970027_INSPECTIONS_20171231

Type of Visit: W Compliance Inspection Q Operation Review O Structure Evaluation Q Technical Assistance
Reason for Visit.( /Routine 0 Complaint 0 Follow-up 0 Referral 0 Emergency 0 Other 0 Denied Access
Date of Visit: �� (Arrival Time: Departure Time: County: _ 1
Farm Name; �Qia S pp_� �{tS Owner Email:
0
Owner Name: bon S aL--�_F k S Phone:
Mailing Address: ate- J J
Physical Address: &0(2g� 5 k0Q 4
Facility Contact: Ln d 1(0.,r! Title: Phone: t1 6 oZ % — g 9 7
Onsite Representative: Integrator;
Certified Operator: Certification Number:
Back-up Operator: Certification Number:
Location of Farm: Latitude: Longitude:
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)?
Region: LOS P-0
[:]Yes WNo ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes ❑ No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes ❑ No ❑ NA ❑ NE
d. Does the discharge bypass the waste management system? (If yes, notify DWQ) U Yes "No U NA U NE
2. Is there evidence of a past discharge from any part of the operation? ❑ Yes P;rNo ❑ NA ❑ NE
3. Were there any observable adverse impacts or potential adverse impacts to the waters ❑ Yes o ❑ NA ❑ NE
of the State other than from a discharge? �
Page I of 3 21412011 Continued

Facili Number: - . Date of Inspection: jZ1 IdAi6
Waste Collection & Treatment
4. Is storage capacity (structural plus storm storage plus heavy rainfall) less than adequate? ❑ Yes No ❑ NA ❑ NE
a. If yes, is waste level into the structural freeboard? ❑ Yes No ❑ NA ❑ NE
Structure I Structure 2 Structure 3 Structure 4 Structure 5 Structure 6
Identifier: 4&CL
Spillway?: Fyt ll'�' 1M{1cS-r
Designed Freeboard (in):
Observed Freeboard (in):
5. Are there any immediate threats to the integrity of any of the structures observed? ❑ Yes 6 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 0 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 No ❑ NA ❑ NE
maintenance or improvement?
Waste Application
10. Are there any required buffers, setbacks, or compliance alternatives that need ❑ Yes 0 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):
13. Soil Type(s):
14. Do the receiving crops differ from those designated in the CAWMP?
0 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 h�No ❑ NA ❑ NE
20. Does the faciVbx,
to have all components of the CAWMP readily available? If yes, check 0yes L] No ❑ NA ❑ NE
the appropriaP ❑Checklists ❑ Design ❑ Maps ❑ Lease Agreements []Other.
21. oes record keeping need improvement? 1fYe , ❑ Yes No ❑ NA ❑ NE
Waste Applicat' nee— aste Analysisroonthly
;;5Analysis a s6� eather Code
�ainfall Stocking rop Yield ❑ 120 Minute Inspections and V Rainfall Inspections udge-&�ruey-
22. Did the facility fail to install and maintain a rain gauge? ❑ Yes �To ❑ NA ❑ NE
23. If selected, did the facility fail to install and maintain rainbreakers on irrigation equipment? ❑ Yes ❑ No ,gi`NA ❑ NE
Page 2 of 3 21412011 Continued

Facilit Number: 19 Date of Inspection: Q
24, Did the facility fail to calibrate waste appliCdtion equipment as required by the permit? ❑ Yes b� ❑ 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. 7�
❑ Failure to complete annual sludge survey ❑Failure to develop a POA for sludge levels
❑ Non -compliant sludge levels in any lagoon
List structure(s) and date of first survey indicating non-compliance:
26, Did the facility fail provide documentation of an actively certified operator in charge? ❑ Yes No ❑ NA ❑ NE
27, Did the facility fail to secure a phosphorus loss assessments (PLAT) certification? ❑ Yes jam' No ❑ NA ❑ NE
Other Issues 77TT
28. Did the facility fail to properly dispose of dead animals with 24 hours and/or document ❑ Yes �No ❑NA ❑ NE
and report mortality rates that were higher than normal?�[
29. At the time of the inspection did the facility pose an odor or air quality concern? ❑ Yes fR 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
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 j No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes No ❑ 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`p
Use, drawings of facility to. better explain situations (use additionalpages; as,neces.sary). ' h �•_ `; ;�.:"
&LA-P LAI-) �6 •
U-)1,P -7
Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes No
❑ Yes No
�66(ol_3
—3 —7 F-- i [ , 7 , 1 01 13lr -- 4 ;1,3 F
zu "[� / w u P
I ,
as�� onl
�
/ !% 11 i .4r 1 AA 4.� O /A/ t
Reviewer/Inspector Name:
Reviewer/Inspector Signature:
Page 3 of 3
Phone:
Date: I ,I/ 61 a l 1
21412011

