440058_ENFORCEMENTS_20171231

e�F WA'Fq
`off PG
� Y
November 30, 2004
CERTIFIED MAIL 7004 0750 0000 2589 9095
RETURN RECEIPT REQUESTED
Mr. Charles Medford
Frank D. Medford Farm
52 Joe Medford Road
Waynesville, North Carolina 28785
• Michael F. Easley, Governor
William G. Ross Jr., Secretary
North Carolina Department of Envirmn=t and Natural Resources
Subject: NOTICE OF VIOLATION
Compliance Inspection — Record Keeping - Freeboard Levels
Frank D. Medford Farm
Facility No. 44-58
Haywood County
Dear Mr. Medford:
Alan W. Klimek, P.E_ Director
Division of Water Quality
N
i
On November 15, 2004, Bev Price of the Division of Water Quality's Asheville Regional Office conducted a routine
compliance inspection of the waste handling system for the Frank D. Medford Farm. It was noted that the waste
pond freeboard levels were not being maintained. This is a violation of the General Permit #AWG200000 Section
(111 2.). The waste levels should be recorded on a weekly basis. Please respond to this office within 15 days of
receipt of this notice indicating what measures you have taken to address this violation.
If you have any questions concerning this matter, please do not hesitate to contact Ms. Bev Price at (828) 296-
4500.
Sincerely, ,_ __
G. Landon Davidson, P.G.
Regional Aquifer Protection Supervisor
cc: Rocky Durham DENR DWQ Mooresville Regional Office 610 E. Center Ave. Ste. 301 Mooresville, NC
28115
Aquifer Protection Section Central Files
Aquifer Protection Section Asheville Regional Office Files
T, Carolina
AWunzffy
North Carolina Division of Water Quality — Asheville Regional Office 2090 U.S. Higbw-ay 70 Suannanoa, NSC 28778 Phone [phone]
Aquifer Protection Section FAX [phone]
Customer Service 1-877-623-6748
Internet h2o.enrslate.naus
An Equal OpportunitylAffirmative Action Employer — 50% Recyded110% Post Consumer Paper

■ Complete items 1, 2, and 3. Also complete
A Si ature
I
I ite-"'cif Restricted Delivery is desired.._,
Er
Cl Agent
E■ Pi, our name and address on -the reverse
❑ Addressee
r so that we can return the card to yoa�� �� '
'K
'eceiv bll (Printed } C. Date of Delivery
■ Attach this card to the back•of'tFie mailpiece, r _
i
Y�
�7�0
or on the front if space perm,t �.
rC
elivery
OFFICIAL
Is delivery address different horn item 1?
If YES, enter delivery address below
❑ Yes
©Na
1. Article Addressed to: y O
k } cam►
CO
�
`
tel 1
' ul
Mt. Charles Medford
J
1 Frank D. Medford Fann
'O_ ra
I j 52 Joe Med Ford Road
-
ce Type
Wdynesvillr_, NC 23785 q
-- — — -� t
`Certified Mall ❑gess Mail
❑k I Dost erect Return Receipt for Merchancilse
Insured Mall ❑ G.O.D.
4. Restricted Delivery? (Fara Fee)
❑ Yes l
y
2. Article Number i
' (rrensfer'from sendce label 7004 j 0 7 5 0 11000 2589 9095
I
PS Form 3811, l= bruary 2004 Domestic Repan Receipt
102595-0¢4W-1540
t
_ -
Ln
CERTIFIED MAILT,.r
KtUtir I
Er
o
estic Mai! pnty;
fVo Insurance Coverage
Provided)
Er
information
visit our website at www.usps.com$
,
CO[
elivery
OFFICIAL
USE
I
ul
ru
Postage
10
.,
Return RacW Fee
Here
C3
TOW Postage & Few
$
M
Sails Y-0
r
or .O Box NM
52 J -e Medford Road
p5 Form 5600, .tune 2402
See Reverse
lar Instructions

• i
52 Joe MedSard Road
Wa BMVi*,- N.C- 28785 i
Phcme: [phone]
E -Mad: net
December 2, 2004 I C7)
G Landon Davidson, P -G. o
North Carolina Division of Water Quality --Asheville Regional Office
2090 U.S. Highway 70 -
Swannanoa, NC 28778-
1
Dear Mr- Davidson:
I have received the Notice of Violation sent to me by the DWQ. My waste pond fiveboard levels
have not been maintained because of the lack of a storage pond liquid marker which has never been
iLstalW by the proper authorities. Leslie Smathers of the Haywood County Soil & Wates
Conservation District has been notified of the violation and the lack of a marker.
This is not the first time I have been cited for the lack of a marker. I have redly asked for the
marker to be installed, but nothing has ever been done. Hopdiffly, the marker well be installed
soon, but obviously I cannot record freeboard levels without it.
C'"
Charles F Medford
Medford Dairy Farm

