification Number: 1001L
a-+•-M on r-id h t 0-* I atog fewy
[]Swine ❑ Poultry Cattle [3Horse Latitude =• F0,79` ®- Longitude ®• ®< EM-
Ded
Swine . Ca a =Po elation r?Pouliry',,
Wean to Feeder
r- ❑ Layer
Feeder to Finish
Non -I
Farrow to Wean
' Other
Farrow to Feeder
V
Farrow to Finish
Disc]liames & Stream Impacts
1. Is any discharge observed from any part of the operation?
Discharge originated at: ❑ Lagoon ❑ Spray Field ❑ Other
1 a. If discharge is observed, was the conveyance man-made?
1 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 Structur Structure 4 Structure 5
Identifier: __Lc)tx.�S
Freeboard (inches): ---�-
12112103 j
0
❑ Yes 40
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes No
❑ Yes No
❑ Yes No
Structure 6
Continued
ii

Facility Number: '
j Date of Inspection )
5. Are there any immediate threats to the egrity of any of the structures observed? (ia/ trees, severeerosion,
seepage, etc.)
6. Are there structures on -site which are not properly addressed and/or managed through a waste management or
closure plan?
(If any of questions 4-6 was answered yes, and the situation poses an
immediate public health or environmental threat, notify DWQ)
7. Do any of the structures need maintenance/improvement?
8. Does any part of the waste management system other than waste structures require maintenancefimprovement?
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? bVgTp'r- L INC>+ VC) r- L'�'e—
11. Is there evidence of over application? If yes, check the appropriate box below. &+ V ftc- + 01.1
❑ Excessive Ponding ❑ PAN ❑ Hydraulic Overload ❑ Frozen Ground ❑ Copper and/or Zinc
12. Crop type
13. Do the receiving crops differ with
14. a) Does the facility lack adequate acreage for land applicatio
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?
V -eA.J tv V P
Odor Issues
17. 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?
18. Are there any dead animals not disposed of properly within 24 hours?
19. Is there any evidence of wind drift during land application? (i.e. residue on neighboring vegetation, asphalt,
roads, building structure, and/or public property)
20. At the time of the inspection did the facility pose an odor or air quality concern? If yes, contact a regional
Air Quality representative immediately.
r
a
❑ Yes XNo
❑ Yes gNo
❑ Yes ®No
XYes 6❑] No
❑ Yes pp No
Yes *To
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes No
❑ Yes *o
❑ Yes A No
.$YM-1TRo
❑ Yes 9No
"o
Yes
❑ Yes *No
Field Copy ❑ Final Notes
-51e, PIO n revise ? (�-.
11�CZ5(� 15
In P oceS5
CC
V4 V-" IseGi. W'al o-d
oil 501/ +esf
resvl+5
So MI5 1 aoo
4 b31aq
r
Reviewer/fnspector Nsune l E Ly r s t p IPA a
Reviewer/Inspeaor Signatam: JAA O I�-tlA Date `
i!✓[uus I % I l pS Continued

Facility Number: — ()5f D of Inspection /
kequired 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 X o
23. Does ord keeping need improvement? If /yes, check the appropriate box below. ❑ Yes No
�te Application ❑ Teeboard Qkaste Analysis ❑ Soil Sampling a04 / `
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 1CYN0
26. Fail to notify regional DWQ of emergency situations as required by General Permit? 7�
(ie/ discharge, freeboard problems, over application) ❑ Yes No
27. Did ReviewerAnspector 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 coveted under a NPDES Permit? (1f no, skip questions 31-35) ❑ Yes kNo
31. If selected, did the facility fail to install and maintain rainbreakers on irrigation equipment? ❑ Yes ❑ No
32. Did the facility fail to install and maintain a rain gauge? ❑ Yes ❑ No
33. Did the facility fail to conduct an annual sludge survey? ❑ Yes ❑ No
34. Did the facility fail to calibrate waste application equipment? ❑ Yes ❑ No
35. Does record keeping for NPDES required forms need improvement? If yes, check the appropriate box below. ❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ Stocking Form ❑ Crop Yield Form ❑ Rainfall ❑ Inspection After V Rain
❑ 120 Minute Inspections ❑ Annual Certification Form
113 No violations or deficiencies were noted during this visit You will receive no further correspondence about this visit
a3 l.Ual
3 to -'4 �1
Fret r pis �a-+-r^ ; elbls rece�p ✓ed t4A- aoo
4m ke *Id -al ,,) n&A-)P/al, p
r»irsm2

Technical Assistance Site Visit
Natural Resources Conservation Service I
Soil and Water Conservation District
Other...
Facility Number 99 - Date: 9/7/04 Time: 11:00 Time On Farm: F__90__j WSRO
Farm Name Miller Brothers Farm
County Yadkin Phone: �4—
Mailing Address 1205 US Highway 21 Hamptonville NC 27020
Onsite
Representative Chris 8,-Shanon Cass Integrator
Type Of Visit Purpose Of Visit
Compliance Inspection (pilot only)
Technical Assistance
Confirmation for Removal
M.
❑ Operating below threshold
❑ Swine ❑ Poultry ® Cattle ❑ Horse
Design Current
Capacitv Population
❑ Wean to Feeder
❑ Feeder to Finish
❑ Farrow to Wean
❑ Farrow to Feeder
❑ Farrow to Finish
❑ Gilts
❑ Boars
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 Population
❑ Layer
❑ Non -Layer
® Dairy
❑ Non -Dairy
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 Population
❑ Layer
❑ Non -Layer
® Dairy
❑ Non -Dairy
® Dairy
❑ Non -Dairy
asp
765
❑ 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.)?
❑ yes ® no
❑ yes ® no
[]yes ® no
4. Is there evidence of nitrogen over application, hydraulic overloading or excessive ponding ❑ yes ® no
requiring DWQ notification?
5. Is there evidence of improper dead animal disposal that poses a threat to the environment ❑ yes ® no
and/or public health?
6. Is the waste level within the structural freeboard elevation range for any waste structure? ❑ yes ® no
Structure? Structure 2 Structure 3 Structure 4 Structure 5
Identifier Upper WSP Lower WSP
Level (Inches) 41 37
CROP TYPES lCom, Silage ismall grain silage
SPRAYFIELD
SOIL TYPES
7. What type of technical assistance does the onsite representative feel is needed? (list in comment section)
03/10/03

Facility Number 99 - 5 Date:
9!7/04
PARAMETER
Q 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)
❑
El
❑ 13.
Waste structure needs maintenance
❑
❑
29. Missing Components (list in comments)
❑ 14.
Over application >= 10% & 10 lbs.
®
El❑
15.
Over application < 10% or < 10 lbs.
30. 2H.0200 re -certification
[116.
Hydraulic overloading
31. Five & Thirty day Plans of Action (PoA)
❑
❑
32. Irrigation record keeping assistance
❑
❑
❑ 17. Deficient irrigation records
❑ 18.
Late/missing waste analysis
33. Organize/computerization of records
❑
❑
❑ 19.
Late/missing lagoon level records
34. Sludge Evaluation
❑
❑
❑ 20. Late/missing soils analysis
❑ 21.
Crop needs improvement
35. Sludge or Closure Plan
❑
❑
❑ 22.
Crop inconsistent with waste plan
36. Sludge removal/closure procedures
❑
❑
37. Waste.Structure Evaluation
❑
❑
❑ 23. Irrigation maintenance deficiency
❑ 24.
Deficient sprayfield conditions
38. Structure Needs Improvement
❑
❑
39. Operation & Maintenance Improvements
❑
❑
40. Marker check/calibration
❑
❑
Reaulatory Referrals
41. Site evaluation
❑
❑
❑ Referred to DWQ Date:
42. Irrigation Calibration
❑
❑
❑ Referred to NCDA Date:
El Other...
43. Irrigation system design installation
El
❑
Date:
44. Secure irrigation information (maps, etc.)
❑
❑
LIST IMPROVEMENTS
45.Operating improvements (pull signs, etc.)
❑
❑
MADE BY OPERATION
46. Wettable Acre Determination
❑
❑
1
47. Evaluate WAD certification/rechecks
❑
❑
48. Crop evaluationlrecommendations
❑
❑
Z.
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 99 - 0 Date: 9n/04
COMMENTS:
Waste Analysis: 5-19-04 SSD 8.4 Ibs.N/ton B, 11.4 S.I.
4-8-04 LSD (WSP1) 1.6 Ibs.N/1000 gals. B, LSD (wsp2) 3.2 Ibs.N/1000 gals. B
# 25, 30 Mr. Cass is raising heifers instead of milk cows and therefore the waste plan and certification
ill need to be done to match the operation.
Mr. Cass has application records, waste samples, soil samples and freeboard records.
There needs to be a third party agreement with the waste applicator. (Mr. Cass does not own any slurry
application equipment.)
# 50. Mr. Cass would like assistance with runoff controls to divert freshwater away from the waste
storage ponds.
TECHNICAL SPECIALIST lRocky Durham
SIGNATURE
Date Entered: 9/10/04
Entered By: lRocky Durham
03/10/03

�sion of Water Quality
sion of Soil and Water Conservation •
] 0 Other Agency
(Type of Visit O Compliance Inspection O Operation Review O Lagoon Evaluation I
Reason for Visit 0• Routine O Complaint O Follow up O Emergency Notification O Other ❑ Denied Access
Facility Number 99 5 Date of Visit: 03/10/2003 Time: 1000
10 Not Operational 0 Below Threshold
0 Permitted 0 Certified 0 Conditionally Certified 0 Registered Date Last Operated or Above Threshold: 0.11..Z9IN9..3..
Farm Name:]Y.LiIAeG.B.t:O.thexS..Farim................................................................................ County: Yattlsi0............................................... WISRO........
Owner Name: L.)(!'..& USter....................... Miller............................................................ Phone No: (3b1.4(8. 41.7�. L eslef.33fi..46$ 2b.63...........
Mailing Address: 1209.U.S..F.fighwa3:11......................................................................... liamplutylk.AC .............................................. 2.792.9 ..............
FacilityContact: Lcsler.MJiller.................................................. Title:................................................................ Phone No:...................................................
Onsite Representative: Ja.¢.ki&.HullogS............................................................................ Integrator:......................................................................................
Certified Operator:1.arlu...................................... Z?imQrA ............................................ Operator Certification Number:..........................................
Location of Farm: _
ake Hwy. 21 South off of Hwy. 421. The farm will be on the right approx. one mile before the Iredell Co. line. Farm
ddress is: 1209 Hwy 21 South, Hamptonville, NC 27020
❑ Swine ❑ Poultry N Cattle ❑ Horse Latitude 36 • 03 04 Longitude E SO • 45 08
Design Current
Swine Capacity 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
Discharges & Stream Impacts
Design Current Design Current
Poultry Capacity Population Cattle Ca aci Population
❑ Layer ® Dairy 350 0
❑ Non -Layer ❑Non -Dairy
❑ Other
Total Design Capacity 350
Total SSLW - 490,000
Subsurface Drains Present
No Liquid Waste Managen
Spray Field Area
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 ® 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? N Spillway ❑ Yes N No
Structure 1 Structure 2 Structure 3 Structure 4 Structure 5 Structure 6
Identifier: ...........Lauver......................Lipper........................................................................................................................................................
Freeboard (inches): 39 30
05103101 W eta Continued

