440058_Inspection_20211117

Division of Water Resources
Division of Soil and Water Conservation
Other Agency
Facility Number: 440058
Facility Status: Active
Permit: AWC440058 Denied Access
Inspection Type: Compliance Inspection Inactive Or Closed Date:
Reason for Visit: Routine
County:
Haywood
Region:
Date of Visit: 11/17/2021 Entry Time: 10:00 am Exit Time: 11:30 am Incident #:
Farm Name: Medford Dairy
Owner Email:
Asheville
Owner: Peggy H Medford Phone: [phone]
Mailing Address: 247 Charlie Medford Ln
Waynesville NC 28786
Physical Address: 254 Joe Medford Rd Waynesville NC 28785
Facility Status: Compliant Not Compliant Integrator:
Location of Farm: Latitude: 35° 35' 42"
3 miles north of 1-40 on lronduff Road
Longitude: 82° 58' 30"
Question Areas:
▪ Dischrge & Stream Impacts
▪ Records and Documents
▪ Waste Col, Stor, & Treat
▪ Other Issues
Waste Application
Certified Operator:
Secondary OIC(s):
Charles F Medford
Operator Certification Number: 21353
On -Site Representative(s): Name Title Phone
24 hour contact name Charlie Medford
Primary Inspector:
Inspector Signature:
Secondary Inspector(s):
Timothy R Fox Phone: [phone]
Date:
Inspection Summary:
Tim Fox with ARO DWR inspected the site.
Charlie Medford was present for the inspection.
The dry stack and liquid holding pond is designed for 60 days of temporary storage.
Calibration done 2021.
Waste analysis provided 8/16 & 3/19.
Spot checked Field 10723-1 (wheat).
Need to update WUPlan to reflect new acreage per GPS data.
Soils need to be taken by December 31, 2021.
Attachment A permit requirements not required until further notice.
Page 1 of 5

Permit: AWC440058
Owner: Peggy H Medford
Inspection Date: 11/17/21 Inspection Type: Compliance Inspection
Facility Number: 440058
Reason for Visit: Routine
Waste Structures
Type
Identifier
Effective
Date
Built
Date
Closed Designated Observed
Date Freeboard Freeboard
Waste Pond
WSP
09/15/2000
30.00
20.00
Wet Stack
WET STACK
09/15/2000
Page 2 of 5

Permit: AWC440058
Inspection Date: 11/17/21
Owner: Peggy H Medford
Facility Number: 440058
Inspection Type: Compliance Inspection Reason for Visit: Routine
Discharges & Stream Impacts
1. Is any discharge observed from any part of the operation?
Discharge originated at:
Structure
Application Field
Other
a. Was conveyance man-made?
b. Did discharge reach Waters of the State? (if yes, notify DWQ)
c. What is the estimated volume that reached waters of the State (gallons)?
d. Does discharge bypass the waste management system? (if yes, notify DWQ)
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 Waters of the
State other than from a discharge?
Waste Collection, Storage & Treatment
4. Is storage capacity less than adequate?
If yes, is waste level into structural freeboard?
5. Are there any immediate threats to the integrity of any of the structures observed (I.e./ larc
trees, severe erosion, seepage, etc.)?
6. Are there structures on -site that are not properly addressed and/or managed through a
waste management or closure plan?
7. Do any of the structures need maintenance or improvement?
8. Do any of the structures lack adequate markers as required by the permit? (Not applicablE
to roofed pits, dry stacks and/or wet stacks)
9. Does any part of the waste management system other than the waste structures require
maintenance or improvement?
Waste Application
10. Are there any required buffers, setbacks, or compliance alternatives that need
maintenance or improvement?
11. Is there evidence of incorrect application?
If yes, check the appropriate box below.
Excessive Ponding?
Hydraulic Overload?
Frozen Ground?
Heavy metals (Cu, Zn, etc)?
PAN?
Is PAN > 10%/10 lbs.?
Total Phosphorus?
Failure to incorporate manure/sludge into bare soil?
Outside of acceptable crop window?
Evidence of wind drift?
Application outside of application area?
Crop Type 1
Yes No NA NE
❑ • ❑ ❑
❑ • ❑ ❑
❑ • ❑ ❑
Yes No NA NE
❑ • ❑ ❑
❑ • ❑ ❑
❑ • ❑ ❑
❑ • ❑ ❑
Yes No NA NE
❑ • ❑ ❑
Corn (Silage)
Page 3 of 5