�..�'�a
Facillty,Number 0` w�s�on�of onser Suilland�Water�Cvat�an�' �,`� ��`�
00�¢ ,
yOthcgency,
& rAz L rY4k tk Rikt 7
Type of Visit XCompliance Inspection 0 Operation Review 0 Structure Evaluation Q Technical Assistance
Reason for Visit Routine 0 Complaint 0 Follow up 0 Referral 0 Emergency 0 Other [I Denied Access
Date of Visit: ja j (? Arrival Time: Departure Time: County: W Region: W�17
Farm Name: a h S Mr KS Owner Email:
Owner Name; �jQA 5Lai __. ___. f Phone: y
Mailing Address: IS12— TBQla►1• ' iOLb►as d. Rtso'( na l�Ne>r,N G 2gGld�
Physical Address: 6+S Beau
Facility Contact: dlOrl SP0.rki Title: Phone No!'J 927 2— 1
Soar � r
Onsite Representative: o DA Integrator:
oA Sparks
Certified Operator: Operator Certification Number:
Back-up Operator:
Back-up Certification Number:
Location of Farm: Latitude: 0 01-1-40 1 [E if Longitude: M o ®i . ® «
�Iw� �ZI Nei Gl � Ra EWI . -rKrn &o w� 2-40? In1, -4 W d1kv
TwtA rr ��. w 3 en1fef +vrm rr !- o►�, -%�n l �d.., r,1401 N ��l ,,
Design , Ciirrentx� x,
Swtne; Calsacty,'Population
Wet I
a
❑ Wean to Finish
❑ La er
.
❑Wean to Feeder
❑Non -I
ElFeeder to Finish
❑ Farrow to Wean''
❑ Farrow to Feeder
❑ La
El Farrow to Finish
ye
❑ Non -I
❑ Gilts'
❑ Boars
❑Pullet
,_ -_ —
- wRk,.. �, g..
Other' k'��t
,. #r�a.F1 ►1'
'1 ❑ Turke
❑Turke
' ❑ Other❑Other
Poults
Discharges & Stream Impacts
1. Is any discharge observed from any part of the operation?
Discharge originated at: ❑ Structure ❑ Appiication Field ❑ Other
a. Was the conveyance man-made?
❑ Dairy Cow
❑ Dairy Calf
❑ Dairy Heifer
❑VrV Cow
Non -Dairy
❑ Beef Stocker
❑ Beef Feeder
❑ Beef Brood Cow
rNO n 6r'i
b. Did the discharge reach waters of the State? (If yes, notify DWQ)
c. What is the estimated volume that reached waters of the State (gallons)?
d. Does discharge bypass the waste management system? (If yes, notify DWQ)
2. Is there evidence of a past discharge from any part of the operation?
3. Were there any adverse impacts or potential adverse impacts to the Waters of the State
other than from a discharge?
❑ Yes XNo ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes
❑ No
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Yes
❑ No
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Yes
❑ No
❑ Yes No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes No ❑ NA ❑ NE
Page 1 of 3 12128104 Continued

•. Facility Number: _ 10Date of Inspection T j� 0
Waste Collection & Treatment
4. Is storage capacity (structural plus storm storage plus heavy rainfall) less than adequate? ❑ Yes XNo ❑ 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: S
Spillway?:
Designed Freeboard (in):
Observed Freeboard (in):
5. Are there any immediate threats to the integrity of any of the structures observed? ❑ Yes XNo
❑ 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 WNo
❑NA ElNE
8. Do any of the stuctures lack adequate markers as required by the permit? ElYes ❑ No
XNA ❑ 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 XNo
ElNA ❑ NE
maintenance/improvement?
11. Is there evidence of incorrect application? If yes, check the appropriate box below. ❑ Yes KNo
❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Excessive Ponding ❑ Hydraulic Overload ❑ Frozen Ground ❑ Heavy Metals (Cu, Zn, etc.)
❑ PAN ❑ PAN > 10% or 10 lbs ❑ Total Phosphorus ❑ Failure to Incorporate Manure/Sludge into Bare Soil
❑ Outside of Acceptable Crop Window ❑ Evidence of Wind Drift ❑ Application Outside of Area
12. Crop type(s) Ern 6 Arh 4— Fe-j t_'C G ��441-e,
13. Soil type(s)
14. Do the receiving crops differ from those designated in the CAWMP?
❑ Yes
No
❑ NA
❑ NE
15. Does the receiving crop and/or land application site need improvement?
❑ Yes
No
❑ NA
❑ NE
16. Did the facility fail to secure and/or operate per the irrigation design or wettable acre determination ?
❑ Yes
❑ No
NA
❑ NE
17. Does the facility lack adequate acreage for land application?
ElYes
XNo
❑ NA
❑ NE
18. Is there a lack of properly operating waste application equipment?
❑ Yes
INo
❑ NA
❑ NE
1 � i � � ' S -- � � ° ���
.( q ) � ,p x , y, r , rjany other"=comments 4 Comments. refer.to uestton # . Ex lain 'an YES answers and/or an recommendations o
a +�.;l�a��a
Use drawings of facility to defter,, explain situations: (use additronal pages, as necessary). ��-e
.-. ..�.. 7.e. Y <.$".s ._ r>•: e, .5:. €:. �54,:.1.�. .�..��..ry c
Reviewer/Inspector Name .q'fi'GK fit` ..;j` s .� +,trt?;; M$-, Phone:C��)
Reviewer/Inspector Signature: Date: D
Page 2 of 3 12128104 Continued

FacilityNumber: •
— 2 � of Inspection i0 3 p
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 XNo
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ El ❑Maps El the appropriate box. WUP Checklists
2l.
Does re rd keeping need improvement? If yes, check the appropriate box below.
❑ Yes XNo
❑ NA
❑ NE
Waste Application Week,_. F___b___d Waste Analysis Soil Analysis
Rainfall Stacking Crap Yield amonthly and 1"
Rain Inspections 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 XNA
❑ NE
24.
Did the facility fail to calibrate waste application equipment as required by the permit?
❑ Yes
❑ NA
❑ NE
25.
Did the facility fail to conduct a sludge survey as required by the permit?
/�No
ElYes ❑ No XN A
❑ 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 No
[I NA
❑ NE
Did the facility fail to properly dispose of dead animals within 24 hours and/or document
-]29.
❑Yes No
❑ NA
El NE
and report the mortality rates that were higher than normal?
30.
At the time of the inspection did the facility pose an odor or air quality concern?
r �,�
El Yes [ No
❑ NA
El NE
If yes, contact a regional Air Quality representative immediately
" \
3 I.
Did the facility fail to notify the regional office of emergency situations as required by
❑ Yes No
❑ NA
ElNE
General Permit? (ie/ discharge, freeboard problems, over application)
II \\
32.
Did Reviewer/Inspector fail to discuss review/inspection with an on -site representative?
❑ Yes �No
❑ NA
❑ NE
33.
Does facility require a follow-up visit by same agency?
❑ Yes 'M�No
❑ NA
❑ NE
Additional�:Com'ments anil/ot•=Drxrvings
"wur �iSGI�/ 41�11 (sd ��i°G'f�� W r 6 "1
lt' -r Z - 37 l7' F- 1 - �r �ld #s on
�.3,r y`�, ! ,,� FIB (� �,Pa ,
�t�ulk� u41 anl� ,
�1 to 07 2- alv-�_
41
fffla744,
to NTE 03 f 311zo 10
poAe.* Ay: 32,4 a
Art U1 o,
Page 3 of 3 12128104