Facility Number: 99-5 • Date of Inspection _ 03/10/2003
5. Are there any immediate threats to the integrity of any of the structures observed? (ie/ tree0vere erosion, ❑ Yes ON . o
seepage, etc.)
6. Are there structures on -site which are not properly addressed and/or managed through a waste management or
closure plan? ❑ Yes M 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 M No
8. Does any part of the waste management system other than waste structures require maintenance/improvement? ❑ Yes M No
9. Do any smctures lack adequate, gauged markers with required maximum and minimum liquid level
elevation markings? ❑ Yes M No
Waste ADDlication
10. Are there any buffers that need maintenance/improvement? ❑ Yes M No
11. Is there evidence of over application? ❑ Excessive Pending ❑ PAN ❑ Hydraulic Overload ❑ Yes M No
12. Crop type Small Grain Overseed Com (Silage & Grain)
13. Do the receiving crops differ with those designated in the Certified Animal Waste Management Plan (CAWMP)? ❑ Yes M No
14. a) Does the facility lack adequate acreage for land application? ❑ Yes M No
b) Does the facility need a wettable acre determination? ❑ Yes M 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 Pen -nit?
(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 noncorhpliance of the Certified AWMP?
❑ Yes M No
XYes ®No
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes M No
❑ Yes M No
❑ Yes M No
❑ Yes M No
No violations or deficiencies were noted during this visit. You will receive no further correspondence about this visit.
Comments (refer to question #): Explain any YES answers and/or any recommendations or any other comments.
Use drawings of facility to better explain situations. (use additional pages as necessary): []-Field, Copy M Final Notes
Lester Miller's address: 1101 US Hwy. 21 Hamptonville, NC 27020
Jackie Billings' address:2383 Mahoganey Rock Rd., Sparta, NC 28675
Waste level in #1 is 23" below the max. liquid mark and 39" below the spillway. Waste level in #2 is 8" below the `lowest" max.
liquid pipe and is 14" below the larger diameter (and more accurate) max. liquid level pipe and 30" below the spillway marker.
16. Only honey wagon onsite is to be picked -up by new owner w/in two weeks (it was sold). Irrigation equipment (pump, pipe, reel) is
on site and is leased from Joe Bullard of Hamptonville. Mr. Bullard plans to take cattle class `B" and become a certified applicator.
17. N/A
Reviewer/Inspector Name Melia Rosebrock
Reviewer/Inspector Signaturet. Date:
05103101 Continued

i
Facili(y Number: 99-5 D IInspection 03/10/2003 •
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
Previous leasee (operator) sold cattle and is no longer milking at this facility. Mr. Billings sent letter to DWQ on 3/10/03 statin€
he was no longer the operator for this farm as of 2/28/03.
Waste was irrigated in Feb. 2003 since honey wagons had been sold 1/29/03. Need to revise WUP if application be irrigation is
continue.
. and 29.-32. Not applicable to this facility at this time.
12/31/02 Waste analysis: #1 = 0.53 lbs. N/1000 gal. and #2 = 0.82 lbs. N/1000 gal.
05103101

Type of Visit dD Compliance Inspection 0 Operation Review 0 Lagoon Evaluation
Reason for Visit �*Outine O Complaint XFollowup O Emergency N�otific�ation�� O Other ❑ Denied Access
FacilityNumber
Date of Visit: �I-_-� Time:
_
10 Not Onerational ItBelow Threshold
O Permitted Certified D Conditionallv Certified E3 Registered Date Last Operated or Above Threshold:
Farm Name: County: LI -
Owner Name: L F ' `�L � 611l' 1QX Z
If01 V W y �' I I Phone No: e
Mailing Address: 1 ?,0' q1 UJ bhah wa,t.t �- � 1-i1L.:Ldl My; i le i ivy— o2 %I / l v� -_
Facility Contact: L� 5 f �C r I• L I I—LpQ.� Title:
OnsiteRepresentative: .�QCK-le fll��lf'14S
Phone No:
Integrator: -
Certified Operator: Operator Certification Number:
Location of Farm:
47I Norit, .6v Hwy ZI Son rl�h i Z
5 ;zl 'tl
ElSwine ❑ Poultry] Cattle ❑ Horse Latitude ®•' Longitude ®••
Farrow to
:. �. ;notatng rands tsoad (raps" I G Ij - ..:�.dU No Liquid Waste Management System �
-------------
Dischames & Stream Impacts
1. Is any discharge observed from any part of the operation? ❑ Yes 4No
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) El Yes ❑ No
2. Is there evidence of past discharge from any pan of the operation? ❑ Yes KNo
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 IgNo
Structured ' ` cture Structure 3 Structure 4 Structure 5 Structure 6
Identifier: Xt) 0
Freeboard (inches):
05103101 I
Continued
fd3

• •
Facility Number: — Date of Inspection j 0
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
XNo
(If any of questions 4-6 was answered yes, and the situation poses an
immediate public health or environmental threat, notify DWQ)
7.
Do any of the structures need maintenance/improvement?
❑ Yes
No
8.
Does any pan of the waste management system other than waste structures require maintenance/improvement?
❑Yes
o
9.
Do any smctures lack adequate, gauged markers with required maximum and minimum liquid level
elevation markings?
El yes
''
l�vo
Waste Application
10.
Are there any buffers that need maintenance/improvement?
ElYes11.
Is there evidence of over app ication? ❑ Excessive Ponding ❑PAN ❑ Hydraulic Overload
ElYes
tNo
12-
Crop type 1 ..� Ou _d 2
13.
Do the receiving crops differ with those designatedOm 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?
18.
Does the facility fail to have all components of the Certified Animal Waste,Management Plan readily available?
(ie/ WUP, checklists, design, maps, etc.)
El Yes
o
19-
�// �//
Does record keeping need improvement? (ie/ inigation,'ItmCbomd, was4e 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?
T
(ie/ discharge, freeboard problems, over application)
❑ Yes
A, No
23.
Did Reviewer inspector fail to discuss review/inspection with on -site representative?
❑ Yes
XNo
24.
Does facility require a follow-up visit by same agency?
❑ Yes
ANo
25.
Were any additional problems noted which cause noncompliance of the Certified AWMP?
N Yes
❑ No
113 No violations or deficiencies were noted during this visit. You will receive no further correspondence about this visit.
- ... _ _.. ,-
'Comments'{refer foquestion #)::Explain any'_'YES answers and/orany,reco`mmeudations or any, ercomments.
-
use drawings of facility to better. explain situations. (use addtnonilr,pages as necessary) - - -`- -
OSCS i
_ .. _.., Feld Copv ❑ Final Notes
a i A6
Gbt
#4 o)d�
c4- t�/WdVIO _4bx� tt a 0(? gj j
3/I%3 ,
Reviewer/Inspector Name � .. ,
- -- ,. - - -.-;--
Reviewer/Inspector Signature:
Date:
05103101 0Continued

Facility, Number: — .$ to of Inspection I .5/�0� •
Odor Issues
26. Does the discharge pipe from the confinement building to the storage pond or lagoon fail to discharge at/or below es o
liquid level of lagoon or storage pond with no agitation? .
27. Are there anv dead animals not disposed of properly within 24 hours? ❑ Yes (�j,�[�! No
28. Is there anv 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? -dn
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.) eo--
31. Do the animals feed storage bins fail to have appropriate cover? v
32. Do the flush tanks lack a submerged fill pipe or a permanent/temporary cover? n *es PPie
o
5. r ' 'h Februa.r acxt3 5lnce o
Additional Comments.and/or Dings: - -" '- - r :.
-3�. — N%.ajark
��. N/h
�'
U/l O Q
v'�(
✓ � -430//i .
Wa a ` ca 8 �,tepet., . tOA4 4--
'tt��
1 losP o• s3 I f -4 z A:;Af /IOCQA 7
05103101 ' lb .
MnrieA

Facility Number 99 5 Date of Visit: 11/l5/2002 1 Time: 1000
O Not Operational O Below Threshold
0 Permitted M Certified 0 Conditionally Certified 0 Registered Date Last Operated or Above Threshold:
Farm Name: M11lec.B.tOthcr5.FArm............................................................................... County: YadMa .............................................. !' .SRQ........
Owner Name: L.F..&.I..G........................... Mau Phone No: 03.61.4.68=4172 .......................................................
Mailing Address: 1209.[J.S..lilgltway..ZI......................................................................... HatA PIQ11yllLe..JHG............................................... 2.7.02Q..............
Facility Contact: dackkRillittgs............................................... Title:................................................................ Phone No: d3.k 4fi8.2617..GfaC.tlU)........
Onsite Representative: dacklc.DiJU11gS............................................................................ Integrator:......................................................................................
Certified Operator:.laslcite.l? ............................... Ililliutgs............................................. Operator Certification Number: 213.83 .............................
Location of Farm:
Take Hwy. 21 South off of Hwy. 421. The farm will be on the right approx. one mile before the Iredell Co. line. Farm
address is: 1209 Hwy 21 South, Hamptonville, NC 27020 W
[]Swine []Poultry M Cattle ❑ Horse Latitude ®• 03, ®" Longitude 80 • 45 08
_ Design'
der renf
_ Desrgn Current Design CutTent
Swme Ca Tacit
ulation
PoultcY Ca aci P.o ulation Cattle Ca aci iro ulation =;
❑ Wean to Feeder
❑ Layer
1
350
437
` ❑ Feeder to Finish
10 Non -Layer
I❑Non-Dairy
f
Tcn
❑ Farrow to Wean
❑ Farrow to Feeder
❑ Other
Total Deslgn Capacity 350
❑Farrow to Finish
❑ Gilts
❑ Boars
-4 Tota1 SSLW` . 490 000
«ak...
�mE4'T"C4NOM.�.''R.t
Number of Isagoopsa:
,� �0 ` ❑Subsurface Drains Present ❑ Lagoon Area ❑ Spray Field Area 'M
Holding Pondsx Solid
Traps, ❑ No Liquid Waste Management System
._0 4w
Dischar2es & Stream Impacts
1. Is any discharge observed from any part of the operation? ❑ Yes 0 No
Discharge originated at: ❑ Lagoon ❑ Spray Field ❑ Other
a. If discharge is observed, was the conveyance man-made? ❑ Yes ❑ No
b. If discharge is observed, did it reach Water of the State? (If yes, notify DWQ) ❑ Yes ❑ No
c. If discharge is observed, what is the estimated Flow in gal/min?
d. Does discharge bypass a lagoon system? (If yes, notify DWQ) ❑ Yes ❑ No
2. Is there evidence of past discharge from any part of the operation? ❑ Yes ® No
3. Were there any adverse impacts or potential adverse impacts to the Waters of the State other than from a discharge? ❑ Yes ® No
Waste Collection & Treatment
4. Is storage capacity (freeboard plus storm storage) less than adequate? ® Spillway ❑ Yes ® No
Structure I Structure 2 Structure 3 Structure 4 Structure 5 Structure 6
Identifier:...........Upper........... ........... Lawe>........................................................................................................................................................
Freeboard (inches): 16 27
05103101 Continued

Facility Number: 99-5 1 • Date of Inspection 11/25/2002
5. Are there any immediate threats to the integrity of any of the structures observed? (ie/ tree0vere erosion,
seepage, etc.)
6. Are there structures on -site which are not properly addressed and/or managed through a waste management or
closure plan?
(If any of questions 4-6 was answered yes, and the situation poses an
immediate public health or environmental threat, notify DWQ)
7. Do any of the structures need maintenance/improvement?
8. Does any part of the waste management system other than waste structures require maintenance/improvement?
9. Do any stuctures lack adequate, gauged markers with required maximum and minimum liquid level
elevation markings?
Waste ADDlicatinn
`
❑ Yes
® No
❑ Yes
® No
❑ Yes
® No
❑ Yes
® No
❑ Yes
® No
10. Are there any buffers that need maintenance/improvement? ❑ Yes ® No
11. Is there evidence of over application? ❑ Excessive Ponding ❑ 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
Q No violations or deficiencies were noted during this visit You will receive no further correspondence about this visit.
Comments refer to question #): •xplain any YFS answers and/or any recommendations or any older comments
Use swings of acility to better explain situations. use additional pages as nec 14 ❑ Field Copy ®Final Notes
. When 1 arrived at the facility the waste in the upper waste storage structure was one inch above the maximum level mark and the
waste was being pumped out and spread using a honey wagon. During the course of the inspection, the farm's staff continued to pump
he waste from the structure so that by the time the inspection was completed the waste was one inch below the maximum liquid mark
19. Operator has recorded Fall 2002 animal waste application data on SLUR -I forms. He plans to obtain waste sample and will complete
SLUR -II forms after the waste analysis results have been received. Check next visit.
5. Facility has CAWMP for 450 cattle. Database still lists only 350.
Reviewer/Inspector Name Melissa Rosebrock
Reviewer/InspectorSignature: Date: s ��
05103101 Continued