Permit: AWC440058
Inspection Date: 11/17/21
Owner: Peggy H Medford
Facility Number: 440058
Inspection Type: Compliance Inspection Reason for Visit: Routine
Waste Application
Crop Type 2
Crop Type 3
Crop Type 4
Crop Type 5
Crop Type 6
Soil Type 1
Soil Type 2
Soil Type 3
Soil Type 4
Soil Type 5
Soil Type 6
14. Do the receiving crops differ from those designated in the Certified Animal Waste
Management Plan(CAWMP)?
15. Does the receiving crop and/or land application site need improvement?
16. Did the facility fail to secure and/or operate per the irrigation design or wettable acre
determination?
17. Does the facility lack adequate acreage for land application?
18. Is there a lack of properly operating waste application equipment?
Records and Documents
19. Did the facility fail to have Certificate of Coverage and Permit readily available?
20. Does the facility fail to have all components of the CAWMP readily available?
If yes, check the appropriate box below.
WUP?
Checklists?
Design?
Maps?
Lease Agreements?
Other?
If Other, please specify
21. Does record keeping need improvement?
If yes, check the appropriate box below.
Waste Application?
Weekly Freeboard?
Waste Analysis?
Soil analysis?
Waste Transfers?
Weather code?
Rainfall?
Stocking?
Crop yields?
Yes No NA NE
Small Grain Cover
❑ • ❑ ❑
❑ • ❑ ❑
Yes No NA NE
❑ • ❑ ❑
❑• ❑ ❑
El
El
❑ • ❑ ❑
Page 4 of 5

Permit: AWC440058
Inspection Date: 11/17/21
Owner: Peggy H Medford
Facility Number: 440058
Inspection Type: Compliance Inspection Reason for Visit: Routine
Records and Documents
120 Minute inspections?
Monthly and 1" Rainfall Inspections
Sludge Survey
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 equipmen
(NPDES only)?
24. Did the facility fail to calibrate waste application equipment as required by the permit?
25. Is the facility out of compliance with permit conditions related to sludge? If yes, check the
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 phosphorous loss assessment (PLAT) certification?
Other Issues
28. Did the facility fail to properly dispose of dead animals within 24 hours and/or document
and report mortality rates that exceed normal rates?
29. At the time of the inspection did the facility pose an odor or air quality concern? If yes,
contact a regional Air Quality representative immediately.
30. Did the facility fail to notify regional DWQ of emergency situations as required by 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
If Other, please specify
32. Were any additional problems noted which cause non-compliance of the Permit or
CAW M P?
33. Did the Reviewer/Inspector fail to discuss review/inspection with on -site representative?
34. Does the facility require a follow-up visit by same agency?
Yes No NA NE
❑ • ❑ ❑
❑ • ❑ ❑
❑ • ❑ ❑
❑ • ❑ ❑
IEI
IEI
El
❑ • ❑ ❑
❑ • ❑ ❑
Yes No NA NE
❑ • ❑ ❑
❑ • ❑ ❑
❑ • ❑ ❑
❑ • ❑ ❑
❑ • ❑ ❑
❑ • ❑ ❑
❑ • ❑ ❑
Page 5 of 5

Facility Number
Cr,
Division of Water Resources
O 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: 0 Routine 0 Complaint 0 Follow-up 0 Referral 0 Emergency 0 Other 0 Denied Access
Date of Visit:
Farm Name:
Owner Name:
Mailing Address:
Physical Address:
Facility Contact:
ZtArrival Time: 0r40 4, _Departure Time: - `f } (j'44County:
ft�tt�ri
,�rd ati
(" d
�ci'c YVI P A
ava
ialltakZ-ac. kV -
Title: Phone•g^ y—t3" /s)—(3D
Integrator:
Onsite Representative:
Certified Operator:
Back-up Operator:
Location of Farm:
egion: "Re
Owner Email: r-C” [�/Vted ("Ve-1 0
Phone: 9213tea'/d — 3o czc_Iy
S2$-(o?7 6V-O4o
Latitude:
Certification Number:
Certification Number:
o35t4(JI
Longitude:
Sa6iCt5,'
CI
Swine
Design Current
Capacity Pop.
Wean to Finish
Wean to Feeder
Feeder to Finish
Farrow to Wean
Farrow to Feeder
Farrow to Finish
Gilts
Boars
Other
Other
Design Current
Wet Poultry Capacity Pop.
Layer
Non -Layer
Design Current
Dr Poultr Caaci P
Cattle
Design Current
Capacity Pop.
Dairy Cow
/so
75,
Dairy Calf
Dairy Heifer
Dry Cow
Non -Dairy
Beef Stocker
Beef Feeder
Beef Brood Cow
Discharges and Stream Impacts
1. Is any discharge observed from anypart 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 allo ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes gNo ❑ NA ❑ NE
Page 1 of 3
2/4/2015 Continued