Type of Visit Compliance Inspection O Operation Review O Structure Evaluation O Technical Assistance
Reason for Visit Routine O Complaint O Follow Up O Referral O Emergency O Other El Denied Access
Date of Visit: Arrival Time: Departure Time: d OQ County: Region: �kJ
Farm Name: .I 1 on t�tY�u- � Owner Email:
Owner Name: U0
Mailing Address: I C> 0 r n
Physical Address:1��71X�7,� /�-b0,V
Facility Contact: 0—Ll' Title:
Onsite Representative: par �,S
Certified Operator: O n S -C �✓
Back-up Operator:
Location of Farm: Latitude:
Phone:
u
Phone No: e. q a I - a 9 Z y
Integrator•
Operator Certification Number:
Back-up Certification Number:
® 11 Longitude: ® ° ®' NA
Design rtrsntj esign Current Design Current
Swine Capacity Population Wet Poultry Capacity Population C*attle Capacity Population
❑ Wean to Finish JE1 Layer I I Daia Cow
❑ Wean to Feeder
1
JEJ Non -Layer I
I
Dairy Calf
❑ Feeder to Finish
❑ Daia Heifer
❑ Farrow to Wean
Dry Poultry
❑
❑ Dry Cow
Non -Dairy
❑ Farrow to Feeder
❑ Farrow to Finish
❑N on-Layersers
Beef Stocker
❑ Gilts
❑ Beef Feeder
❑ Pullets
❑ Boars
❑ Beef Brood Cow
❑ Turke s
Qther ❑ Turkey Poults
❑ Other ❑ Other
I I
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 0 No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes
❑ No
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Yes
❑ No
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Yes
❑ No
❑ Yes
No
❑ NA
❑ NI?
❑ Yes
No
❑ NA
❑ NE
12128104 Continued

FacilityNumber:.. — A
Date of Inspection 1
.• r r
iT
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?
tructure I SID
ure 2 Structure 3 Structure 4
Identifier:
Spillway?:
Designed Freeboard (in):
Observed Freeboard (in):
5. Are there any immediate threats to the integrity of any of the structures observed?
(ic/ 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 *o
❑ Yes ❑ No
Structure 5
❑ NA ❑ NE
El NA ❑NE
Structure 6
❑ Yes] No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes 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? ❑ Yes 0 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 El? Yes No ❑ NA ❑ NE
maintenance or improvement?
Waste Application
10. Are there any required buffers, setbacks, or compliance alternatives that need
maintenance/improvement?
❑ Yes 0 No ❑ NA ❑ NE
11. Is there evidence of incorrect application? if yes, check the appropriate box below. ❑ Yes 0 No ❑ NA • ❑ NE
❑ Excessive Ponding ❑ Hydraulic Overload ❑ Frozen Ground ❑ Heavy Metals (Cu, Zn, etc.)
❑ FAN ❑ PAN > 10% or 10 lbs ❑ Total Phosphorus ❑ Failure to Incorporate Manure/Sludge into Bare Soil
❑ Outside of Acceptable Crop Window ❑ Evidence of Wind Daft ❑ Application Outside of Area
12. Crop type(s)
13. Soil type(s)
14. Do the receiving crops differ from those designated in the CAWMP?
15. Does the receiving crop and/or land application site need improvement?
Yes
❑ Yes
16. Did the facility fail to secure and/or operate per the irrigation design or wettable acre determination ? ❑ Yes
17. Does the facility lack adequate acreage for land application? ❑ Yes
18. Is there a lack of properly operating waste application equipment? ❑ Yes
❑ No ❑ NA ❑ NE
0 No [:1 NA ❑ NE
❑ No YNA ❑ NE
VNo ❑ NA ❑ NE
kko ❑ NA ❑ NE
mmentsn� q .
Comm ents (refer tb question #). Explain any YES.,answer's and/orany recommendations orany$ other 5_2
Use drawings of facility to better explain situations. (use,Addthonal pages,,as,necessary):> 4 bI : t ��:.-...��..�t
Reviewer/inspector Name Phone: -s,2
Reviewer/[nspector Signature: Date: 07 1107
tr �12/28/04 Continued

Fj
Facility Number: — ve of Inspection
1
Required Records & Documents
19. Did the facility fail to have Certificate of Coverage & Permit readily available?
A
❑ Yes Eg'Na ❑ NA ❑ NE
20. Does the facility fail to have all components of the CAWMP readily available? If yes, check ❑ Yes o ❑ NA ❑ NE
the appropriate box. ❑ WUp ❑ Checklists ❑ Design El Maps El Other
21. Does cord keeping need improvement? lJ Yes ❑ No ❑ NA ❑ NE
aste Applica 'on =E14Z_11LbPU'�ti1JLLS'
�il A lysis Waste Transfers D ic:rtfen
Rainfall Stocking Crop Yielonthly and l l' 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
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Yes
❑ No
9NA
❑ NE
❑ Yes
;<No
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Yes
❑ No
KNA
❑ NE
❑ Yes
No
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Yes
No
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Yes
ONo
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Yes
V No
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Yes
M No
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Yes
LvJ No
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Yes XNo ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes L1Q No ❑ NA ❑ NE
1 1 1 1 ! 1 1 Ia r .,
17 A
i
(G� ,. to
I I
II! r✓rr �
` i �1/
f L !
AaAj
i r,
I r f •
i
C7
._. r