52 ,N. M� Road 1
wW=nille, N.C. 28795
Phone: [phone]
E-Maii:cshcmedfo nee
December 2, 2004
= .A►
G Landon Davidson, P.G.
North Carolina Division of Water Quality -Asheville Regional Office
2090 U.S. Highway 70
Swannanoa, NC 28778
Dear Mr. Davidson.
I have received the Notice of Violation sent to me by the DWQ. The failore to submit a waste
analyses was an oversight on my part. I generally try to do at least one per year but neglected to
do so this year.
I will try to complete the waste application records in the future (specifically the IRR -2 and SLD -2
forms). I am still trying to comprehend parts of the forms.
Sincerely
czk" � h2o,A
Charles F Medford
Medford Dairy

of W A rEq
❑ `C
• • Michael F. Easley, Governor
�� • �t. u 5k William G. Ross Jr., Secretary
North Carolina Department of Environment and Natural Resources
Alan W_ Klimek, P.E. Director
Division of Water Quality
Aquifer Protection Section
December 22, 2005
CERTIFIED MAIL 7004 0750 0000 2393 8503
RETURN RECEIPT REQUESTED
Mr. Charles Medford
Frank D. Medford Fane
52 Joe Medford Road
Waynesville, North Carolina 28785
Subject: NOTICE OF VIOLATION
Compliance Inspection - Record Keeping
Frank D. Medford Farm
Facility No. 44-58
Haywood County
Dear Mr. Medford:
On December 7, 2005, Beverly Price of the Division of Water Quality's Asheville Regional Office
conducted a routine compliance inspection of the waste handling system for the Frank D. Medford Farm.
The farm appeared to be well maintained but record keeping issues remain.
The inspection revealed no waste analyses have been collected so far in 2005. This is a violation of your
certified animal waste management plan and the General Permit #AWG200000 (Condition 111.5.). The
waste application records were not complete. Specifically, the IRR -2 and SLD -2 forms were not
completed and therefore did not include Plant Available Nitrogen (PAN) calculations. This is a violation
of General Permit #AWG200000 (Condition III -6.) Please respond to this office within 15 days of receipt
of this notice indicating what measures you have taken to address this violation.
As a reminder, the State General Permit revised and reissued in 2004 includes the following
documentation requirements: 1) weather conditions at time of application, 2) 120 minute spray irrigation
inspections, 3) rainfall events, 4) waste pond inspections after a greater than one inch rainfall and
monthly, 5) monthly stocking records, 6) calibration of waste application equipment. It is recommended
that you contact the Haywood County Soil & Water Conservation District for assistance with calibration of
waste application equipment.
t4"
Carolina
urldly
North Carolina Division of Water Quality — Asheville Regional Office 2090 U.S. Highway 70 Swarmanoa, NC 28776 Phone [phone]
Aguifct Protection Section FAX [phone]
Customer Service 1-877-623-6748
Internet h2o.enr.state.nc us
An Equal OpportundylAffumative Action Employer— 50% Regcled/10% Post Consumer Paper

Mr. Medford
December 22, 2005
Page 2
If you have any questions concerning this matter, please do not hesitate to contact Ms. Beverly Price at
[phone].
Sincere_y,-
11
J
G. Landon Da idson, P.G.
Regional Aquifer Protection Supervisor
cc: DENR Division of Soil & Water Mooresville Regional office 610 E. Center Ave. Ste. 301
Mooresville, NC 28115
Aquifer Protection Section Central Files
. r
■ C' ,-Tete items 1, 2, and 3. Also complete k
itb... 4 if Restricted Delivery is desired. ❑ Age
■ Print your name and address on the reverse X T%4 ❑ Addressee
so that we Can return the card Ao you. B. Received by (Prfnted N C. Date of Delivery
■ Attach this card to the back of the mallpiece, _ Z3 _O
or on the front if space permits.
1, ARicte Addressed to: D. is delivery address different from item 1? ❑ Yes
It YES, enter derivery address below: ❑ No
Chanes Medfnra
+=;,,nk D. t4edfafd Fay:
`
'ye M,dfuld
^f:ryQ�viIMJCf-i...l
DEC 2 8 2005
I
k r
2. iRrticte
r{7iarrslar Bari service labeQ "` J 7004
I
3. Service Type
3 Certified Mall ❑ FVaess Mail
❑ Registered ® Return Receipt for Merchandise $
❑Ansured Mall ❑ C.O.D. F
4. Restricted Delivery? (Fxha Fee) ❑ .Yes
750 000
PS Form 3811, February 2004 Domestic Return Receipt
2591:8503
""n
,o
P
Here
102595 -M -WI M
oLn
,, mes-tic 44ail Only;
No insurance Cow
CO
rn
u7
ru
Fosterer°
:CA]dW
$
CI
Fee
Ct
C7
Return Redept Fee
Ct
(Endmoront Required)
C]
R(ErJorrswient
Lrl
RequhQ
rte
En`
TOtal Postage & F.
�
To
-
Cr.arles Medfar.�
L�
r�-
-
ireeF lips r
Fr anti i). w.e&ovl Farr!
¢ JOE M."PCM Rr"'J
or PO am Na
.;.jYne;villP, fiC 7.9795
ClAi. �'fsfB. ZIP►j
""n
,o
P
Here