Facility'NuDOI Inspection IU25/2002 •
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
(_' " ho t!omments an .o-r7 rawtugs:
05103101
05103101

lOA
Type of Visit lQ Compliance Inspection 0 Operation Review 0 Lagoon Evaluation
Reason for Visit % Routine 0 Complaint 0 Follow up 0 Emergency Notification 0 Other
Facility Number Date of Visit:
0 Permitted xCertified 0 Conditionally Certified 0 Registered
Farm Name: m i l le.Ir $ ms • Fa rM
Owner Name: i.F d-- 1-6 M a IP.Y'
Mailing Address:
Facility Contact:
Q
Title:
V
Onsite Representative: t - 1 -BIG
Illz
o
Certified Operator: J CLC'L (e 1
Location of Farm:
❑ Denied Access
Date Last Operated or A mv�Threshold:
Counh•: V�/�
Phone No:
Q�/_n
Phone No:33� v o"'^6I -7
Integrator: FwV,L,�
^
Operator Certification Number: 5 33'3
►gym /s or) rl fft-T',
[]Swine ❑ Poultry 1x Cattle ❑Horse Latitude Longitude ®' ®• ®�
`Design =Current -
Feeder to
Discharges & Stream Impacts
1. Is any discharge observed from any pan 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? IYI Spillway
Structure
LL Structure 2 , . ,eSltucmre 3 7� Structure 4 Structure s
Identifier: "f`-- �^ (^�Q`l.V �•�J
Freeboard (inches): _ IS _
❑ Yes �No
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes
❑ No
❑ Yes
❑ Yes
,>No
$QNo
❑ Yes
XNo
Structure 6
05103101 - Continued
1

Facility Number: — • Date of Inspection dl /// J /QcFC.•
5. Are there any immediate threats to the integrity of any of the structures observed? (ie/rved trees, severe erosion,
seepage. etc.)
6. Are there structures on -site which are not properly addressed and/or managed through a waste management or
closure plan?
(If any of questions 4-6 was answered yes, and the situation poses an
immediate public health or environmental threat, notify DWQ)
7. Do any of the structures need maintenance/improvement?
8. Does any part of the waste management system other than waste structures require maintenance/improvement?
9. Do any 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?
Pending ❑ PAN ❑ Hydraulic Overload
❑ Yes I�i[/No
El Yes TTI]O��No
❑ Yes No
ElYes 0
No
❑ Yes /�_ pj'No
❑ Yes (XI No
❑ Yes ,71[Y/� No
13. Do the receiving crops differ with tObse designated in the Certified Animal Waste Management Plan (CAWMP)? ❑ YeslNo
No
14. a) Does the facility lack adequate acreage for land application? El YesNo
b) Does the facility need a wettable acre determination? El YesNo
c) This facility is pended for a wettable acre determination? ❑ YesNo
15. Does the receiving crop need improvement? ❑ Yes
16. Is there a lack of adequate waste application equipment? ❑ Yes NfNo
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.) / /
❑ Yes19.
Does record keeping need improvement? (ie/ irrigation,-freebettit wasteanalysis &soil sadfple reports)
❑ Yes k.0.
20. Is facility not in compliance with any applicable setback criteria in effect at the time of design?
❑ YesNo
21. Did the facility fail to have a actively certified operator in charge?
❑ Yes
22. Fail to notify regional DWQ of emergency situations as by General Permit?
(ie/ discharge, freeboard problems, over application)
❑ Yes
23. Did Reviewer/Inspector fail to discuss review/inspection with on -site representative?
Elo
fNoo
24. Does facility require a follow-up visit by same agency?
El Yes
25. Were any additional problems noted which cause noncompliance of the Certified AWMP?
❑ Yes �No
10 No violations or deficiencies were noted during this visit. You will receive no further correspondence about this visit.
:Comments{refer to question #): E:plain any'.YES attsweis and/dr'.any recommen_datious oiisny ther comments _
-Use drawings of facility -to better_explain situations. (use addttianal page as necessary) Field Copv
❑ Final Notes
ReviewerQnspector Name - -.. or -Ay,
Signatur(Ejda, Date:
11101t7p1—�
0510310I
Continued

Facility number: — to of inspection I / / /�S 19— •
Odor Issues
26. Does the discharge pipe from the confinement building to the storage pond or lagoon fail to discharge at/or below
liquid level of lagoon or storage pond with no agitation?
27. Are there any dead animals not disposed of properly within 24 hours?
28. Is there any evidence of wind drift during land application? (i.e. residue on neighboring vegetation, asphalt,
roads, building structure, and/or public property)
29. Is the land application spray system intake not located near the liquid surface of the lagoon?
30. Were any major maintenance problems with the ventilation fan(s) noted? (i.e. broken fan belts, missing or
or broken fan blade(s), inoperable shutters, etc.)
31. Do the animals feed storage bins fail to have appropriate cover?
32. Do the flush tanks lack a submerged fill pipe or a permanent/temporary cover?
❑ Yes "No
El Yes �o
Additional Comments:and/orDrawings:` - - - --- - - _
uA
/�JF� Ob
11 UV -/
O5103101

0
Facility Number 99 5 Date of Visit: 6/6l2002 Time: 10:20
Not Operational O Below Threshold
E3 Permitted ■ Certified [3 Conditionally Certified 13 Registered Date Last Operated or Above Threshold: ....... .................
Farm Name: Miller.Brothers..I,', rin...................... :........................................................ County: YA.kA0............................................... H',SRQ........
Owner Name: L.E.&.LG........................... J.!'lillcr......... :................................................ Phone No:(3Jb1.4($r41.7.2........................................................
Mailing Address: 12Q2.U,,S.Rjgb. ssX.A1......................................................................... HamplAutxllle..1!IG............................................... 2.7.020 .............
FacilityContact...............................................................................Title:................................................................ Phone No:...................................................
Onsite Representative: da..dde.Bllli= ............................................................................ Integrator:......................................................................................
Certified Operator:daukie.D................................ Ilffli gs............................................. Operator Certification Number: 213.833.............................
Location of Farm:
Poke Hwy. 21 South off of Hwy. 421. The farm will be on the right approx. one mile before the Iredell Co. line. Farm
tddress is: 1209 Hwy 21 South, Hamptonville, NC 27020
[]Swine []Poultry H Cattle []Horse Latitude ®• 03 , ® Longitude 80 • 45 08
r
.. r 't ' ' Des g7n
tgnr.
��� t ry- r
-`�tgn ' ,.`` iDesign Current
Svrne Ca act .`
P,o ulatiotn
Poult . Cattle Ca 8cit rP,o Mahon '.
rY Ca acit , , P,o uladon
❑ Wean to Feeder
❑Layer
N Dairy
350
440
'`_
❑ Feeder to Finish
❑Non -Layer
❑Non -Dairy
❑ Farrow to Wean
❑ Farrow to Feeder
❑Other <'
a
❑❑ Ga to FinishT�Dtal
Design Capacity 350
3F
�ow
°' , � �' �"� }Total SS)�W 490,000
i'
❑Boars
*, ` � „
it
AreaIlls
❑ Drains �Pr�nt pray Field Area
t -. Ho1dN�Ponds hd T�
ps
g - Y
2 No Lit uid Waste Mane emen❑t S stem
❑ q — — Management
Discha=.& 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? N Spillway ❑ Yes N No
Structure I Structure 2 Structure 3 Structure 4 Structure 5 Structure b.
Identifier: ..... Uppec....SP...........Lnatcr. W.SP...................................................................................................................................................
Freeboard (inches): 85 30
05103101 Continued

Facility Number: 99-5 1 Date of Inspection 6/6/2002 i y
5. Are there any immediate threats to the integrity of any of the structures observed? (ie/ treZSsevere 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 Auulication
10. Are there any buffers that need maintenance/improvement? ❑ Yes N No
11. Is there evidence of over application? ❑ Excessive Ponding ❑ PAN ❑ Hydraulic Overload ❑ Yes N No
12. Crop type Corn (Silage & Grain) Cool season grasses(Hay) Fescue (Graze)
13. Do the receiving crops differ with those designated in the Certified Animal Waste Management Plan (CAWMP)? ❑ Yes N No
14. a) Does the facility lack adequate acreage for land application? ❑ Yes N No
b) Does.the facility need a wettable acre determination? ❑ Yes ❑ No
c) This facility is pended for a wettable acre determination?
❑ Yes
❑ No
15.
Does the receiving crop need improvement?
❑ Yes
N No
16._
Is there a lack of adequate waste application equipment?
❑ Yes
NNo
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
N No
19.
Does record keeping need improvement? (ie/ irrigation, freeboard, waste analysis & soil sample reports)
❑ Yes
N No
20.
Is facility not in compliance with any applicable setback criteria in effect at the time of design?
❑ Yes
N No
21.
Did the facility fail to have a actively certified operator in charge?
❑ Yes
N No
22.
Fail to notify regional DWQ of emergency situations as required by General Permit?
(ie/ discharge, freeboard problems, over application)
❑ Yes
N No
23.
Did Reviewer/Inspector fail to discuss review/inspection with on -site representative?
❑ Yes
N No
24. Does facility require a follow-up visit by same agency? ❑ Yes N No
25. Were any additional problems noted which cause noncompliance of the Certified AWMP? ❑ 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 # : Explain any YES answers an oulTainvirecOmmendations or any other comments.
Use drawings of facility to better explain situations use additional pages as necessary : ❑ Field Copy N Final Notes
Facility and records are in compliance.
e facility has a certification and WUP for 450 head total.
Records look much better this year, as well as the hay strips.
Reviewer/Inspector Name Rocky Durham
Reviewer/Inspector Signature: Date:
05103101 Continued

Facility Number: "_5 Da f Inspection 6/6/2002
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
analysis: 5-3-02 LSD (la) 0.72 Ibs.N/1000 gals. B, LSD (2b) 4.3 Ibs.N/1000 gals. B
10-23-01 LSD (2) 6.9 Ibs.N/1000 gals..B
05103101