Facility Number: 4CP - J
Date of Inspection: (if I'7 )24
Waste Collection & Treatment
4. Is storage capacity (structural plus storm storage plus heavy rainfall) less than adequate?
a. If yes, is waste level into the structural freeboard?
Arae 1 A i t 2 Structure 3 Structure 4
Identifies ./
Spillway?:
Designed Freeboard (in):
Observed Freeboard (in):
u
p
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?
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?
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)
❑ Yes
❑ Yes
21-No
g-No
❑ NA
❑ NA
D NE
❑ NE
9. Does any part of the waste management system other than the waste structures require ❑ NA ❑ NE
maintenance or improvement?
Waste Application
10. Are there any required buffers, setbacks, or compliance alternatives that need ❑ NA ❑ NE
maintenance or improvement?
11. Is there evidence of incorrect land application? If yes, check the appropriate box below. ❑ Yes El -No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Excessive Ponding ❑ Hydraulic Overload ❑ Frozen Ground ❑ Heavy Metals (Cu, Zn, etc.)
❑ PAN D 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): -;7j1n.¢614
13. Sail Type(s):
Sette
rot) h) e " C 61240 4%N-r L
r i L°-eo-) a a
l
14. Do the receiving crops differ from those desi nated in the CAWMP?
15. Does the receiving crop and/or land application site need improvement?
16. Did the facility fail to secure and/or operate per the irrigation design or wettable
acres determination?
17. Does the facility lack adequate acreage for land application?
18. Is there a lack of properly operating waste application equipment?
Required Records & Documents
19. Did the facility fail to have the Certificate of Coverage & Permit readily available?
20. Does the facility fail to have all components of the CAWMP readily available? If yes, check
the appropriate box.
❑WUP ❑Checklists ❑Design ❑Maps ❑ Lease Agreements
21. Does record keeping need improvement? If yes, check the appropriate box below.
❑ Waste Application 0 Weekly Freeboard ❑ Waste Analysis ❑ Soil Analysis
❑ Yes jNo ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes jJo ❑ NA ❑ NE
Structure 5 Structure 6
❑ Yes ttNo ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes FPNo ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ YesNo
❑ Yes
❑ Yes
❑ Yes
OzNo
Eg-Nc
❑ Yes [�No
❑ Yes 7:No
❑ Yes NtNo
❑ Yes SASo
Other:
❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ NA ❑NE
❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes [f'No ❑NA ❑NE
❑ 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 min gauge?
23. If selected, did the facility fail to install and maintain rainbreakers on irrigation equipment?
Page 2 of 3
❑ Sludge Survey
El Yes EI-No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes `/A No ❑ NA ❑ NE
2/4/2015 Continued
❑ Yes No

Facility Number: /Ftf - 6s
Date of Inspection: (I(67/24
24. Did the facility fail to calibrate waste application equipment as required by the permit?
25. Is the facility out of compliance with permit conditions related to sludge? If yes, check
the appropriate box(es) below.
❑ Failure to complete annual sludge survey
❑ Non -compliant sludge levels in any lagoon
List structure(s) and date of first survey indicating non-compliance:
❑ Yes %a ❑ NA
❑ Yes FI-No ❑ NA
['Failure to develop a POA for sludge levels
❑ NE
❑ NE
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
❑ Yes
❑ Yes 0-No
❑ Yes 18 No
❑ Yes grNo
❑ Yes IgNo
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
❑ Yes
❑ Yes
?No
®,No
RINo
❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ NA ❑NE
❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ NA ❑NE
❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ 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).
riiN. ` j1 Age Nat Ie Sia ei'ted 1ha.iCfc.,
CsLr1te ad d AietS pees '4' *Az- ios T>0-).J
d s`rn=-dz t- (1 a Ita 1,4 �o>`a ! 6 de 6^ 07
(go dG is fl-e' (,wart 61,5vate,
luttsit Axfrlyrt7
5P G .0-e-ho,/ ti 1d Go 1'33—!
rc idea''fu tcpdJc- Luv?I lb tiec,,) aOfatre-
�S P� c daa t figto ky At,eahave
4--f—k Glu,/,..T// peratdt roctlrea 4' kwr
rred
LUL-T) c luvef1w-v" h-a t c -. U
Reviewer/Inspector Name:
Reviewer/Inspector Signature:
Page 3 of 3
Phone:
Date:
67.2 - -4e2,6y
ti /iwzt
5/12/2020