Division of Water Quality
❑ Division of Soil and Water Conservation
❑ Other Agency
Facility Number: 440058 Facility Status: Active Permit: AWC44 058 ❑ Denied Access
Inspection Type: Compliance Ins ecti n Inactive or Closed Date:
Reason for Visit: Routine County: Haywood Region: Asheville
Date of Visit: 12/07/2005 Entry Time: 09:00 AM Exit Time: Incident #:
Fan'n Name: Frank D. Medford Firm Owner Email:
Owner: Frank D Medford
Phone: 82"27-6766
Mailing Address: 52 Joe Nl2gford lid Waynesville NC 257866420
Physical Address:
Facility Status: ❑ Compliant ❑ Not Compliant
Location of Farm:
3 miles north of 1-40 on Ironduff Road
Integrator.
Latitude: 35°35'42" _ Longitude: $2''8'30"
Question Areas:
Discharges & Stream Impacts Waste Collection & Treatment Waste Application
Records and Documents Other issues
Certified Operator: Charles F Medford
Secondary OIC(s):
On -Site Representative(s): Name
Operator Certification Number: 21353
Title
Phone
Primary Inspector: Beverly Pri Prone:
n -
Inspector Signature: 10,U Date:
Secondary Inspector(s):
Page: 1

Permit: A1fVC440058
0.
Owner - Facility: Frank D Medford
U
Facility Number: 440058
Inspection Date: 12107/2005 inspection Type. Compliance Inspection Reason for Visit: Routine
Inspection Summary:
Soils Analysis: 416105
8. Maximum liquid level on waste pond marker -needs to be verified.
21. Record keeping issues: 1) Waste application - IRR -1 & SLD -1 fomes completed but IRR -2 & SLD -2 forms are not completed and
PAN balances are not calculated. 2) 124 minute spray irrigation inspections need to be documented, 3) weather conditions at time of
application need to be documented, 4) Freeboard - maximum liquid level needs to be verified, 5) Rainfall needs to be documented, 6)
waste pond inspections after a greater than one inch rainfall & monthly require documentation, 7) Waste Analyses - none taken so far
in 2005, 8) stocking records - required monthly.
22. Rain gauge needs to be installed
24. Waste application needs calibration.
Haywood SWCD is updating waste plan. '
NOV to follow for missing waste analyses and incomplete waste application retards.
Page: 2

Permit AWC440058 Owner- Facility: Frank D Medford Facility Number: 444058
Inspection Date: 1210712005 Inspection Type: Compliance Inspection Reason for Visit: Routine
Regulated Operations Design Capacity Current Population
Cattle
Cattle - Milk Cow 130 105
Total Design Capacity: 130
Total SSLW: 182,000
Waste Structures
Type ldenttfier Closed Date Start Date Designed Freeboard Observed Freeboard
kaste Pond WSP 49.00
ket Stade WET STACK
Page: 3