Facility Number 99 5 Dale ur Visit: IUl/2001 Time: 1000 Printedon: 11/l/2001
Q Not Operational Q Below Threshold
0 Permitted ■ Certified E3 Conditionally Certified 13 Registered Date Last Operated or Above Threshold:
Farm Name: Mittel.Brn111ers.Fatatt............................................................................... County: Yadloin.............................................. W
SRO ........
Owner Name: 1..F.A.Lid............................ Miilxs........................................................... Phone No: G?3G1.4h8-417.2.D.aix'3.3.3 4k8 26..1'7-L/ ..
Mailing Address: 12Q9. U.S..Wghri:7Y..21......................................................................... Rampionift.AC .............................................. 27.QZQ .............
Facility Contact: d;ilckie.Rifto............................................... Title: .Iarkie.ullubA.tte.6S7.1.7.95........ Phone No: daekie.1H).3-36. 7..2.478.Ct
Onsite Representative: dacUP,.Bi11iW............................................................................ Integrator:......................................................................................
Certified Operator:.ludde.11 ............................... Djub s............................................. Operator Certification Number:21383.............................
Location of Farm:
Take Hwy. 21 South off of Hwy. 421. The farm will be on the right approx. one mile before the Iredell Co. line. Farm
address is: 1209 Hwy 21 South, Hamptonville, NC 27020
❑ Swine ❑ Poultry ® Cattle ❑ Horse Latitude ®• 03 ' ®" Longitude 80 • 45 O8 •'
Design
Swine Ca acit
Current
P,o ulation
Design Current Design Current
Poultry Ca acit P,o Wation Cattle Ca acit P,o Wation
❑ Wean to Feeder
❑ Layer
®Dairy 350
440
❑ Feeder to Finish
❑ Non -Layer
❑Non -Dairy
❑ Farrow to Wean
❑ Farrow to Feeder
❑ Farrow to Finish
❑ Gilts
❑ Other
Total Design Capacity 350
Total SSLW 490,000
❑ Boars
�
0
❑ Subsurface Drains Present ❑ Lagoon Area ❑ Spray Field Area
❑ No Liquid Waste Management System
Number of Lagoons
Holding Ponds / Solid Traps
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 stone storage) less than adequate? ® Spillway ❑ Yes ® No
Structure 1 Structure 2 Structure 3 Structure 4 Structure 5 Structure 6
Identifier: ..... Lawcr.W.SP...... .... UPRer .larger........................................................................... ......................................................................
Freeboard (inches): 48 102
05103101 Continued

Facilit Number: 99-5 Date of Ins ection 11/1/2001 y � P 0 Printed mr
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 of
closure plan?
(If any of questions 4-6 was answered yes, and the situation poses an
immediate public health or environmental threat, notify DWQ)
7. Do any of the structures need maintenance/improvement?
11/1/2001
❑ Yes ® No
8. Does any part of the waste management system other than waste structures require maintenance/improvement?
9. Do any stuctures lack adequate, gauged markers with required maximum and minimum liquid level
elevation markings?
Waste Application
10. Are there any buffers that need maintenance/improvement?
11. Is there evidence of over application? ❑ Excessive Ponding ❑ PAN ❑ Hydraulic Overload
12. Crop type Corn (Silage & Grain) Small Grain (Wheat, Barley,
13. Do the receiving crops differ with those designated in the Certified Animal Waste Management Plan (CAWMP)?
14. a) Does the facility lack adequate acreage for land application?
b) Does the facility need a wettable acre determination?
c) This facility is pended for a wettable acre determination?
15. Does the receiving crop need improvement?
16. Is there a lack of adequate waste application equipment'?
Required Records & Documents
17. Fail to have Certificate of Coverage & General Permit or other Permit readily available?
18. Does the facility fail to have all components of the Certified Animal Waste Management Plan readily available?
(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 M No
❑ Yes N No
❑ Yes M No
❑ Yes N No
❑ Yes M No
❑ Yes N No
❑ Yes N No
❑ Yes M No
❑ Yes M No
❑ Yes N No
❑ Yes M No
❑ Yes N No
[]Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes N No
M Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes N No
❑ Yes N No
M Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes M No
❑ Yes N No
N Yes ❑ No
10 No violations or deficiencies were noted during this visit. You will receive no further correspondence about this visit.
Comments refer to question # : Explain any YES answers and/or any recommendations or any other comments.
necessary ❑ Field Copy N Final Notes
Use drawings of facility to better explain situations. ase additional No"
9. Markers are not in securely on upper, larger WSP. Need to move them to another location or set them more permanently.
_
15. There is hay, again, that has been mowed but needs to be baled and removed from field.
19. 2001 soil test results performed by Southern States were not identified so that fields could be compared to the WUP. Acreages nor
field IDs from soil tests matched the WUP. Could not confirm that soil test analyses had been performed for fields receiving animal
waste. In addition, the soil tests did not analyze for copper and zinc. These analyses need to be performed as well. Operator had not
recorded commercial fertilizer nitrogen since he said that this data was not given to him by owner or leasee of the land onto which he
applies waste.
221ooked as if waste level had been up to maximum level mark at some point. No evidence of discharge or overflow.
Reviewer/Inspector Name Methisp Rosebrock
Reviewer/Inspector Signatur Date: Q
05103101 1 1 Continued

Facility Number: 99-5 D: f Inspection 11/1/2001 • Printed on; 11/1/2001
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 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?
32. Do the flush tanks lack a submerged fill pipe or a permanent/temporary cover?
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes ❑ No
MOMonalaammenfsTart oj awrngs:
27. One dead cow noted that is to be picked up today.
Operator requested form to change name of facility to Billings Dairy.
05103101

II/1 )0) - Ilq
Type of Visit l7{ 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 Dale of Visit
:0 b Time: O o0
0 Permitted 0 Certified 0 Conditionally Certified 0 Registered
Farm Name:...:.F_°k..L.:
Owner Name}! ......... 7°T!1,!(....... 7....�...............
` k 1...L2.1.J14
Facility Contact: Zi?C& ....................... Title:
Mailing Address: .i.a A1. .... ?S...�.I.l. .h. ..._�.1.....}...
.
Onsite Representative:
Certified Operator: ....... aaek�;e� ..
i r.•ntinn of Fnrm•
Date Last Operated or Above Threshold:
County:.........N.. .................... ......
y6 6 ill 7-....
!1 . Phone No: ...... _............_........�
r 336•'l/oS �i,/���
.............................................. one No: .I ..... ._
IjAA P+0P 11i 1)10 ,NC, D -76J(O
Integrator: ................�........................._.............__._._........--
Operator Certification Number:,...... 3 .........
r • I •mil' { t i
C
❑ Swine ❑ Poultry
Swtae.:;
❑ Wean to Feeder
❑ Feeder to Finish
❑ Farrow to Wean
❑ Farrow to Feede
❑ Farrow to Finisl
Cattle ❑ Horse Latitude ®• ®` Longitude [=• E�` ®"
Design Current < Design Current Destgn , . Cuirrenf .'
Cattle Capacityelation:'
a aci PoPqo
Dairy
❑ Non -Dairy
I
I-
❑ Other
Total Design Capacity
Total SSLW
:Number of Lagoons _ 10 Subsurface Drains Present 110 Lagoon Area 1❑ Spray Field Area 1
Holding Ponds / Solid Trapgr.® ❑ No Liquid Waste Management System
Discharges & Stream Impacts
1. Is any discharge observed from any part of the operation?
Discharge originated at: ❑ Lagoon ❑ Spray Field ❑ Other
a. If discharge is observed, was the conveyance man-made? .
b. If discharge is observed, did it reach Water of the State? (If yes, notify DWQ)
c. If discharge is observed. what is the estimated flow in gal/min?
d. Does discharge bypass a lagoon system? (If yes, notify DWQ)
2. Is there evidence of past discharge from any part of the operation?
3. Were there any adverse impacts or potential adverse impacts to the Waters of the State other than from a discharge?
Waste Collection & Treatment
4. Is storage capacity (freeboard plus storm storage) less than adequate? ICI Spillway
Structure I (1 Structure 2 Structure 3/ Structure 4 Structure 5
Identifier: lo{ Px,_ P .,..,L„
........ ...................................................................
Freeboard(inches): I bZ ptte.
5/00 1
❑ Yes No
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes $ No
❑ Yes *90
[]Yes )(No
Structure 6
Continued on back

acility Number: — d • Date of Inspection 0 D •
5. Are there any immediate threats to the integrity of any of the structures observed? fie/ trees, severe erosion, []Yes KNo
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 maimenance/improvement? ❑ Yes No
8. Does any part of the waste management system other than waste structures require maintenancelimprovement? ❑Yes No
9. Do any stuctures lack adequate, gauged markers with required maximum and minimum liquid level
elevation markings? []Yes KNo
Waste Application
10. Are there any buffers that need maintenance/improvement? ❑ Yes A No
11. Is there evidence of over applicajon? ❑ Excessive-Ponding PAN []Hydraulic Overload ❑ Yes l]d No
12. Crop type °V.t!(luf. _its 7`
13. Do the receiving crops differ with tho designated in the Certified Animal Waste Management Plan (CAWMP)? ❑ Yes o
14. a) Does the facility lack adequate acreage for land application? ❑ Yes�No
b) Does the facility need a wettable acre determination? ❑ Yes I'" No
c) This facility is pended for a wettable acre determination? ❑ Yes VNo
15. Does the receiving crop need improvement? ❑ Yes )KNo
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?
18. Does the facility fail to have all components of the Certified Animal W to Management Plan readily available?
(ie/ WUP, checklists, design, maps, etc.) tilt ❑ Yes ((No
19. Does record keeping need improvement? fie/ irrigation, freeboard, waste analysis 86lsrnple reports) XYes ❑ No
20. Is facility not in compliance with any applicable setback criteria in effect at the time of design? ❑ Yes tx]No
21. Did the facility fail to have a actively certified operator in charge? �� % ❑ Yes ANo
22. Fail to notify regional DWQ of emergency situations as required by General Permit? 1
(ie/ discharge, freeboard problems, over application) Y I 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 X No
Q Yl9lA4lOtjs;oF ilgticpepcie •ire A4.r.t�is:vlslt� Yop will S GIYe �!Q fu1 th$r : .
':-cotzesporidence:abouEthisvisit:':':-:':':':':'.
:•:':':':•:':':•:':':•:•:-:•:•:-:':•:•:':•:•:•:•:•:•:•:•:
Comment_s;.(reer o: gpes6on #): Explatan_ wesnd/ryre_o_- ny. asoamendatio-re- -
or any other eommenfa T � P
Use'drawipgs of facilitydto better explain situations. (use additioniilpages as teeessary) _'. _ 4
76
I,
Reviewer/Inspector Name
Reviewer/Inspector Signature.-� / / A / Ir A -
Date:
5100

° Facility Number: — Iof Inspection D o •
Odor Issues
26.
Does the discharge pipe from the confinement building to the storage pond or lagoon fail to discharge at/or below
-nE] Yes 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 KNo
28.
Is there any evidence of wind drift during land application? (i.e. residue on neighboring vegetation, asphalt,
❑ Yes XNo
roads, building structure, and/or public property)
29.
Is the land application spray system intake not located near the liquid surface of the lagoon?
30.
Were any major maintenance problems with the ventilation fan(s) noted? (i.e. broken fan belts, missing or
or broken fan blade(s), inoperable
❑ Yes 11ko
shutters, etc.)
31.
Do the animals feed storage bins fail to have appropriate cover?
��s—n9 No
32.
Do the flush tanks lack a submerged fill pipe or a permanent/temporary cover?
B$-No
aonm Lomments anaor,uravnngs:; `-
i/ r�
/ /! l'l %I /D l W/ ►i
i�.WHO
/ s, C oil