y
Division of Water Qualit.
Facility Number 7 Division of Soil and Water Conservation 1 /y}
O Other Agency
Type of Visit
Compliance Inspection
0 Operation Review 0 Structure Evaluation
0 Technical Assistance
Reason for Visit
9Routine 0 Complaint
�0 Follow up 0 Referral 0 Emergency
0 Other ❑ Denied Access s
Date of' isit: I.7 f(p 1 UPS I Arrival Time: Departure Time: a " f County: Region: h�
Farm Name:' - n�SPq.,_rtCS Owner Email:
Owner Name: tv 1Ut 1 m1r Phone: —[ —
Mailing Address: aP6,0 /ar Pr
Physical Address: h jam] � /e'-a _.
o j
Facility Contact: _�! J0Y1 (-S_ ___ Title: Phone Nl "i na27
9 l 7
Onsite Representative: lmr\ Integrator:
Certified Operator: t- 11 Operator Certification Number:
Back-up Operator:
Location of Farm:
L)5 0-1 No
Swine
Wean to Finish
Wean to Feeder
Feeder to Finish
Farrow to Wean
Farrow to Feeder
Farrow to Finish
Gilts
Other
❑ Other
Latitude. ® o
o �.r��rYl4n
Back-up Certification Number:
Design Current Design Current
Capacity Population Wet Poultry Capacity Population
❑ Layer
1 ❑ 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'?
Design Current
Cattle Capacity Population
❑ DaiEX Cow
❑ Dairy Calf
❑ Dairy Heifei
El Dry Cow
Non -Dairy
0jqn
Beef Stockez
❑ Beef Feeder
❑ Beef Brood Co
Number of Structures:
b. Did the discharge reach waters of the State'? (If yes, notify DWQ)
c. What is the estimated volume that reached waters of the State (gallons)?
d. Does discharge bypass the waste management system? (if yes, notify DWQ)
2. is there evidence of a past discharge from any part of the operation?
3. Were there any adverse impacts or potential adverse impacts to the Waters of the State
other than from a discharge?
❑ Yes No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes ❑ No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes ❑ No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes ❑ No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes] No ❑ NA ❑ NE
0yes ❑ No ❑ NA ❑ NE
12128104 Continued

Facility Number: q, — "] • Date of Inspection
Waste Collection & Treatment
4. Is storage capacity (structural plus storm storage plus heavy rainfall) less than adequate?
a. If yes, is waste level into the structural freeboard?
Structure I Structure 2 Structure 3 Structure 4
Identifier: �r S
❑ Yes �No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes ❑ No ❑ NA ❑ NE
Structure 5 Structure 6
Spillway?:
Designed Freeboard (in):
Observed Freeboard (in): r if1� I
5. Are there any immediate threats to the integrity of any of the structures observed? ❑ Yes �No ❑ NA ❑ NE
(ie/ large trees, severe erosion, seepage, etc.)
6. Are there structures on -site which are not properly addressed and/or managed ❑ Yes $1j110 ❑ 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 neat, notify DWQ
7. Do any of the structures need maintenance or improvement? ❑ Yes No ❑ NA ❑ NE
S. 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 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?
1 l . Is there evidence of incorrect application`? if yes, check the appropriate box below. ❑ Yes �No ElNA ❑ NE
Excessive Ponding ❑ Hydraulic Overload ❑ Frozen 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 ❑ Evidence of Wind Drift ❑ Application Outside of Area
12. Crop type(s) QQcn
13. Soil type(s)
14. Do the receiving crops differ from those designated in the CAWMP?
❑ Yes XNo
❑ 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
19NA
❑ 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 19 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):
v ii d-wc e, o� 5M r m6f -t w U-)a s-te 'I n 5+Y?-- �►,� . �1 L-,,-
t c�
fee, b� She r_ o l (S —0 (I re.a. we s t oar
Cattle- , n� S I Q d o� 4e ave � be, m o ve d ou4- fo r m t 0'� tea r
r Q C.2 e
.►
Reviewer/Inspector Name M Phone:
Reviewer/inspector Signatur Date:
I r i 1 12128104 Continued

Facility Number: — R;ate Inspection
of
Required
Records & Documents
19.
Did the facility fail to have Certificate of Coverage & Permit readily available?
❑ Yes
Io
❑ NA
❑ NE
20.
Does the facility fail to have all components of the CAWMP readily available? If yes, check
❑ Yes
4 No
[]NA
❑ NE
the appropirate box. WUP ❑ Checklists ❑ Design ❑ Maps ❑ Other
21.
Doe record keeping need improvement? ex
❑Yes
�No
❑NA
❑NE
ste Application ee c Waste Analysis Soil An ysis Waste Transfers
RainFall Stocking Crop Yield 20 Minute Inspections l�'l��onthly 1"Rain
Inspections
Code
and
Bather
22.
Did the facility fail to install and maintain a rain gauge?
❑ Yes
iNo
❑ NA
❑ NE
23.
I.f selected, did the facility fail to install and maintain rainbreakers on irrigation equipment?
❑ Yes
❑ No
06NA
❑ NE
24.
Did the facility fail to calibrate waste application equipment as required by the permit?
❑ Yes
)(No
❑ NA
❑ NE
25.
Did the facility fail to conduct a sludge survey as required by the permit?
❑ Yes
❑ No
XNA
❑ 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
A No
❑ NA
❑ NE
29.
Did the facility fail to properly dispose of dead animals within 24 hours and/or document
❑ Yes
P(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
❑ NA
❑ NE
If yes, contact a regional Air Quality representative immediately
31.
Did the facility fail to notify the regional office of emergency situations as required by
❑ Yes
No
❑ NA
❑ NE
General Permit`? (ie/ discharge, freeboard problems, over application)
32.
Did Reviewer/Inspector fail to discuss review/inspection with an on -site representative?
❑ Yes
No
❑ NA
❑ NE
33.
Does facility require a follow-up visit by same agency?
❑ Yes
No
❑ NA
❑ NE
Additional Comments and/or Drawings:
V mL `c,
o?� need i-� ea I i b sa e. s p irQad o t ovv f
I ia�r I l QI y ' n w4Ste rn_ Rao /AP Y' t [
y-� 5 5 L c n o d
t0 c 1 i" 5 c) 1-
GdC_I-A�rMi+.
12128104