0
•
Permit AWC440068 Owner - Facility: Frank D Medford Facility Number. 4.40058
Inspection Date: 1210712005 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? ❑ ■ ❑ Cl
Discharge originated at:
Structure n
Application Field ❑
Other ❑
a. Was conveyance man-made? Cl ❑ ■ ❑
b. Did discharge reach Waters of the State? (if yes, notify DWQ) fl Cl ■ ❑
c. Estimated volume reaching surface waters?
0 ■
❑
❑
8. Do any of the structures lack adequate markers as required by the permit? (Not applicable to roofed pits,
d. Does discharge bypass the waste management system? (if yes, notify DWQ)
❑
i-1
■
❑
2_ is there evidence of a past discharge from any part of the operation?
❑
■
❑
11
3. Were there any adverse impacts or potential adverse impacts to Waters of the State other than from a
n
■
❑
❑
discharge?
Yes No
NA
NE
10. Are there any required buffers, setbacks, or compliance alternatives that need maintenance or
Waste Collection, Stora a & Treatment Yes
No
NA
NE
4. Is storage capacity less than adequate?.
❑
■
❑
❑
If yes, is waste level into structural freeboard?
I1
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?
0 ■
❑
❑
8. Do any of the structures lack adequate markers as required by the permit? (Not applicable to roofed pits,
■ ❑
❑
❑
dry stacks and/or wet stacks)
9. Does any part of the waste management system other than the waste structures require maintenance or
❑ ■
❑
❑
improvement?
Waste Application
Yes No
NA
NE
10. Are there any required buffers, setbacks, or compliance alternatives that need maintenance or
❑ ■
❑
❑
improvement?
11. Is there evidence of incorrect application? ❑ ■ ❑ ❑
If yes, check the appropriate box below.
Excessive Ponding? 0
Hydraulic Overload? ❑
Frozen Ground? n
Heavy metals (Cu, Zn, etc)? ❑
Page: 4

Permit AVVC440058 Owner - Facility: Frank D Medford
Inspection Date: 12107/2005' Inspection Type: Compliance Inspection
Waste Application
PAN?
Is PAN > 100/o/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
Crop Type 2
Facility Number: 440058
Reason for Visit: Routine
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 andlor 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 appficaiion 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?
Yes No NA NE
11
El
El
❑
❑
❑
❑
Corn (Silage)
Small Grain (Wheal,
Barley, Oats)
Fescue (Hay. Pasture)
❑■1111
❑ ■ ❑ ❑
n■n❑
❑■1111
Yes No NA NE
❑■❑11
❑ ■ ❑ ❑
X
Page: 5

i • .
Permit: AWC440058 Owner - Facility: Frank D Medford Facility Number: 440058
Inspection Date: 12/0712005 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?
IN
Weather code?
■
Weekly Freeboard?
❑
Transfers?
0
Rainfall?
■
Inspections after > 1 inch rainfall 8 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)? ❑ ❑ IN ❑
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?
❑
❑
IN
❑
26. Did the facility fait to have an actively certified operator in charge?
❑
■
❑
❑
27. Did the facility fail to secure a phosphorous loss assessment (PLAT) certification?
❑
❑
■
❑
Other Issues
Yes
No
NA
NE
28. Were any additional problems noted which cause non-compliance of the Permit or CAWMP?
❑
■
❑
fi
29. Did the facility fail to properly dispose of dead animals within 24 hours and/or document and report those ❑ ■ ❑ ❑
mortality rates that exceed normal rates?
30. At the time of the inspection did the facility pose an air quality concern? If yes, contact a regional Air ❑ ■ i❑ D
Quality representative immediately.
Page: 6

r
Permit: AVVC440056 Owner - Facility: Frank D Medford
Inspection Date: 1M7/2005 Inspection Type: Compliance Inspection
Other Issues
31 _ Did the facility fail to notify regional DWQ of emergency situations as required by Permit?
32. Did Reviewer/Inspector fail to discuss reviewrinspection with on-site representative?
33. Does facility require a follow-up visit by'same agency?
Facility Number: 440056
Reason for Visit: Routine
Yes No NA NE
Page: 7

State of North Car lina
Department of Environment
and Natural Resources
Asheville Regional office A410
00-%
Michael F. Easley, Governor NCDENR
William G. Ross, Jr., Secretary
Alan Klimek, P . E . , Director Nofr,,, C-mRow , ^ oar cw
Division of Water Quality E11MRONMEt4rAND NOWLP"L RE;5�
WATER QUALITY SECTION
October 9, 2002
Mr, Charlie Medford
247 Medford Lane
Waynesville, North Carolina 28786
Subject: NOTICE OF DEFECIENCY
Animal Operation Inspection
Frank D. Medford Farm 44-58
Haywood County
Dear Mr. Medford:
Please find attached a printed copy of the Inspection Report for the inspection, which I
conducted at your dairy for the 2002 inspection year.
During the Inspection, it was noted that a liquid level marker still had not been installed in
your waste pond_ It is my understanding that staff from the Haywood Soil & Water Office is to install
the marker this month. I will re -inspect your dairy in November to check on the status of the marker.
A review of your records on October 8, 2002 found them to be in good order. Keep up the
good work!
Your assistance provided during my inspection was greatly appreciated. If you have any
questions, please do not hesitate to contact me at 251-6208.
Sincerel
Keith Haynes
Environmental Specialist
Enclosure
xc: Haywood Soil & Water Office