Picture
I r'L )
4144
11/2
•
r
x
or
:_r
•
11'
a
Ss
lit ales j►
*Vs

1
* *
d 0
�r
tb <
LI
to
e* CD
CO a
> 0
g).‘
% LU
to 6
CL ass.
ef4.6
R*
frit sU
bilea c
n 0 3
Ds: 5- •
D e
E z
Ct. et ea"
3nw
3 urts
gi)03w
Cyr 3
a 0 0,)
o
...... . a
orb
age
Figs C rne. 0
0CS
cr Let. 9,
11 0
tun a 0
cat *
aci 14•:
elk 0 so.
C CD
3 0 o
2 Q
aaneufi!S s,aaunn0
esms
0 Win
0.
o -0
c
3 5-
...y 0
SI is
*• Vr
co
o
3 Zie
0
0
I
a
in
E
1111111111111
sit
0
0
0
0
-4
g
a)
•
Q)
3 at
CD
3
a a
N
0
aab
0
0
D
0
s
Q
0
0
D
'0'
0
Kit"
0
0
0 0
%f3
0
assi
0
0
co
N
o
w
1"
00
03
1V
ebb
00
CPI
.%
W
CO
CD
OD
N
0
0 O
ra: ED
� p
a crri
c0
CO
0
0
0)
1
to
r
0
Jest"
.J►
0
0
arni
0
•
2
m
amf
0
3
C
C
0 rN
9e cD
co a-0
cs; fir
m ao
0>
Z
## euoud SIJaU nO
0
z
N
0 r-
CD (0
0
r
3 r
impish €
er _Q
f
tri o
o a
fk
77
v0 8

ID BCD
74.
•••:76
sadc
selw
to
co c
reek a)
B roe
Ira
rma
emeli
0 0)
C
51 •
a o5
w sa
pint ‘a
3 nDa
U)
tig a a)
o
3 w.
' C co Q
a)
L
CtsC
Cise LTC ;10
Cal; a 0
Cat
CD
re;
•
so
3 la o
co
r C
a
o
o
at
a.
Mom.
3 5"
ernOs
,..a. 0
Y est en
gos
CD
a
CO
0 tD
0 in
3
CD �R
•
o iC
r
0
taa
a
0)
1
CD
mai
N
0
N
eel
Oat
0
0
c
CO
mak
0
Kis
0
0
0
0
Q
0
..i
0
N
0
tU
0
0
•
0
�
0
Cis
0
0
CO
0)
0)
eta
nia
NI
97;
CO
set
flaw
Ni)
0�
rC
0
CA)
■
co
0
-.t
•
f1
alsi
CO
etweei
CO
N
0
mis
CO
co
N
3 p
a cD
`4:5:1
eta ga
0
0
0
0)
c0
0
0
0
ar
o
o Ztdc
r Z
W co O
0 a)
VMS IP
0)
•
# euogd S,JOUMO
0
CD
0
CO
o Q.
0)0 o
.R..i
a
N
0
a �
C
CD
Dn.
LU
as 0
3 es
cars) is
( >
0
0
V
0
3
to
N
Q3 a
LI 3 o
CO Q IV
CD
CT a
sv 'v
>
(D Z
0
c{13
0 o
0
3 r
o �
rn
0) --
an 0
iDe.: 6.
v -77
gis
o x
u)
v a,
0 0
o
�v 0.
0.
c
3

Area._ M
reckcie r Ccd: Fallon
1.41
MQJ. 11'
VrzaQ.; 3'1, iislQafce-
eise,,y, to no Aka
assismeoesommilettileinign
- M
tea;
toe
_ _•raf.--_
:a1.aidsa-

i

am
mbwativ,
Aiterraw
A� +
asks r
=Ca