9R Division of Water Quality
Facility Number a 0 Division of Soil and Water onservation '
•• 0 Other Agency
IType of Visit �A Compliance Inspection 0 Operation Review 0 Structure Evaluation 0 Technical Assistance I
Reason for Visit 4 Routine 0 Complaint 0 Follow up 0 Referral 0 Emergency 0 Other ❑ Denied Access
Date of Visit: 1 l ' Arrival Time: Departure Time: b County: \166 1 K C5 Region: w 5 � O
Farm Name: 13on Spa ry, Owner Email:
Owner Name: D O y) S Ao_rV�5 Phone: 25 , , a g d �
Mailing Address:
Physical Address: D ROct-d
Facility Contact: __ _bb0 S AAY k S _ Title:
Onsite Representative: �Z)0y S ��_s____
Certified Operator: b { r 5
Back-up Operator:
Phone No: l C—u 7— a I i q
Integrator:
Operator Certification Number: a a I go?
Back-up Certification Number:
Location of Farm: Latitude: [Mo ©g W 4f Longitude: �d ° ®d Lamj fl
v s 4 a I No`t' r) to 0,1 v rni C'+� t � d ey-', t , 4 � ✓ n fr- � -q h w W -e
,6 -bu r v)
Swine
❑ Wean to Finish
❑ Wean to Feeder
❑ Feeder to Finish
❑ Farrow to Wean
❑ Farrow to Feeder
❑ Farrow to Finish
❑ Gilts
❑ Boars
Other
❑ Other
Design Current Design Current
Capacity Population Wet Poultry Capacity Population
❑ Layer
❑ Non -La et
Dry Poultry
❑ Layers
❑ Non -Layers
❑ Pullets
❑ Turkeys
❑ Turkey Poults
❑ Other
Discharges & Stream Impacts
1. Is any discharge observed from any part of the operation?
Discharge originated at: ❑ Structure ❑ Application Field ❑ Other
a. Was the conveyance man-made?
Design Current
Cattle Capacity Population
❑
Dairy Cow
❑
Dairy Calf
❑
Dairy Heifei
❑
Dry Cow
Non-Dai
O O
-�
Beef Stocker
❑
Beef Feeder
❑
Beef Brood Cowl
i
Number of Structures:Q11
b. Did the discharge reach waters of the State? (If yes, notify DWQ)
c. What is the estimated volume that reached waters of the State (gallons)?
d. Does discharge bypass the waste management system? (If yes, notify DWQ)
2. Is there evidence of a past discharge from any part of the operation?
3. Were there any adverse impacts or potential adverse impacts to the Waters of the State
other than from a discharge?
❑ Yes No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes
❑ No
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Yes
❑ No
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Yes
❑ No
❑ Yes
No
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Yes
No
ElNA
❑ NE
12128104 Continued

Facility Number: • Date of Inspection 0 0 •
Waste Collection & Treatment
4. Is storage capacity (structural plus stone storage plus heavy rainfall) less than adequate? ❑ Yes VNo ❑ 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: l]1til,sjal V.--
t
Spillway?:
Designed Freeboard (in):
Observed Freeboard (in):
5. Are there any immediate threats to the integrity of any of the structures observed? ❑ Yes
�(No ❑ NA ❑ NE
(ie/ large trees, severe erosion, seepage, etc.)
6. Are there structures on -site which are not properly addressed and/or managed ❑ Yes
VNo ❑ NA ❑ NE
through a waste management or closure plan?
If any of questions 4-6 were answered yes, and the situation poses an immediate public health or environmental threat, notify DWQ
7. Do any of the structures need maintenance or improvement? ❑ Yes
XNo ❑ NA ❑ NE
8. Do any of the stuctures lack adequate markers as required by the permit? ❑ Yes
❑ No VNA ❑ 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
t�(No ❑ NA ❑ NE
maintenance/improvement?
11. Is there evidence of incorrect application? If yes, check the appropriate box below. ❑ Yes
�No ❑ NA ElNE
ElExcessive Ponding [IHydraulic Overload ❑ Frozen Ground [IHeavy Metals (Cu, Zn, etc.)
❑ PAN ❑ PAN > 10% or 10 lbs []Total Phosphorus ❑ Failure to Incorporate Manure/Sludge into
Bare Soil
❑ Outside of Acceptable Crop Window ❑ Evidence of Wind Drift ❑ Application Outside of Area
12. Crop type(s)
13. Soil type(s)
14. Do the receiving crops differ from those designated in the CAWMP?
❑ Yes
No
[I NA
El 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
VNo
V NA
❑ NE
17. Does the facility lack adequate acreage for land application?
❑ Yes
No
❑ NA
❑ NE
18. Is there a lack of properly operating waste application equipment?
❑ Yes
No
❑ NA
❑ NE
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. (use additional pages as necessary):
3.
Reviewerllnspector Name Phone: "S `ta
Reviewer/Inspector Signature: Date: 0p
- 12128104 Continued

Facility Number: Date of Inspection 1 0
Renuired Records & Documents
19. Did the facility fail to have Certificate of Coverage & Permit readily available? ❑ yes KNo ❑ 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 eecklis El Design El Maps ❑Other
`�[n0 641
21. Doe eeord keeping need improvement. ,�,% ❑ YesgNo ❑ NA ❑ NE
Li0 Waste Applicati n ❑-feel b - ante Analysis L soil Analysis L�1 Waste Transfers
Rainfall Stocking Crop Yield 120 Minute Inspections UKOnthly and V Rain Inspections �ZtherCodc
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
*o
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Yes
❑ No
ZNA
❑ NE
❑ Yes
No
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Yes
❑ No
fVNA
El NE
❑ Yes
No
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Yes
No
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Yes
No
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Yes
�No
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Yes
No
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Yes]
No
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Yes
VNo
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Yes
INo
❑ NA
❑ NE
Additional Comments and/or Drawings:
47- /A (Owe_
a°O -7.
9 o- T z S^F- rho
r
' ho5 P h0rL,5 16ve- o meawr)
71
6,0
F-- l3 �flK-0F �— R�(p� 12128104
R,,Abmv; Wn4SA,.I_b+ I ev. k,0'-� ��.ord 5 0.re