(Type of Visit O Compliance Inspection O Operation Review O Lagoon Evaluation
Reason for {unit Q Routine O Complaint O Follow up O Emergency Notification O Other ❑ Denied Access
Facility Number IA 5$ Date of vssir 9/17RDQ2 Time: 13aU
1 10 Not Operational Q Below Threshold
® Permitted M Certif' ted U Conditionally Certified j3 Registered Date Last Operated or Above Threshold-
Farm Nam : Eraak D- MeftrdJE County:
Owner Name: Frank D_ Medforid -----, .. _ _ __ Phone No: ($28 67 -6766----
Mat7ing Address: 155 doe Medford RmW Wer=exviile Nc
Facility Contact: ___.. Title:._......_._...._ ----------- ... — Phone No:
Onsite Representative: Charlie.Mafard...................... _----___ . Integrator.
Certified Operator. CkadCLL ._.,....-_.._,._„.._... Meffard Operator Certification Number: 213M
Location of Farm:
3 miles north of 140 on lronduff Road
❑ Swine ❑ Poultry ® Cattle ❑ Horse Latitude 35 • 35 32 Longitude F s2--1* ®�
❑ Ween to Feeder
❑ Feeder to Finish
❑ Farrow to Wean
❑ Farrow to Feeder
❑ FwTow to Finish
❑ Gilts
❑ soars
Discharges & Stream Impacts
I . Is any discharge observed from any part of the operation?
© Yes 59 No
Discharge originated at: ❑ Lagoon C Spray Field ❑ Other
a. If discharge is observed, was the conveyance man-made? ❑ Yes ONO
b. If discharge is observed, did it reach Water of the State? (If yes, notify DWQ) ❑ Yes Cl No
c. If discharge is observed, what is the estimated flow in galimin?
d. Does discharge bypass a lagoon system? (If yes, notify DWQ) ❑ Yes ❑ No
2. Is there evidence of past discharge fi-om any part of the operation? Cl Yes ® No
3. Were there any adverse impacts or potcatial 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 Z No
Structure i Strucnue 2 Structure 3 Structure 4 Stsvcttme 5 Structure 6
Identifier. ... 3Ma= Bans.
Freeboard (inches):
O-VO3/01 Ca dnued

Facility Number: 44-58 • Date of Inspection 9/17/2002
5. Are there any immediate threats to the integrity of any of the structures observed? Oct trees, severe erosion, ❑ Yes ® No
seepage, etc.)
6. Are there structures on-site which are not property addressed and/or managed through a waste management or
closuretan?
p (If any of questions 4.6 was answered yes, and the situation poses an Yes ® No
immediate public health or environmental threat, notify DWQ)
T Do any of the structures treed maintenancelimprowment? ❑ Yes ® No
S. Does any part of the waste management system other than waste structures require main te uncefimpmvement? ❑ Yes [@ No
9. Do any stuctures lack adequate, gauged markers with required mwdmum and minimum liquid level
elevation marlangs? Yes [ No
Waste Application
10. Are there any buffers that need maintenance/fmprovement? ❑ Yes ® No
11. Is there evidence of over application? ❑ Excessive Ponding ❑ PAN ❑ Hydraulic Overload ❑ Yes M'No
12. Crop type Corn (Silage & Grain) Small Grain (Wheat, Barley,
Milo. a
13. Do the receiving crops differ with those designated in the Certified Animal Waste Management Plan (CAWMP)? (3 Yes 0 No
14. a) Does the facility lack adequate acreage for land application? ❑ Yes 0 No
b) Does the facility need a wettable acre determination? ❑ Yes ® No
c) This facility is pended for a wettable acre determination? ❑ Yes H No
15. Does the receiving crop need improvement? ❑ Yes IN No
16. Is there a lack of adequate waste application equipment?
❑ Yes
0 No
Required Records & Documents
vz � , 4 �
', }V- i i'i. `�s}.i,.l:tr 2}2 }:- �:�-v H} ti: },^.,[�� { 'Li],vi�..2}.i,l,i,.=', •y:'v}> ?.l,>.r•l-
e waste pond still does nat have a Ievel marker. Records were not evaluated during this visit as Mr_ Medford was in the process of cutting
IT Fail to have Certificate of Coverage & General Permit or other Permit readily available?
❑ Yes
N No
18. Does the facility fail to have all components of the Certified Animal Waste Management Plan readily available?
The dry stack level was about 30 inches from the top of the wall.
(ie/ WUP, checklists, design, maps, etc.)
❑ Yes
iK No
19. Does record keeping need improvement? (id irrigation, fieeboard, 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
CM 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 reviewfmspection with on-site representative?
❑ Yes
®No
24. Does facility require a follow-up visit by same agency?
Yes
❑ No
25. Were any additional problems noted which cause noncompliance of the Certified AWMP?
❑ Yes
® No
113 No violations or deficiencies were Doted during this visit. You will receive no further correspondence about this visit.
- -
ud4 }i`itr`.$+4:c^.:::L`.LitYiEn
$se #e`.lfgz
� ❑ FicId Copy [� Proal Nates
vz � , 4 �
', }V- i i'i. `�s}.i,.l:tr 2}2 }:- �:�-v H} ti: },^.,[�� { 'Li],vi�..2}.i,l,i,.=', •y:'v}> ?.l,>.r•l-
e waste pond still does nat have a Ievel marker. Records were not evaluated during this visit as Mr_ Medford was in the process of cutting
corn. A follow-up visit will be scheduled in October 2002 to check the records. A liquid level marker is scheduled to be installed within the
ext two weeks, this will also be checked during the follow-up visit. Otherwise, the facility aoppeared to be well maintained and operated.
The dry stack level was about 30 inches from the top of the wall.
v:?1:L'.,t:• ,,::}): .{}'::;:'.>" ::::'c</.-: "'k}::::}„` 6:::t.yp� `.La. t::R:EJL7,'..�•;}:,,t..,
f
ewerMspector Name
E
ewer/inspector Signature: Date;
05/03/01 Continued