Facility Number 99 5 Date of Visit: 6/19/2001 Time: 9:40 Printed on: 10/25/2001
0 Not Operational Q Below Threshold
0 Permitted E Certified 0 Conditionally Certified 0 Registered Date Last Operated or Above Threshold: .........................
Farm Name: 1/alIA1rC. A:0t1Ak1CS..F,alnut............................................................................... County: YRltlaiAtl............................................... W.SRQ........
OwnerName. L E..&.I. G........................... Mimelr.......................................................... Phone No: 03.61.4.68 41.72........................................................
Mailing Address: 1209...$..Uiglt»:ay..21......................................................................... RamplRuARe..1!IG............................................... 2.7.020 .............
FacilityContact: .............................................................................. Title:................................................................ Phone No:...................................................
OnsiteRepresentative: dadde.011111W........................................................................... Integrator.......................................................................................
Certified Operator: Jackie ..................................... amilmo ............................................. Operator Certification Number: 213.83..............................
Location of Fart:
Take Hwy. 21 South off of Hwy. 421. The farm will be on the right approx. one mile before the Iredell Co. line. Farm
address is: 1209 Hwy 21 South, Hamptonville, NC 27020
❑ Swine ❑ Poultry ® Cattle ❑ Horse Latitude ®• 03 ' ®" Longitude F80 • 45 08
Discharges & Stream Impacts
L Is any discharge observed from any part of the operation?
Discharge originated at: ❑ Lagoon ❑ Spray Field ❑ Other
a. If discharge is observed, was the conveyance man-made?
b. If discharge is observed, did it reach Water of the State? (If yes, notify DWQ)
c. If discharge is observed, what is the estimated flow in gal/min?
d. Does discharge bypass a lagoon system? (If yes, notify DWQ)
2. Is there evidence of past discharge from any part of the operation?
3. Were there any adverse impacts or potential adverse impacts to the Waters of the State other than from a discharge?
Waste Collection & Treatment
4. Is storage capacity (freeboard plus storm storage) less than adequate? ® Spillway
Structure I Structure 2 Structure 3 Structure 4 Structure 5
Identifier: ..... Lower.W.SP...... .Upper(bW. W SP...................................................................................................................
Freeboard (inches): 65 65
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes
❑ No
❑ Yes
® No
❑ Yes
® No
❑ Yes
® No
Structure 6
05103101 Continued

Facility Number: 99-5 Date of Inspection 6/19/2001 Printed on: 10/25/2001
5. Are there an immediate threats to the integrity of an of the structures observed? ie/ treosevere erosion
Y g Y Y (
❑Yes
®No
seepage, etc.)
6.
Are there structures on -site which are not properly addressed and/or managed through a waste management or
closure plan? -
❑ Yes
® No
(If any of questions 4-6 was answered yes, and the situation poses an
immediate public health or environmental threat, notify DWQ)
7.
Do any of the structures need maintenance/improvement?
❑ Yes
® No
8.
Does any part of the waste management system other than waste structures require maintenance/improvement?
❑ Yes
® No
9.
Do any stuctures lack adequate, gauged markers with required maximum and minimum liquid level
elevation markings?
❑ Yes
® No
Waste Application
10.
Are there any buffers that need maintenance/improvement?
❑ Yes
® No
11.
Is there evidence of over application? ❑ Excessive Ponding ❑ PAN ❑ Hydraulic Overload
❑ Yes
® No
12.
Crop type Small Grain (Wheat, Barley, Com (Silage & Grain) 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
IN No
b) Does the facility need a wettable acre determination?
❑ Yes
IN No
c) This facility is pended for a wettable acre determination?
❑ Yes
IN No
15.
Does the receiving crop need improvement?
® Yes
❑ No
16.
Istherea 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
Q No violations or deficiencies were noted during this visit. You will receive no further correspondence about this visit.
Comments refer to question ENExplain an E answers and/or any ommendations or an other comments.
se dra gs of facilit o tte explain situa 'o a additional es as necessary ❑ Field Copy ®Final Notes
Will need to get a copy of the soil analysis for 2001 with other records. Mr. Billings stated that another farmer does the crops and he
had the soil analysis.
15. The grass strips need weed control and mowing. This was mentioned on last years review. Hay needs to be baled and removed.
he waste ponds have been pumped down and vegetation cut around them.
Reviewer/Inspector Name rRocky Durham
Reviewer/Inspector Signature: Date:
05103101 Continued

Facli ty Number: 99-5 D) f Inspection 6/19/2001 • Printed on: 10/25/2001
Odor Issues
26. Does the discharge pipe from the confinement building to the storage pond or lagoon fail to discharge at/or below ❑ 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: 2/14/O1 LSD la. 0.29 Ibs.N/1000 gals. B, Ib. 0.49 Ibs.N/1000 gals. B; 2a 2.1 lbs.N/I000 gals. B, 2b 6.7 Ibs.N
5/16/O1 LSD WSP #1 0.73 lbs.N/1000 gals. B; WSP #2 4.8 Ibs.N/1000 gal. B
05103101

of Visit O• Compliance Inspection O Operation Review O lagoon Evaluation
for Visit O Routine O Complaint O Follow up O Emergency Notification O Other ❑ Denied Access
Facility Number 99 O$ Date of Visit: 10/10/2000 Time: 0955 Printed on: 10/11/2000
0 Not Operational 0 Below Threshold
13Permitted E Certified [3 Conditionally Certified E3Registered Date Last Operated or Above Threshold:
FartName: ............................................................................... County:
W5.110........
Owner Name: G..F..&.LG........................... Miller.......................................................... Phone No:(33.61.14.W.41.72 ............................. s }...•�1b
Facility Contact:.12CWr..Bil1np...............................................Title:................................................................ PhoneJow No: �36,4fr8.2.17p......... IO
ll_
Mailing Address:2hl4.Wallxer. taltclt..linad............................................................ RaMP1QK1xil1e..NC.......................................... ... .... Y
OnsiteRepresentative: .laC.lUle.l{IU.=........................................................................... integrator:......................................................................................
Certified Operator:,laC.kie.Rjllj gS.................... .1?.arl(liza111.0.Ate............................. Operator Certification Number:.2j3.V..d0.d.21.4.4.4.....
Location of Farm:
Take Hwy. 21 South off of Hwy. 421. The farm will be on the right approx. one mile before the Iredell Co. line. Farm
address is: 1209 Hwy 21 South, Hamptonville, NC 27020
❑ Swine ❑ Poultry ® Cattle ❑ Horse Latitude 36 • 03 04 " Longitude F 80 •F 45'F 08
i w a ; s t tt
S�wme" t I' kaeN
Design
Current aDestgn @urreut 'y ` Design Curren th "
su,�cw
Pouelt t'Y
Wean Feeder
Ca act APO
ulation- . Ca acrt d;P,o ulation Ca aat .P,o u1SGon
Layer Dairy
❑ to
❑ ® 350 354 a,
=i
❑ Feeder to Finish
❑Non -Layer 11 10 Non Dairy
" "'
❑ Farrow to Wean>
❑Farrow to Feeder
❑ Other • � � ` ' � "" "
Yv ,s Total Destgn Capacity 350
ow to Finish
❑ Gilts
❑Boars;
sy.
y ' ti Tti'tal SSL'W ' 490,000
r It
Number of Lagoons ❑ Subsurface Drains Present 110 Lagoon Area 10Spray Ficld Arca
Holding Ponds / Soltd Traps 2� ❑ No Liquid Waste Management System
Discharges & Stream Impacts
1. Is any discharge observed from any part of the operation? ❑ Yes ® No
Discharge originated at: ❑ Lagoon ❑ Spray Field ❑ Other
a. If discharge is observed, was the conveyance man-made'? ❑ Yes ❑ No
b. If discharge is observed, did it reach Water of the State'? (If yes, notify DWQ) ❑ Yes ❑ No
c. If discharge is observed, what is the estimated flow in gal/min? .
d. Does discharge bypass a lagoon system? (If yes, notify DWQ) ❑ Yes ❑ No
2. Is there evidence of past discharge from any part of the operation? ❑ Yes ® No
3. Were there any adverse impacts or potential adverse impacts to the Waters of the State other than from a discharge? ❑ Yes ® No
Waste Collection & Treatment
4. Is storage capacity (freeboard plus storm storage) less than adequate?
Structure 1 Structure 2 Structure 3
Identifier: ... North..smaller.... ..... South .larger ..................................
® Spillway
Structure 4 Structure 5
....................................................................
❑ Yes ® No
Structure 6
Freeboard (inches): 48 8
5100
Continued on back

Facilit Number: 99-05 Date of Inspection 10/10/2000 Printed on: 10/11/2000
ority
" ^
5.
Are there any immediate threats to the 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 Aunlication
10. Are there any buffers that need maintenance/improvement? ❑ Yes ® No
11. Is there evidence of over application? ❑ Excessive Ponding ❑ PAN ❑ Hydraulic Overload ❑ Yes ® No
12. Crop type Corn (Silage & Grain) Small Grain (Wheat, Barley, Timothy, Orchard, & Rye Fescue (Graze)
13. Do the receiving crops differ with those designated in the Certified Animal Waste Management Plan (CAWMP)? ❑ Yes ® No
14. a) Does the facility lack adequate acreage for land application? ❑ Yes ® No
b) Does the facility need a wettable acre determination? ❑ Yes ® No
c) This facility is pended for a wettable acre determination? ❑ Yes ® No
15. Does the receiving crop need improvement? ❑ Yes ® No
-16. Is there a -lack of -adequate waste application equipment? - - - - ❑-Yes ®No
Reuuired Records & Documents
17. Fail to have Certificate of Coverage & General Permit readily available?
18. Does the facility fail to have all components of the Certified Animal Waste Management Plan readily available?
(ie/ WUP, checklists, design, maps, etc.)
19. Does record keeping need improvement? (ie/ irrigation, freeboard, waste analysis & soil sample reports)
20. Is facility not in compliance with any applicable setback criteria in effect at the time of design?
21. Did the facility fail to have a actively certified operator in charge?
22. Fail to notify regional DWQ of emergency situations as required by General Permit?
(ie/ discharge, freeboard problems, over application)
23. Did Reviewer/Inspector fail to discuss review/inspection with on -site representative?
24. Does facility require a follow-up visit by same agency?
25. Were any additional problems noted which cause noncompliance of the Certified AWMP?
❑ No,yiolatiotis:o deficiencies were n6ted :during this: visit.::You:will i'ecewe i,o further
. corresnondeitce. about this visit.:
;ility plans on going up to 375-380 during winter. New waste plan by Nancy K@�tJl-is tpj 4`50.
00
Need to pump larger pond immediately. �to`��V 1'b,
"t
Need to remove trees on dam of larger waste pond. Burrow holes need to be r aired on this dam, too.
Need to install a graduated pump marker.
❑ Yes []No
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes ® No
Reviewer/Inspector Name Melissa Rosebrock
�' WY%. ,MI.FLN ENUIRi'^� 1. -

Facility Number: 99-05 D�of Inspection 10/10/2000 • Printed on: 10/11/2000
Odor Issues
26. Does the discharge pipe from the confinement building to the storage pond or lagoon fail to discharge at/or below
Cl 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 latid 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
J
5100

[vision of Water Quality
fission of Soil and Water Conservation _
. - Q Other Agency
Type of Visit 0 Compliance Inspection O Operation Review O Lagoon Evaluation
Reason for Visit ?A Routine O Complaint O Follow up O Emergency Notification O Other
Facility Number H= I
Date of Visit:
0 Permitted ® Certified Q Conditionally Certified [3 Registered
Farm Name: .T.......Mi1J.u...... iJ.lf m..e......jFlrm ...................................
Owner Name:.,
Facility Contact:
Mailing Addi essss:
IJ
Onsite Representative:...-T/ity ......_EJ. �..1..�.1.11�� ............................
Certified Operator:,. s1, . 6c.),....... C......... z,
Location of Farm:
wy a r loy . a rrn on r
Time:
❑ Denied Access
Printed on: 7/21/2000
Date Last Operated
_or,fAbove Threshold: .........................
County: ........11L/^L.. �._....o..........................................
Phone No:....._�..._..S.O �.......L%.1.............'
Phone No: 3..:.K?..l...l. /
.............52 � .a .....
Integrator: .................... .........................._....11........... ..
Operator Certification Number:,_- _ ................
r
MI 1'e- 0
❑ Swine ❑ Poultry Cattle ❑ Horse Latitude ®• ®' E`; Longitude $Q • ®' ®'°
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 Finish
❑ Gilts
❑ Boars
� --
Design Current
C ttie Pan Po ulatio
Dairy
❑ Non -Dairy
Total Design Capacity 3S d
Total SSLW qW, 0
Number of Lagoons I "t.. J❑ Subsurface Drains �l❑ Lag••^n Area JU Spray Field Area I
Holding Ponds / Solid Traps® ❑ No Liquid Waste Management System
Discharges & Stream Impacts �[
1. Is any discharge observed from any part of the operation? ❑ Yes IXI No
Discharge originated at: ❑ Lagoon ❑ Spray Field ❑ 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
a If dischart c is observed. what is the estimated flow in gal/min?
d. Does discharge bypass a lagoon system'? (If yes, notify DWQ) ❑ Yes [I 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 �.e
4. Is storage capacity (freeboard plus storm storage) less than adequate? Spillway Yes NXo
Snuct rr I DD Su uu -lure 2 n ,,,Strt cture 3 / `. Structure 4 Structure 5.. . St.Aucitire 6. .
Identifier: . ... �r..fr.Q :7tQ`.1..1IJi.lU..........
Freehowd(inches): � �
5100 11 Continued on back