Division of Water Quality
Division of Soil and Water Conservation
❑ Other Agency
Facility Number: 970027 _ Facility Status. Active Permit: AWC970027 ❑ Denied Access
Inspection Type: Compliance Inspection Inactive or Closed Date:
Reason for Visit: Routine County: Wilkes Region: Winston-Salem
Date of Visit: 10/03/2006 .. Entry Time:01:00 PM Exit Time: 02:30 EM
Farm Name: Don Sparks
Owner: Don C Soa&
Physical Address:
Facility Status: ❑ Compliant
Location of Farm:
❑ Not Compliant Integrator:
Incident M
Owner Email:
Phone: [phone]
Latitude:36°14'39" — Longitude:80°58'37"
From Hwy 266 in Roaring River take White Plains to White Plains Church Road north approx. 3 miles to Hoots Rd, turn right go
approx. 1 mile to farm on right.
Questlon Areas:
Discharges & Stream Impacts
Records and Documents
Certified Operator: Don C Sparks
Secondary OIC(s):
Waste Collection & Treatment Waste Application
Other Issues
Operator Certification Number: 22142
On -Site Representative(s): Name Title Phone
On -site representative Don Sparks Phone: [phone]
24 hour contact name Don Sparks Phone: [phone]
Primary Inspector: qM a Rosebrock Phone:
Inspector SignatureDate:
Secondary Inspector(s):
Inspection Summary:
21. A couple of fields reportedly have copper levels around 2000.
21. No beef manure applied this year. No beef records required.
21. No rainfall records again this year. --- NOV
24. Need to complete spreader calibration and document.
28. Need to add T-277 F-11, F-12, and F-16 to WUP.
28, T-9761 F-1 and F-2 received poultry litter, but these fields could not be located in the beef or poultry WUPs.
28. T-9860 F-1 is listed as fescue pasture. Need to also add corn to both WUPs.
28. Need to add fescue hay to T-437 Fields 1-6; and T-423 Fields 1,3,&4; and TA24 F-1.
28. Need to add T-306 F-5 to WUP.
Page: 1

•
•
Permit: AWC970027
Inspection Date: 1010312006
Owner- Facility: Don C Sparks
Inspection Type: Compliance Inspection
Facility Number: 970027
Reason for Visit: Routine
Regulated Operations Design Capacity Current Population
Cattle
O Cattle - Beef Brood Cow
50
0
Q Cattle - Beef Stocker Calf
150
0
Total Design Capacity: 200
Total SSLW: 132,500
Waste Structures
Type Identifier Closed Date Start Date Designed Freeboard Observed Freeboard
!Dry Stack DRY STACK 48.00
Page: 2

• 0
Permit: AWC970027 owner - Facility: Don C Sparks Facility Number: 970027
Inspection Date: 10/03/2006 Inspection Type: Compliance Inspection Reason for Visit: Routine
Discharges & Stream Impacts Yes No NA NE
1. Is any discharge observed from any part of the operation? ❑ ■ ❑ ❑
Discharge originated at:
Structure ❑
Application Field ❑
Other ❑
a. Was conveyance man-made? ❑ ■ ❑ ❑
b. Did discharge reach Waters of the Stale? (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 (l.e./ large 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? ❑ ■ ❑ ❑
S. 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
❑ woo
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?
❑
Hydraulic Overload?
❑
Frozen Ground? ❑
Heavy metals (Cu, Zn, etc)? ❑
Page: 3

•
•
Permit: AWC970027 Owner - Facility: Don C Sparks
Facility Number: 970027
Inspection Date: 10/03/2006 Inspection Type: Compliance Inspection Reason for Visit: Routine
Waste Application
Yes
No
NA
NE
PAN?
❑
Is PAN > 10%/10 lbs.?
Cl
Total P205?
❑
Failure to incorporate manure/sludge into bare soil?
Cl
Outside of acceptable crop window?
❑
Evidence of wind drift?
❑
Application outside of application area?
❑
Crop Type 1
Corn
(Silage)
Crop Type 2
Corn
(Grain)
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?
❑
■
❑
Cl
17. Does the facility lack adequate acreage for land application?
❑
■
❑
❑
18. Is there a lack of properly operating waste application equipment?
❑
■
❑
❑
Records and Documents
Yes
No
NA
NE
19. Did the facility fail to have Certificate of Coverage and Permit readily available?
❑
❑
❑
❑
20. Does the facility fail to have all components of the CAWMP readily available?
❑
❑
❑
❑
If yes, check the appropriate box below.
WU P?
❑
Page: 4

Permit: AWC970027 Owner - Facility: Don C Sparks Facility Number: 970027
Inspection Date: 10103/2006 Inspection Type: Compliance Inspection Reason for Via It: Routine
Records and Documents
Yes
No
NA
NE
Checklists?
❑
Design?
❑
Maps?
❑
Other?
❑
21. Does record keeping need improvement?
❑
❑
❑
❑
If yes, check the appropriate box below.
Waste Application?
❑
120 Minute inspections?
❑
Weather code?
❑
Weekly Freeboard?
❑
Transfers?
❑
Rainfall?
Cl
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?
❑
Cl
❑
❑
26. Did the facility fail to have an actively certified operator in charge?
❑
❑
❑
❑ .
27. Did the facility fail to secure a phosphorous loss assessment (PLAT) certification?
❑
Cl
❑
❑
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 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
❑
❑
❑
Cl
Quality representative immediately.
i\,
Page; 5

Permit: AWC970027 Owner - Facility: Don C Sparks
Facility Number: 970027
Inspection Date: 10/03/2006 Inspection Type: Compliance Inspection
Reason for Visit: Routine
Other Issues
Yes
No NA
NE
31. Did the facility fail to notify regional DWQ of emergency situations as required by Permit?
❑
❑ ❑
❑
32. Did Reviewer/Inspector fail to discuss review/inspection with on -site representative?
❑
❑ ❑
❑
33. Does facility require a follow-up visit by same agency?
❑
❑ ❑
❑
Page: 6