i
State of North Carolina
Department of Environment
and Natural Resources
Asheville Regional office
Michael F. Easley, Governor NCDENFI
William G. Ross, Jr., Secretary
Gregory J. Thorpe, Ph.D. , Acting Director NORTH CARCUNA DERARTMEWr OF
Division of Water Quality ENVIRONMENT AND NA3-URAL RF-soURCES
WATER QUALITY SECTION
November 13, 2001
Mr. Charlie Medford
247 Medford Lane
Waynesville, North Carolina 28786
Subject: NOTICE OF DEFECIENCY
Animal Operation Inspection
Frank D. Medford Farm 44-58
Haywood County
Dear Mr. Medford:
Please find attached a printed copy of the Inspection Report for the inspection, which
conducted at your dairy for the 2001 inspection year.
Note that a level marker should be installed in your waste pond. It is suggested that you
contact the Haywood Soil & Water Office if you need assistance.
Your assistance provided during my inspection was greatly appreciated. If you have any
questions, please do not hesitate to contact me at 251-6208.
g&��
Environmental Specialist
Enclosure
xc: Haywood Soil & Water Office

r
Type of Visit OO Compliance Inspection O Operation Review O Lagoon Evaluation
Reason for Visit O Routine O Complaint O Follow up O Emergency Notification O Other ❑ Denied Access
Facility Number
Date of Visit: 6/14/2001 Time: 11:15 Printed on: 11/9/2001
44 58
Not
Operational Q Below Threshold
® Permitted ® Certified © Conditionally Certified 0 Registered Date Last Operated or Above Threshold: ............
Farm Name: li.[g,Als%.Mt~dfQxd..FairM..... ..................... ..... _..................................... County: Uay&QQd........................... ...... ..... .. ARQ............
Owner Name: Frau1C.D.............................. -- Medford ......................................... _.......... Phone No: (,$2.8k.627-_6739_ ... ........... ............... _.......... .........
yIailing Address: 2 7.. hax.Iit~.k!f�dford..aQ�...••............._......•_......................_....... Way -tic .vd�.lY.-.-..............................._.............._ 2.87-M..............
Facility Contact: 1wX1adic.McdfS!]Cd.......................................... Title: ..................................... ........................... Phone No: ._.................. ..........................
Onsite Representative: CbLarjjgMedfvr.d........................................................... Integrator: ............. ............................................. ..................... .....
Certified Operator:.healrigs.................................. Upd.g.rid.......................................... Operator Certification Number: 2X353 .............. ..............
Location of Farm:
3 miles north of 1-40 on lronduff Road +
❑ Swine []Poultry ® Cattle ❑ Horse Latitude 35 • 35 42 Longitude 82 • 58 30
Design Current
Swine Canacitv Ponulation
❑ Wean to Feeder
❑ Feeder to Finish
❑ Farrow to Wean
❑ Farrow to Feeder
❑ Farrow to Finish
❑ Gilts
❑ Soars
Design Current Design Current
Poultry Capacity PopulationCattle Capacity Population
❑ Layer IN Dairy 130 120
❑ Non -Layer JE3 Non -Dairy
4 ,
❑ Other
Total Design Capacity .130
Total SSLW 182,000
Number of Lagoons 10 Subsurface Drains Present ❑ Lagoon Area ID Spray Field Area
Midi ng Pgiads 1 Solid Traps ❑ No Liquid Waste Management System
Discharges & Stream Impacts
1. Is any discharge observed from any part of the operation? ❑ Yes ® No
Discharge originated at: ❑ Lagoon ❑ Spray Field ❑ Other
a. If discharge is observed, was the conveyance roan -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 gaUmin?
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 Stricture 5 Structure 6
Identifier: .......wastc..pand...... ........ &Y -stack ........ ..............
Freeboard (inches): 60 48
05/03/01 Continued