Facility Number: — Date of Inspection d [0 t7d Printed on: 7/21/2000 XNO
5. Are there any immediate threats to theo.rity of any of the structures observed? (ie/ tret•Csevere erosion, ❑ Yes
seepage, etc.)
6. Are there structures on -site which are not properly addressed and/or managed through a waste management or
closure plan? ❑ Yes XNo
(If any of questions 4-6 was answered yes, and the situation poses an
immediate public health or environmental threat, notify DWQ)
7. Do any of the structures need maintenance/improvement?
8. Does any part of the waste management system other than waste structures require maintenance/improvement?
9. Do any stuctures lack adequate, gauged markers with required maximum and minimum liquid level
elevation markings?
Waste Application
10. Are there any buffers that need maintenance/improvement?
11. Is there evidence of over application? ❑ Excessive Ponding ❑ PAN ❑ Hydraulic Overload
0
12. Crop type rn hg&4Jh4X 4Aky,
IN Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes IXI No
!�
Yes ❑ No
�/
❑ Yes No
❑ Yes XNo
65 of
13.
Do the receiving crops differ with t se designated in the Certified Anim I Waste Management Plan (CAWMP)?
Yes
XNo
14.
a) Does the facility lack adequate acreage for land application?
El Yes
((No
b) Does the facility need a wettable acre determination?
❑ Yes
No
c) This facility is pended for a wettable acre determination?
❑ Yes
15.
Does the receiving crop need improvement?
❑ Yes
YIN
No
/pp`No
16.
Is there a lack of adequate waste application equipment?
❑ Yes
,,,,,L..__y///
Required
Records & Documents /�
17.
Fail to have Certificate of Coverage & General Permit readily available? M/A
-E3-irss— !rNo
18.
Does the facility fail to have all components of the Certified Animal Waste Management Plan readily available?
(ic/ WUP, checklists, design, maps, etc.)
❑ Yes
) No
19.
Does record keeping need improvement? (ic/ 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
o
22.
Fail to notify regional DWQ of emergency situations as required by General Permit?
fie/ discharge, freeboard problems, over application)
❑ Yes
No
TTT"`
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
CVO-V i6fatidris'ot- &flcleuCiCS -*&i, p6fed diWing tbis,vlslt' -'"il W111 I'&6Q i6 06 iutthe* r' • ,
. corresnotideitce: abouC 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):
2 I,v1) s' -
�-4 . NaV\ er
Reviewer/Inspector Name
Rom
Reviewer/Inspector Signaturek Allie Ii OdA 1/1/d11 /lv /V .dam Date: 10116100 5100

Facility Number: — S I of Inspection 01 / �p • Printed on: 7/21/2000
Odor Issues
26. Does the discharge pipe from the confinement building to the storage pond or lagoon fail to discharge Wor below —El *Ss -.^; o
liquid level of lagoon or storage pond with no agitation? QtA I r
27. Are there any dead animals not disposed of properly within 24 hours` BorleA O„ ngl o&e-�•�> ICDt 1—f^om E], Yes �No
28. Is there any evidence of wind drift during land application? (i.e. residue on neighboring
vegetation, aspharl¢f-Ce—i M- Yes XNo
roads, building structure, and/or public property) �/
29. Is the land application spray system intake not located near the liquid surface of the lagoon? ❑ Yes pd No
30. Were any major maintenance problems with the ventilation fan(s) noted? (i.e. broken fan belts, missing or 7�
or broken fan blade(s), inoperable shutters, etc.) []Yes XNo
31. Do the animals feed storage bins fail to have appropriate cover? bM it s oZ -a "—Zn..Lo
32. Do the Flush tanks lack a submerged fill pipe or a permanent/temporary cover?� .QX4"ZJ-N9
➢fib .0 2 6 up le le o�'a--h r -9 rWJ
rag(va4ed nta'�e.>,? N�V
�' , ) U1C. l ✓�,f N eec� 'D kaue 8rOJ- Ma-f V,er,
3 Oo
(-eOkI 39
5100

vision of Water Quality
'. sion of Soil and Water Conservation : •,.
�`0 Other Agency
(Type of Visit O Compliance Inspection OO Operation Review O Lagoon Evaluation I
Reason for Visit OO Routine O Complaint. O Follow up O Emergency Notification O Other ❑ Denied Access
Facility Number 99 5 Date of Visit: 7/13/2000 'rime: 13:15 Printed on: 10/2/2000
O Not Operational O Below Threshold
0 Permitted ®Certified [3 Conditionally Certified 0 Registered Date Last Operated or Above Threshold: .......................
FarmName: millei.BrAthus.E.axm ............................................................................... County: Y,adltia.............................................. IY.SRO ........
OwnerName: L.E..r&.t~,G........................... Miilex.......................................................... Phone No: (,33Se1.4.ft8. 4.1..72........................................................
FacilityContact: .:............................................................................ Title:................................................................ Phone No:...................................................
Mailing Address: 269A..W..alke[.Eratich.RAad............................................................ HalmRtonVA11.e..AIC............................................... 2.7.02.9 .............
OnsiteRepresentative: ,IaC.kt2.J1111t1............................................................................ Integrator:......................................................................................
Certified Operator: t)ar jo..L................................. Zamora ............................................ Operator Certification Number: 21.444 .
Location of Farm:
rake Hwy. 21 South off of Hwy. 421. The farm will be on the right approx. one mile before the Iredell Co. line.
[]Swine ❑ Poultry ®Cattle []Horse Latitude 0• =, =" Longitude =• =' 0"
Design . Current
Swine CaDacity 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 Cattle
Ca raci Po ulation
❑ Layer
® Dairy
350
423
❑ Non -Layer
I
I
Non -Dairy
❑
Other
Total Design Capacity
350
Total SSLW
490,000
No Liquid Waste
Present 11❑ Lagoon Area 1❑ Spray Field Area
Discharees & 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: .........W'.SP.12.................... SP.AJ.............................................................................................................
Freeboard (inches): 6 24
1,5/00
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes []No
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes ❑ No
Structure 6
Continued on back

Facility Number: 99-5 Date of Inspection 7/13/2000 Printed on: 10/2/2000
5. Are there any immediate threats to the in*_ ty of any of the structures observed? (ie/ tree*vere 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?
N Yes
❑ No
Waste Application
10.
Are there any buffers that need maintenance/improvement?
❑ Yes
N No
11.
Is there evidence of over application? ❑ Excessive Ponding ❑ PAN ❑ Hydraulic Overload
❑ Yes
N No
12.
Crop type Com (Silage & Grain) Orchard grass (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
❑ 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?
N Yes
❑ No
16._Is
there a lack -of adequate waste application equipment? _ _
❑ Yes
N No
Required
Records & Documents
17.
Fail to have Certificate of Coverage & General Permit readily available?
❑ Yes
❑ No
18. Does the facility fail to have all components of the Certified Animal Waste Management Plan readily available?
(ie/ WUP, checklists, design, maps, etc.)
❑ Yes
N No
19.
Does record keeping need improvement? (ie/ irrigation, freeboard, waste analysis & soil sample reports)
❑ Yes
N No
20.
Is facility not in compliance with any applicable setback criteria in effect at the time of design?
❑ Yes
N No
21.
Did the facility fail to have a actively certified operator in charge?
❑ Yes
N No
22.
Fail to notify regional DWQ of emergency situations as required by General Permit?
-
(ie/ discharge, freeboard problems, over application)
❑ Yes
N No
23.
Did Reviewer/Inspector fail to discuss review/inspection with on -site representative?
❑ Yes
N No
24.
Does facility require a follow-up visit by same agency?
❑ Yes
N No
25.
Were any additional problems noted which cause noncompliance of the Certified AWMP?
❑ Yes
N No
No yiolatiotis:or defcion c e$•were;noted Auring'this. visit Y, u:will receive no'furt6;er•;
correspondence abouf 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):
# 9. Need to have max. liquid elevation and top of spillway elev. shot and install marker that is graduated.
15.Orchard grass strips need to have weeds and Johnson grass control done. This was mentioned last year.
4. There is no max. liquid marker, therefore, I am not sure if holding ponds are over the max. liquid level. Need to pump WSP # 2
to have Jackie Billings added as back-up operator in charge.
Reviewer/Inspector Name Rocky Durham
Reviewer/Inspector Signature: Date: 5100

Facility Number: 99-5 Inspection 7/13/2000 Printed on: 10/2/2000
D
*
Odor Issues •;of
26.
Does the discharge pipe from the confinement building to the storage pond or lagoon fail to discharge atior 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
J
5100

Facility Number 99 OS Date of Inspection 3/29/99
Time of Inspection 24 hr. (hh:mm)
[] Permitted ®Certified [3 Conditionally Certified E3Registered Not O erational Date Last Operated: ..........................
Farm Name: Mi crInitiers.Earni................................................................................. County:YAdlun.............................................. ..S.RQ........
Owner Name. LE A.I G............................Miller........................................................... Phone No:(3aQ.46li-AVI .......................................................
Facility Contact: dultie.AiD ap............................................... Title: .Jeri=................................................. Phone No:03Q.46fl-2b12....................
Mailing Address: 2£t44....alker.B.razteh.Road............................................................ Hamplonyffic.NC .............................................. 27.0211.............
Onsite Representative:,I&ddc.HAUngs...................... Integrator: me rutor:...............................................:......................................
Certified Operator: laWc.Billings....................
Location of Farm:
Operator Certification Number: 213M .............................
Latitude 36 • 03 04 Longitude 80 • 45 08
Discharges & Stream Impacts
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 D WQ)
c. If discharge is observed, what is the estimated flow in gal1min?
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 stone storage) less than adequate'? ' ❑ Spillway
Structure I Structure 2 Stricture 3 Structure 4 Structure 5
Identifier: ...... NaWlTtmd...... ....... &AWLEond...... ........ ........................... .................................... ....................................
Freeboard(inches): ............... tY................. .............. 31Y.................................................... ................................... ...................................
5. Are there any immediate threats to the integrity of any of the structures observed? (ie/ trees, severe erosion,
seepage, etc.)
3/23/99
❑ Yes 0 No
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes
[]No
® Yes
[]No
❑ Yes
® No
® Yes
[]No
Structure 6
...............................
..............................
❑ Yes
H No
Continued on back