Division of Water Quality ,
Facility'Number q , Division of Soil and Water loonservation 1`
Other. Agency
Type of Visit Compliance Inspection 0 Operation Review 0 Structure Evaluation 0 Technical Assistance
Reason for Vis t Routine 0 Complaint 0 Follow up 0 Referral 0 Emergency 0 Other ❑ Denied Access
����
Date of Visit: Arrival Time: , o Departure Time: n County: Region: !_�`�
Farm Name: y� Owner Email:
Owner Name: f3 n -.-N oa_r5 _ Phone: q 7 4
Mailing Address:
Physical Address: o ��� f
Facility Contact:
M O lLA' V— 5_ Title: Phone No: a a 9
Onsite Representative: C) Pri , - 0_r LL S Integrator:
Certified Operator: - nC�—r. [L 5 Operator Certification Number:
Back-up Operator:
Back-up Certification Number:
Location of Farm: Latitude: ®o ®s Longitude: °
u S q• a I I ►rnic�h ma-n -�, 1+ r �'(�
h- -- to a o q�-b ohi+e_ �br�i 5 C h. 12°d- ri h+� Nod' Co 6 rrt ►
Design Current.Design, Current DesignCurrent
Swine Capacity Populations. Wet Poultry ,Capacity Population Cattle Capacity Popgaataon
❑ Wean to Finish
❑ Wean to Feeder
❑ Feeder to Finish
❑ Farrow to Wean
❑ Farrow to Feeder
❑ Farrow to Finish
Boars
Other
❑ Other
❑ Laver
❑ Non -Layer
Dry Poultry''
❑ La ers
❑ Non -Layers
❑ Pullets
❑ Turkeys
❑ Turkey Pouets
❑ Other
Discharees & Stream Impacts
1. Is any discharge observed from any part of the operation?
Discharge originated at: ❑ Structure ❑ Application Field ❑ Other
a. Was the conveyance man-made?
❑ Dairy Cow
❑ Dairy Calf
❑ Dairy Heifer
EI.Dry Cow
Non-Dairya-0
O
El -Beef Stocker
❑ Beef Feeder
❑ Beef Brood Cow
JNumber of Structures I'
b. Did the discharge reach waters of the State? (If yes, notify DWQ)
c. What is the estimated volume that reached waters of the State (gallons)?
d. Does discharge bypass the waste management system? (If yes, notify DWQ)
2. Is there evidence of a past discharge from any part of the operation?
3. Were there any adverse impacts or potential adverse impacts to the Waters of the State
other than from a discharge?
Page I of 3
❑ Yes 0Io ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes
❑ No
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Yes
❑ No
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Yes
❑ No
❑ Yes _t4o ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes *_No []NA ❑ NE
12128104 Continued

Facility Number: — a Ote of Inspection 0
Required Records & Documents
19. Did the facility fail to have Certificate of Coverage & Permit readily available? ❑ Yes ❑ NA ❑ NE
20. Does the facility fail to have all components of the CAWMP readily available? If yes, check ❑ Yes No ❑ NA ❑ NE
the ppropriate box.
❑ Wi1P El Checklists Design El Maps El Other
21. D s record keeping need impro ment? Yes ❑ No ❑ NA ❑ NE
Waste Application y� My e�eeerd Waste Analysis Soil Analysi
Rainfa L"l�b�c Crop Yield s ❑ Motu►1" Rain Inspectionsaeer6ode
22. Did the facility fail to install and maintain a rain gauge? ❑ Yes XNo ❑ NA ❑ NE
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. r
5 0 r'rv�
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 property 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 fait to discuss review/inspection with an on -site representative?
33. Does facility require a follow-up visit by same agency? �� `I �� `0
�1
❑ Yes
❑ No
ly(NA
❑ NE
Yes
❑ No
❑ NA
❑ NE
Yes
❑ No
�6A
❑ NE
❑ Yes
% No
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Yes
❑ No
XNA
❑ NE
❑ Yes No
❑ Yes No
❑ Yes No
❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes �No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes )] No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes *o ❑ NA ❑ NE
rI f � l t1 a
r
0
/ 1av rr•
i
M,
Page 3 of 3 D F_ 1 1 12128104

Facility Number: 9 , — 0 Date of Inspection
Waste Collection & Treatment
4. is storage capacity (structural plus storm storage plus heavy rainfall) less than adequate?
a. If yes, is waste level into the structural freeboard?
Structure 1 Structure 2 Structure 3 Structure 4
Identifier: V__
Spillway?:
Designed Freeboard (in):
Observed Freeboard (in):
5. Are there any immediate threats to the integrity of any of the structures observed?
(ie/ large trees, severe erosion, seepage, etc.)
6. Are there structures on -site which are not properly addressed and/or managed
through a waste management or closure plan?
❑ Yes No
❑ Yes No
Structure 5
❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ NA ❑ NE
Structure 6
❑ Yes 4No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes tNo ❑ 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 O(No ❑ NA ❑ NE
8. Do any of the stuctures lack adequate markers as required by the permit? ❑Yes [I No NA El NB
(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 [INE
maintenance or improvement? 0
Waste Application
10. Are there any required buffers, setbacks, or compliance alternatives that need ❑ Yes "#No ❑ NA ❑ NE
maintenance/improvement?
11. Is there evidence of incorrect application? If yes, check the appropriate box below. ❑ Yes ❑ No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Excessive Ponding ❑ Hydraulic Overload ❑ Frozen Ground ❑ Heavy Metals (Cu, Zn, etc.)
❑ PAN ❑ PAN > 10% or 10 Ibs ❑ Total Phosphorus ❑ Failure to Incorporate Manure/Sludge into Bare Soil
❑ Outside of Acceptable Crop Window ❑ Evidence of Wind Drift ❑ Application Outside of Area
12. Crop type(s)
13. Soil type(s)
14. Do the receiving crops differ from those designated in the CAWMP?
15. Does the receiving crop and/or land application site need improvement?
❑ Yes
❑ Yes
16. Did the facility fail to secure and/or operate per the irrigation design or wettable acre determination ? ❑ Yes
17. Does the facility lack adequate acreage for land application? ❑ Yes
18. Is there a lack of properly operating waste application equipment? ❑ Yes
El No El NA ❑NE
No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ No NA ❑ NE
�No ❑ NA ❑ NE
�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):
­7
a3qV
1► 3,°�� �_
Reviewer/Inspector Name -- -- Phone:
Reviewer/Inspector Signature: Date: i b Q
e 2 of 3 ll r t � 0(o i— 512128104 Continued �ue
� ( fie.-e�
" n�As is be., ozbW `r