Facility Number. 44-58 • Date of Inspection 611 412 0 0 1 Printed on.• 1319/2001
5. Are there any immediate threats to the integrity of any of the structures observed? (ie/ trees, severe erosion,
seepage, etc.)
6. Are there structures on-site which are not properly addressed and/or managed through a waste management or
closure plan?
(If any of questions 4-6 was answered yes, and the situation poses an
immediate public health or environmental threat. notify DWQ)
7. Do any of the structures need maintenance/improvement?
8. Does any part of the waste management system other than waste structures require maintenance/improvement?
9- Do any stuctures lack adequate, gauged markers with required maximum and minimutn liquid level
elevation markings?
Waste ADDlication
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes ®No
® Yes ❑ No
10. Are there anv 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,
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 N 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
Reviewer/Inspector Name D th Baynes _' :.TM r:
, _ _
17.
Fail to have Certificate of Coverage & General Permit or other Permit readily available?
❑ Yes
®No
I&
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 irnprovement? (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 Petnmit?
(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
10 No violations or deficiencies were noted during this visit. You will receive no further correspondence about this visit.
Cormm�entsr{referto iun}IE�`zplamn y YESatuwessamf^}recorr,ndatlons o�arro#Tier eons y
Qwince g�t�aciltiy to']te#er�n sttnia#toats: {vseadd�tho�pages as-nece�cs�.�� ❑ Field Copy ❑Final Notes
The waste pond is still lacking a liquid level marker. There is not a CAWMP on site. This should be provided by the local Soil & Water
ffice. Records are in good order with the exception of field records. The facility appears to be well maintained and operated
Reviewer/Inspector Name D th Baynes _' :.TM r:
, _ _
Reviewer/Inspector Signature: Date: q. 6
05103101 Continued

s
NORTH CAROLINA DEPARTMENT OF
ENVIRONMENT AND NATURAL RESOURCES
�D�IIVISION OF WATER QUALITY
WATER QUALITY SECTIHEVILLE REGIONAL OFFICE
November 13, 2000
Mr. Charlie Medford
247 Medford Lane
Waynesville, North Carolina 28786
Subject: NOTICE OF DEFECIENCY
Animal Operation Inspection
Frank D. Medford Farm 49--58
Haywood County
Dear Mr. Medford:
Please find attached a printed copy of the Inspection
Report for the inspection which I conducted at your dairy
on October 17, 2000.
Note that a level marker should be installed in your
waste pond. It is suggested that you contact the Haywood
Soil & Water Office if you need assistance. If you have any
questions, please do not hesitate to contact me at 251-6208.
Sincerely,
Keith Ha e`
Y� s
Environmental Specialist
xc: Haywood Soil & Water Office
INTERCHANGE BUILDING, 59 WOOOFIN PLACE, ASHEVILLE, NORTH CAROLINA 28801-24t4
PHONE [phone] FAX [phone]
AN EQUAL bPP'ORTUNITY / AFFIRMATIVE ACTION EMPLOYER - 50% RECYCLEa/109I r03T-CONSUMER PAPER