Facility Number: 99—o5 e of Inspection
6. Are there structures on -site which are no properly addressed and/or managed through a Its in
or
closure plait?
(If any of questions 4fi was answered yes, and the situation poses an
immediate public health or environmental threat, notify DWQ)
7. Do any of the structures need maintenance/improvement?
8. Does any part of the waste management system other than waste structures require maintenance/improvement?
9. Do any smctures lack adequate, gauged markers with required maximum and minimum liquid level
elevation markings?
Waste Application -
10. Are there any buffers that need maimenance/improvement?
11. Is there evidence of over application? ❑ Excessive Pondhtg ❑ PAN
12. Crop type
13. Do the receiving crops differ with those designated in the Certified Animal Waste Management Plan (CA WMP)?
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 wettable acre detenmmation?
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?
3/29/99
❑ Yes
H No
❑ Yes
0 No
® Yes
❑ No
® Yes
❑ No
❑ Yes
Z No
❑ Yes
® No
4 -Ni' ivwlaiioai tir:del`rcieticiei'ivere:rioieii:duriitg iliii visit : Yroti-,0l:receive ito hirilier:' :
. .........................................................
.'.rnrrucrinwNiviri. '.'.'.'.'.'.'.'.'.'.'.'.'.'.'.'.'.'.'.'.'.'.'.'.'.'.'.'.
- Visible evidence of past discharges through spillway of northern pond.
- Northern pond being pumped daring inspection; need to draw it down to provide adequate storm storage.
- Need to reoute drainage from silage storage/spent yeast area into southern storage pond.
- Need to install "start pump" marker.
? - No record of DWQ notification of inadequate freeboard or past discharges.
t - Follow up inspection will be conducted within 30 days.
Reviewer/Inspector Name Al
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes H No
❑ Yes 0 No
❑ Yes [R No
❑ Yes H No
Reviewer/Inspector Signature: Date:

Facility Number 99 OS
®Registered 13Certified [3 Applied for Permit 0 Permitted
Date of Inspection 4/24/98
Time of Inspection 24 hr. (hh:mm)
10 Not Operational Date Last Operated: ..........................
Farm Name: MZcr.BAnthcs.F.wx................................................................................ County:]ladkau.............................................. ..SRQ........
Owner Name: LF.A.L.G........................... Miner .......................................................... Phone No:03.6)..46114111 .......................................................
Facility Contact: jackla.BlBhg&................................................ Title:Uasm.OAC .................................... Phone No: 3.36-37247116 ......................
Mailing Address: 2444...alker.Branch.Road............................................................. HaMplonyAk.NC ............................................... 17.02ft .............
Onsite Representative: J.&dde..BAllilnKit ............................................................................ Integrator:............................................
Certified Operator: Jackie.Billinga................................................................................. Operator Certification Number:
Location of Farm:
Latitude =•=' 0- Longitude =• =' =«
Design ! Current :
Destgn Current
Design Current
Swme
Capacity Population;
Poultry! Capacity Population Cattle
Capacity Popuhhou
[IWean to Feeder
❑Layer ®Dairy
350 500
❑ Feeder to Finish
❑ Non -Layer I.dO Non -Dairy
❑ Farrow to Wean
❑ Farrow to Feeder
❑Other
❑ Farrow to Finish
T"I DeSrgn„ Ca fladty
. 350
❑ Gilts
❑Boars -
-� MEW
490,000
Number of Lagoons
f HoldlnJ?ends U ❑ Subsurface Drains Present
❑Lagoon Area ❑Spray Field Area
❑ No Liquid Waste Management System
General
I. Are there any buffers that need maintenance/improvement? -
❑ Yes
❑ No
2. Is any discharge observed from any part of the operation?
❑ Yes
®No
Discharge originated at: ❑ Lagoon ❑ Spray Field ❑ Other
a. If discharge is observed, was the conveyance man-made?
❑ Yes
❑ No
b. If discharge is observed, did it reach Surface Water'? (If yes, notify DWQ)
❑ Yes
❑ No
a If discharge is observed, what is the estimated flow in gal/min?
d. Does discharge bypass a lagoon system? (If yes, notify DWQ)
❑ Yes
❑ No
3. Is there evidence of past discharge from any part of the operation?
❑ Yes
® No
4. Were Otere any adverse impacts to Ore waters of die 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
® No
maintenance/improvement?
6. Is facility not in compliance with any applicable setback criteria in effect at the time of design?
❑ Yes
® No
7. Did the facility fail to have a certified operator in responsible charge?
❑ Yes
® No
7/25/97

Facility Number. 99-05 Date spection 4/24/98
8, Are there lagoons or storage ponds on such need to be properly closed'? • ❑ Yes N No
Structures (La¢oons,Holdine Ponds, Flush Pits, etc.)
9. Is storage capacity (freeboard plus storm storage) less than adequate? N Yes ❑ No
Structure I Structure 2 Structure 3 Structure 4 Structure 5 Structure 6
Identifier: .................................... ... 1.,8R9nd/.Sm.Rd
... ................................... .................................... .................................... ....................................
Freeboard(ft):................................... ......�d..Q.:. 1..4.:....................................................................................................................................................
10. Is seepage observed from any of the structures? ❑ Yes N No
I I . 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 minunum or maximum liquid level markers?
❑ Yes
❑ 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....................................................................................................................................................................................................................................
16.
Do the receiving crops differ with those designated in the Animal Waste Management Plan (AWMP)?
❑ Yes
❑ 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'?
N Yes
❑ 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
22.
Does record keeping need improvement'?
❑ Yes
❑ No
For Certified or Permitted Facilities Only
23.
Does the facility fail to have a copy of the Animal Waste Management Plan readily available?
❑ 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
EJ•Nlo'v olatib'ns d'r•defiCieit¢ieS'Wete noted'du'rapg'this-visit.'?-0q akill'reCeive R'I)*ilrtheY'-
... , .corresnoudence Aok 4his:visit• ::::::: ::: :::::::::::: .' - - - - -' - • - -
attached complaint form. The largest of the 2 storaage ponds has just been pumped. The smaller needs pumping, but no evidence o:
overflows. Any overflow would go to farm pond on property, and it looks tine. Stream below lagoons looks fine. Mr. Billings says
ild be certified any day now. New pump on -site, waiting on mounting of tanks on spray truck by S.E. Silo Co. Tried several times to
.act complainant; phone disconnected.
Reviewer/Inspector Name Ahmet`Siatt�y .'
Reviewer/InsDector Signature: Date:

❑ DSWC Am IM Feedlot Operation Review W
[96WQ Animal Feedlot Operation Site Inspection
IO Routine tit Complaint 0 Follow-up of DWQ inspection 0 Follow-up of DSWC review 0 Other
Facility Number Date of Inspection
--yKLL •e,e1'Yie Time of Inspection 24 he (hh:mm)
Iegistered E3 Certified [3 Applied for Permit E3 Permitted 13 Not Operational Date Last Operated -..._.
Farm Name:...2flv�.....tJ.....l...J..'C..III !//�YJ County........1�(....�f.......................................
.................. /
Owner Name:...... .. '� .!'ll.............................................................. Phone N'o:....f.`..:f.../�— �J zA Cam........:/ .
{/ j� - % G
Facility Contact Jg.%S //�..._//../..(C.< ...�......_ Title�tlt�2 Pl 4�S .......... Phone No:......�[...........�
Mailing Address:... .0 _
_.�>......./Z1174-
�.am/ ..........`.. ........4;
Onsite Representative: ....'-I ze......%r........... Integrator: .........................................................
.........................
Certified Operator:................./�/x
O
fir.. ...................... Operator Certification Number:.........................................
Location of Farm:
Latitude ='='=° Longitude =•=(=<1
Swine Capacity Population
❑ Wean to Feeder
❑ Feeder to Finish
❑ Farrow to Wean
❑ Farrow to Feeder
❑ Farrow to Finish
❑ Gilts
❑ Boars
Design Current Design : Current;
Poultry Capacity Population Cattle Capacity Population
❑ Layer airy
❑ Non -Layer I 1 10 Non -Dairy
❑ Other
Total Design Capacity
Total SSLW
Number of Lagoons /Holding Ponds 10 Subsurface Drains Present 110 Lagoon Area ID Spray Field Area
- - ❑ No Liquid Waste Management System
General
1. Are there any buffers that need maintenance/improvement?
2. Is any discharge observed from any part of the operation?
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 ,alhniO
d. Does discharge bypass a lagoon system? (If yes, notifv DWQ)
3. Is there evidence of past discharge from any part of the operation?
4. Were there any adverse impacts to the waters of the State other than from a discharge?
5. Does any pan of the waste management system (other than lagoons/holding ponds) require
maintenance/improvement?
6. Is facility not in compliance with any applicable setback criteria in effect at the time of design?
7. Did the facility fail to have a certified operator in responsible charge?
7/25/97
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes )VNo
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes XNo
❑ Yes ANo
❑ Yes Rslo
❑ Yes XNo
❑ Yes VNo
Continued on back V M

���❑ DSWC An Feedlot Operation Review
j�WQ Animal Feedlot Operation Site Inspection �
��� e
Iy Koutine�AJ Complaint U Follow-up of DWQ inspection O Follow-up of DSWC review O Other
Facility Number �f M1 Date of Inspection %% /
Time of Inspection 24 hr.
--LL
LYKegistered Certified 0 Applied for Permit E3 Permitted JE3 Not Operational Date st Operated:,:-
Farm Name: ... /...//.....L.............a_{� 01-
Counlv:........
......./.....f..........................................
f ..�- ..... ..... ....
Owner Name: ..... i...../�/%l1/..............................................................'hone Nu:.... r�� .-._ /�/1 ?.- ../.I ZA
Facility Contact: Jn«. /_/ /�/...._5........ Title:..... f�� 4 �� ........
Phone No:......��..........
MailingAddress:.../ ..............................t...............................................:.`.-.a. ............................................................... ..........................
Onsite Representative:....
./_/���
Certified Operator; .......__.../1..................................................... ................:......... Oper'a`f r Certification Number:.........................................
Location of Farm:
Latitude 00=, =" Longitude F--]•
- Design
Swine Capacit.
❑ Wean to Feeder
❑ Feeder to Finish
❑ Farrow to Wean
❑ Farrow to Feeder
❑ Farrow to Finish
❑ Gilts
17 Boars
Poultry,
❑ Other
Total Design Capacity
Total SSLW
:Number of Lagoons / Holding Ponds i —, JU Subsurface Drains Present �I❑ Lagoon Area Jp Spray Field Area .I
❑ No Liquid Waste Management System
General
1. Are there any buffers that need maintenance/improvement?
2. Is any discharge observed from any part of the operation?
Discharge 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
%Mai n tenance/improvement?
6. Is facility not in compliance with any applicable setback criteria in effect at the time of design?
7. Did the facility fail to have a certified operator in responsible charge?
7/25/97
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes XNo
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes gNo
❑ Yes . NO
❑ Yes jE No
❑ Yes ifNo
❑ Yes [ No JJltl
Continued on back

• Facility Number: — • •
8. Are there lagoons or storage ponds on site which need to be properly closed?
Structures (Lasoons.IIoldimg Ponds, Flush Pits, etc.)
9. Is storage capacity (freeboard plus storm storage) less than adequate?
Structur Q"'�t cur 2Iructure 3 Structure 4
Identifier�.l.....Q?..... ..�f/
7U' '
Freeboard (tt) .....:.rC.R.................!!
...............................................................................
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)
15. Crop type
❑ Yes XNo
es ❑ No
Structure 5 Structure 6
❑ Yes gNo
❑ Yes ro
❑ Yes J[��Vo
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes XNo
16. Do the receiving crops differ with those designated in the Animal Waste Management Plan (AWMP)?
17. Does the facility have a lack of adequate acreage for land application?
18. Does the receiving crop need improvement?
19. Is there a lack of available waste application equipment?
20. Does facility require a follow-up visit by same agency?
21. Did Reviewer/Inspector fail to discuss review/inspection with on -site representative?
22. Does record keeping need improvement?
For Certified or Permitted Facilities Only
23. Does the facility fail to have a copy of the Animal Waste Management Plan readily available?
24. Were any additional problems noted which cause noncompliance of the Certified AWMP? _
25. Were any additional problems noted which cause noncompliance of the Permit?
No violations or deficiencies were noted during this.visit. You.will receive no further
........ ........ . ...... . ...... . ...... . ...... .....
correspondence about this visit.
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes YNo
❑ Yes DrNo
es /❑ No
❑ Yes IqNo
❑ Yes XNo
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes ❑ No
_5�A � llf l���IOM /clir?% fG�i►?. r� f G� ffi� _
R��'�'O
"ally
f��a��o1ir,
iCW-5-C/m9
Reviewer/Inspector Name ; ,
Reviewer/Inspector Signature: /�//j7iGj/� 1 i//f Date:

�acth[y Number — ' • p a _ '.
,- 8. Are there lagoons or storage ponds on site which need to be properly closed? ❑ Yes XNo
'J Structures (La2,00ns Holding Ponds, Flush Pits, etc.)
9. Is storage capacity (freeboard plus storm storage) less than adequate? es ❑ No
Structure l "Jt eture tructure 3 Structure 4 Structure 5
Identifier: 4? l 1,r �i /�� '•-
�......�..0.� . / /2.......................................................................................................
Freeboard(ft) >........-�................�..".._A7.1/........................_...:.........................M.......: -.......................................................
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 pgses
an immediate public health or environmental threat, notify D,yrVQ
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)
15. Crop type..............................................................................................................................................
16. Do the receiving crops differ with those designated in the Animal Waste Management Plan (AWMP)?
it
17. Does the facility have a lack of adequaie, 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/Iospector fail to discuss review/inspection with on -site representative?
22. Does record keeping need improvement?
For Certified or Permitted Facilities Certified or Permitted Facilities Only
23. Does the facility fail to have a copy of the Animal Waste Management Plan readily available?
24. Were any additional problems noted which cause noncompliance of the Certified AWMP?
25. Were any additional problems noted which cause noncompliance of the Permit'?
Q No violations or deficiencies. were noted during this.visit..You,will receive -no further.
....... ........ . ...... . ...... . ...... . ...... .....
correspondence about this visit: '
Structure 6
❑ Yes 9No
❑ Yes ;#'1�10
❑ Yes f3YNo
` e
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes tg No
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes XNo
❑ Yes ['NO
T'Ves ❑ No
❑ Yes allo
i
❑ Yes XNo
ElYes ❑ No
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes ❑ No
e551e �`l ��/ogea-
J�O/l�
6i�OrJ /Qj1i�S l ' s ii/r° �! /�Ti��i�Cs Scr%•ss� S�r�ri/�/<<
IReviewer/Inspector Name
Reviewer/Inspector Signature:
Date:

f
ZA
} •
NORTH CAROLINA DEPARTMENT OF
ENVIRONMENT AND NATURAL RESOURCES
MOORESVILLE REGIONAL OFFICE
Division of Soil and Water Conservation
October 6, 1998 RECEIVED
N.C. Dept. of rHNR
Mr. L.F. Miller OCT 14 MIS
2644 Walker Branch Rd,
Hamptonville, North Carolina 27020 WipsiOn-Salem
Regional U?fiCS
SUBJECT: Operation Review Notice of Referral
Miller Brothers Farm
Facility No. 99-5
Yadkin County
Dear Mr. Miller,
On October 6, an Operation Review was conducted of Miller Brothers Farm, facility no. 99-5, This
Review, undertaken in accordance with G.S. 143-215.10D, is one of two visits scheduled for all
registered livestock operations during the 1998 calendar year.
During the Review, it was noted that there was evidence of a past discharge from the waste holding
pond (milking parlor pond). Since failure to maintain adequate storage and freeboard in waste holding
ponds is illegal, your operation along with supporting documentation was referred to the Division of
Water Quality for further investigation and possible enforcement action. G.S. 143-215.10E requires
me to notify Division of Water Quality and the owner/operator of this observed violation.
It is imperative that this problem be eliminated immediately. You are strongly encouraged to contact
your certified technical specialist for help. You may also want to contact your local Soil and Water
Conservation District Office since they may be able to provide you with additional technical and/or
financial assistance to implement corrective best management practices.
Please remember that in order for your facility to be in compliance with environmental regulations,
animal waste cannot be discharged into the waters of the State, and the animal waste collection,
treatment, storage and disposal systems must be properly sized, maintained and operated under the
responsible charge of a certified operator.
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. 276 if you have any questions, concerns or need
additional information.
Sincerely,
Rocky D. Durham
Environmental Engineer I
Enclosure
cc: Yadkin Soil and Water Conservation District
Mike Mickey, DWQ Winston-Salem Regional Office
DSWC Regional Files
919 NORTH MAIN STREET, MOORESVILLE, NORTH CAROLINA 261 15
PHONE [phone] FAX [phone]
AN EQUAL OPPORTUNITY/AFFIRMATIVE ACTION EMPLOYER -50% RECYCLED/10% POST -CONS UMER PAPER

IS nuuuuc p wwpiawi p ruuuw-up ul uwa[ Inspection p ronow-up or uawa- review p vmer
Facility Number Date of Inspection
Time of Inspection �fb UO�— 24 hr. (hh:mm)
0 Registered p Certified p Applied for Permit p Permitted 10 Not Operational Date Last Operated:
Farm Name: Miller..Sruthers.F.arm................................................................................ County: Yadkin WSRO
Owner Name: L.E.,&1 G.......................... BUIer .......................................................... Phone No: (336).40 4172.......................................................
FacilityContact: Jackie.Rilliugs................................................Title:............................................................... Phone No:....................................................
Mailing Address: 2644..Walker.Brauch.Road............................................................ Hamptanville..N.0 ............................................... 2702.0 ..............
OnsiteRepresentative: Jackie Billings........................................................................... Integrator:.......................................................................................
Certified Operator:Jackie..................................... Biwags.............................................. Operator Certification Number:213B3.............................
Location of Farm:
Latitude =*=' 0" Longitude =s =' O"
esrgn
;_ urren _
estgn prren - -
esign_ �-urren
Swine
`'Capacity
]Population Poultry _ C p city Populatton` Cattle . -; . .
Capacity Population `
p Wean to Feeder
.10 Layer
Dairy
p ee er to mis
,; ❑ Non -Layer �'"_ C on- auy
❑ arrow to ean
❑ Farrow to Fee er
' ❑Other
p Farrow to Finish
-
TotaMesign Capacity
❑ Gilts
❑ Boars
Total SSLW
490,000
fi oldi
Number of LaLa goons /HoldmgdPonds k ❑
u stir ace rams resent 10 Lagoon Area
JE3 Spray Field Area
- p
No Liquid Waste Management System
I' -
General
1. Are there any buffers that need maintenance/improvement?
2. Is any discharge observed from any part of the operation?
Discharge originated at: ❑ Lagoon p 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
maintenance/improvement?
6. Is facility not in compliance with any applicable setback criteria in effect at the time of design?
❑ Yes ® No
p Yes ® No
❑ Yes p No
p Yes p No
[]Yes p No
to Yes p No
p Yes ® No
Yes Cl No
p Yes ® No
7. Did the facility fail to have a certified operator in responsible charge?
7/25/97
❑ Yes ® No
Continued on back

Facility Number: 99_5 Date 0,spection
8. Are there lagoons or storage ponds on site which need to be properly closed?
Structures (Lagoons.Holding Ponds. Flush Pits. etc.)
9. Is storage capacity (freeboard plus storm storage) less than adequate?
Structure I Structure 2 Structure 3
Identifier: Confinement Milking Parlor
Freeboard(ft):..............2.0.............................1.7............................................
10. Is seepage observed from any of the structures?
Structure 4
11. Is erosion, or any other threats to the integrity of any of the structures observed?
12. Do any of the structures need maintenance/improvement?
(If any of questions 9-12 was answered yes, and the situation poses an
immediate public health or environmental threat, notify DWQ)
13. Do any of the structures lack adequate minimum or maximum liquid level markers?
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
Structure 5 Structure 6
........................................................................
p Yes
® No
❑ Yes
® No
p Yes
® No
® Yes
p No
p Yes
® No
15. Crop type ....... am.4Silage.&.Cisain)....... SmaAGrai�n�.(Wh��eat,.Barley,............................................................
16. Do the receiving crops differ with those designated m the ? nunal Waste Management Plan (AWMP)?
17. Does the facility have a lack of adequate acreage for land application?
18. Does the receiving crop need improvement?
19. Is there a lack of available waste application equipment?
20. Does facility require a follow-up visit by same agency?
21. Did Reviewer/Inspector fail to discuss review/inspection with on -site representative?
22. Does record keeping need improvement?
For Certified or Permitted Facilities Only
23. Does the facility fail to have a copy of the Animal Waste Management Plan readily available?
24. Were any additional problems noted which cause noncompliance of the Certified AWMP?
25. Were any additional problems noted which cause noncompliance of the Permit?
Q . 1Y0'violanons.or neticrencles-were.nntea .during tuts visit:. You wlu.receive no turtner. . - .
............................. .........................
• . • . cericespoitilene"e ab6uit this visit::
..........................................................
ttthe final ""signatures.
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes ® No
p Yes ® No
p Yes X No
p Yes ® No
p Yes ® No
® Yes p No
p Yes []No
p Yes ❑ No
p Yes p No
tmmems.
93 Obser43_evidence of past discharge throggh_;emergencyspillway,on structure #-2. Informed operator that I would have to refer'
him to the Division of Niter Quahtyc=Spoke to Mike MickeyofDWQ in WSRO and he said they had seen the same situation but'it'
ud been some tune bdck`
# $, Not realty sure f storage capacity Ls."adequate without plan
m
4`
Reviewer/Inspector Name Rocky=D D_u'rham
Reviewer/Inspector Signature: Date:

W0 Fax:919-'15-6042 5OPERRTIOPS BRANCH ?14 50 F. 07.`15
SU fiquifes immedl;W Mentim
Peary number
SiTEF VISITATION RECORD
Data: 1 u t i 1 �t 4995
Owner: • 131o5 po,r,-y Farm Name:
County:
Agent Visiting Site: }; �„� s ���k Fhcne:fi o q_aesL
Operator. . 42 ;1/% Phcre: -0
Or -Site Represesiative: —�' Fhcne:
Physical Addrm:
Mailing kd2ss:
Tyre of Cpe _tic _ Swine _ ?cui ry �C=1tle
wesign Capaciy: thr Number efArimab on S;te: 3 v2 0
LM'%de: -3C-2 D3 D It Longicode:
Type Af ir5 ec::cr.: f Grcurd _ •4eriai
Circle Yes or No
Dce: i e ':. 'Nastmoie Lagxr, have s fioic^Ot frcetiard of 1 `ooi I5 ear icur S;C, n Event
(;.::proximately 1 Fcct+ 7 inches) Cr Pic
Freekard: / =esi G 1-c�-s
F-:.'?Cifit{oS Mth .,tor: thar, ore iagecn, iiease address to clja; ifiyGC:':5 dE bcar!l under the
c: m-ants sce t'cn.
`„Es:r.y se=_page case^x-d from 6`e!a,c_n(s)7
Yes
or
\b
`VES tr:ere sresior, -.f the dart?
Yes
oc
Is=deccc;e land available fcr la-d applice:icn?
Me�sj
Cr
tic
Is ;he ccver crop adequale7
(—yes7
cr
No
n �'�'ICI^13! .:^n;2 i:s: Cc� Sh.;.�
i�o /�:c'n
�, t •-
I'�. �I �r?:._ e�..
��ne�L��-i JY9 �y
.i 'T n
�� r71
/iCy�� � — � ••••/��
1�"�.r