P
Type of Visit O• Compliance Inspection O Operation Review O Lagoon Evaluation
Reason for Visit - OO Routine O Complaint O Follaw up O Emergency Notification O Other ❑ Denied Access
Facility Number 44 5t3 Date of visit—Wi—mo- Time: 1000 Printed on: i mm000
Q Not Operational O Below Threshold
Li Permitted 0 Certified 13Conditionally Certified Q Registered Daft Last Operated or Above Threshold:
Farm Name: Frank n Medford Fann....—_...County:
Owner Name: Frank 11. _ - -- --- -. 111�slfsi!ird ------ - -W _ � � ._ Phone No: O2$1A27=6732.
Facility Contact: _ ^ _ _._.._. _. _ _ _ Title:....W_ W._W......_...... _ ....._ ... Phone No:
Mailing Address: Z42.Char11eD1ttlfar�di�aAte... .___... _ _._ attn axlW��i _ _ ..._....._ .._. _ 278x .... ...... ...
Onsite Representative:
Certified Operator: C>bad „t. .. _._.W..._........ hicilfu[d.................. .............. Operator Certification Number: 2L _...._...... _.....
Location of Farm:
3 miles north of I40 on IrondafiRoad a►
w
❑ Swine ❑ Poultry ® Cattle ❑ Horse Latitude 35 *F 35 Longitude $2 • 58 30 K
Discharges & Stream Impacts
I . Is any discharge observed from any part of the operation? ❑ Yes 19 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 gaUmin?
d. Does discharge bypass a Iagoon system? (If yes. notify DWI) ❑ 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 H No
Waste Collection & Treatment
4. Is storage capacity (freeboard plus storm storage) less than adequate? ❑ Spillway ❑ Yes ® No
Structure 1 Structure 2 Structure 3 Structure 4 Structure 5 Structure 6
Identifier: wasW.pttad...-.. dxy.sitarl�._....................... ---....... _. _. ...............
...... .........
Freeboard(inches):....»....faLk............... ............... 48.....w. _._......................... ..... ...... .._........... ........... ............. _ ......... ...._ .» ..... » . ....._
a

Facility Number. 4t—s8 t• . Date of Inspection 1Q117/2QQQ
Printed on: 102020Q0
5. Are there any immediate threats to the integrity of any of the strucm es observed? (iej tvs, severe erosion,
❑ Yes M No
seepage, etc-)
6. Are there structures on-site which are not properly addressed and/or managed through a waste management or
closure pian? ❑ Yes H No
(If any of questions 44 was answered yes, and the situation poses an
immediate public health or enviroumentai threat, notify DWt)
7. Do any of the structures need mamtcnan nnproveme it?
8. Does any part of the waste management system other than waste structures require maintenancehmprovement?
9. Do any stuctur -s lack adequate, gauged markers with required maximum and minimum liquid level
elevation markings?
Waste Avafication
10. Are there any buffers that need maintenancehmprovement?
11. Is there evidence of over application? ❑ Excessive Ponding ❑ PAN ❑ Hydraulic Overload
12. Crop type Corn (Silage & Grain) Small Grain (Wheat, Barley,
MHO, Oars
13. Do the receiving crops differ with those designated in the Certified Animal Waste Management Pian (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?
Recjaired 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/ W1UP, checklists, design, maps, etc.)
19. Does record keeping need improvement? (ie/ irrigation, fi eeboard, 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 reviewhmspection 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 AWMI'?
❑ Yes 0 No
❑ Yes ® No
Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes ®No
❑ Yes 0 No
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes H No
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes ® No
0 Yes ® No
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes CK No
Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes H No
❑ Yes H No
❑ Yes CK No
❑ Yes N No
❑ Yes 0 No
��V' Y���iAt33: Rr.��+CiCRG�S• �'�: Rate�:d�l�g �� •�iSi�:: Y4U �.rf✓Ceiv� ,oP �rj�et'
Co ; • - "dencb about this -visit.' -
}� C.
rpC°.*p,^
�}��? �„`. � Uk.�::r
W:� ,..�..,-...�...Yr... -� :., sct"in..�24r. Yy"t %}� h,•`tc-`:: 2`�`:
The waste pond needs a level marker. The local Soil & Water Office should provide assistmice in the installation of the marker. The
+
WMT needs to be obtained Brom the Soil & Water Office also. Record keeping is minimal, assistance should be provided by the S&W
Office. The facility appeared to be well maimained and operated.
ft :}}i}}p.+F*' t}%3}}:-i};Sx::-_vr,-�}rv. w.-.w.vyrw.�_}N:P: x}u }•.y:},:-. ::4:.Y.x-'..U•.i.-.'m?y3'w ^:^C+yr:.r..Y::
•.fi,.c.-r....ac,:: ..v..c�. vr::-:;•:.v _,..3{o: �1 w-. - :-rt:-:: wu'.%''a`s'':x �:�ao :n'>..fi"-�^}x:c:.. c-:-�... :'•:,-...:..-rr. =.�:;.:` .:;µet:
RevieerlIns r Name <: .,.:.u�:: ..&�i ` fr L:.:: - �'�.i.''ax'-.cit:,+:rnr < rv.m.✓rv.xr tm�•r,:. ''"urn, -t. ..%^::x.. ..'`
gvw : e:•
,..v�
ReveewerMspedor Signature: Date: - • 0 0_ Vpp