Division of Water Quality
❑ Division of Soil and Water Conservation
❑ Other Agency--__
Facility Number: 970027 Facility Status: Active Permit: &VQ970027 ❑ Denied Access
Inspection Type: Compliance Insp=ign Inactive or Closed Date:
Reason for Visit: Routine County: Wilkes Region: Winston-Salem
Date of Visit: 10/20/2005 _. Entry Time:11050 AM Exit Time: 03:00 PM
Farm Name: Don Sparks
Owner: Don C Sparks -
Incident #:
Owner Email:
Phone: [phone]§01
Mailing Address: 1242 Poplar Springs Rd _ Bgxjo.g River NC 286699136_
Physical Address:
Facility Status: ❑ Compliant ❑ Not Compliant Integrator:
Location of Farm:
Latitude: 304'39" Longitude: $Q"58'37"
From Hwy 268 in Roaring River take White Plains to White Plains Church Road north approx. 3 miles to Hoots Rd, turn right go
approx, 1 mile to farm on right.
Question Areas:
Discharges & Stream Impacts
Records and Documents
Certified Operator: Don C Sparks
Secondary OIC(s):
Waste Collection & Treatment Waste Application
Other issues
Operator Certification Number: 22142
On -Site Representative(s): Name Title Phone
On -site representative Don Sparks Phone: [phone]
24 hour contact name Don Sparks Phone: [phone]
Primary Inspector: issa Rosebrock Phone: [phone]
Ext.383
Inspector Signature: Date: go a
fn
Secondary Inspector(s):
Phone:
Phone:
Page: 1

• •
Permit: AWC970027 Owner - Faclllty: Don C Sparks Facility Number: 970027
Inspection Date: 10M12005 Inspection Type: Compliance Inspection Reason for Visit: Routine
Inspection Summary:
3. Some leachate is flowing from the silo but does not appear to be causing a water quality problem.
9. Creeks and buffers look great at this site. Mr. Sparks has four different cattle sites. We looked at the one on Tharpe Rd. Cattle are
to be fenced from the creek and waterers installed soon.
21. 2005 soil tests results have been completed.
21. Some of the fields in the WUP receive sludge waste from Loisiana Pacific (formerly Abitibi. No litter or beef waste is applied to
these fields according to Mr. Sparks.
28. T-9860 F-1 needs to have corn added to WUP for poultry,
T-306 F-5 (approx. 45 A, fescue/hay) is on map but also needs to be in chart in the WUP. T-305 F- 10-13 also needs to be listed in the
chart for fescue pasture.
9122/05 waste analyses:
P Dry SK=24,6, P&B Dry=15,8, and CIS Comp=25.5 lbs. Mon
Page: 2

Permit; AWC970027 Owner- Facility. Don C Sparks Facility Number : 970027
Inspection Date: 1012012005 Inspection Type: Compliance Inspection Reason for Visit: Routine
Regulated Operations Design Capacity Current Population
Cattle
Cattle - Beef Brood Cow 0
Q Cattle - Beef Stocker Calf 0
Total Design Capacity:
Total SSLW:
Tvoe Identifier Closed Date Start Date Deslened Freeboard Observed Freeboard
ry Stack DRY STACK 48.00
Page: 3

0
•
Permit: AWC970027 Owner - Facility: Don C Sparks
Facility Number: 970027
Inspection Date: 10/2012005 Inspection Type: Compliance Inspection Reason for Visit: Routine
Discharges R Stream Imp Yes No NA NE
1. Is any discharge observed from any part of the operation? ❑ ■ ❑ ❑
Discharge originated at:
Structure ❑
Application Field
❑
Other
❑
a. Was conveyance man-made?
❑
■
❑
❑
b. Did discharge reach Waters of the State? (if yes, notify DWQ)
❑
■
❑
❑
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?
n
■
o
o
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 an immediate threats to the Integrity of any of the structures observed (Le./ large trees, severe erosion,
etc.)?
i--i
■
❑
Clseepage,
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
Cl
■
❑
❑
stacks and/or wet stacks)
9. Does any part of the waste management system other than the waste structures require maintenance or
n
■
❑
❑
improvement?
Waste Ap lication
Yes
No
NA
NE
10. Are there any required buffers, setbacks, or compliance alternatives that need maintenance or improvement?
❑
■
❑
❑
11. Is there evidence of Incorrect application?
❑
■
❑
❑
If yes, check the appropriate box below.
Excessive Ponding?
❑
Hydraulic Overload?
❑
Frozen Ground?
❑
Heavy metals (Cu, Zn, etc)?
❑
PAN?
❑
Is PAN > 10%110 lbs,?
❑
Total P2057
❑
Failure to incorporate manuretsludge into bare soil?
❑
Outside of acceptable crop window?
❑
Evidence of wind drift?
❑
Application outside of application area?
❑
Crop Type 1
Corn (Silage)
Crop Type 2
Crop Type 3
Crop Type 4
Page: 4

•
Permit: AWC970027 Owner- Facility: Don C Sparks
Facility Number: 970027
Inspection pate: 10/20/2005 Inspection Type: Compliance Inspection
Reason for Visit:
Routine
Waste Application
Yes
No
NA NE
Crop Type 5
Crop Type 6
Soil Type 1
Soil Type 2
Soil Type 3
Soil Type 4
Soil Type 5
Soil Type 6
14. Do the receiving crops differ from those designated In the Certified Animal Waste
Management Plan(CAWMP)? ❑
■
❑ ❑
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 determination7 ❑
■
❑ ❑
17. Does the facility lack adequate acreage for land application?
❑
In
❑ ❑
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 Cerllficate of Coverage and Permit readily available?
❑
■
❑ ❑
20. Does the facility fail to have all components of the CAWMP readily available?
❑
■
❑ ❑
If yes, check the appropriate box below.
WUP?
❑
Checklists?
❑
Design?
❑
Maps?
❑
Other?
❑
21. Does record keeping need improvement?
■
❑
❑ ❑
If yes, check the appropriate box below.
Waste Application?
❑
120 Minute inspections?
❑
Weather code?
❑
Weekly Freeboard?
❑
Transfers?
❑
Rainfall?
■
Inspections after a 1 Inch rainfall & monthly?
❑
Waste Analysis?
❑
Annual soil analysis?
❑
Crop yields?
■
Stocking?
❑
Annual Certification Form (NPDES only)?
❑
22. Did the facillty fall 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?
❑
■
❑ ❑
Page: 5

Permit: AW0970027 Owner - Facility: Don C Sparks Facility Number: 970027
Inspection Date: 10/2012005 Inspection Type: Compliance Inspection Reason for Visit: Routine
Records and Documents Yes No NA NE
27. Did the facility fail to secure a phosphorous loss assessment (PLAT) certification? ❑ ■ ❑ ❑
Otherlssues 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.
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?
❑
■
❑
❑
4
Page: 6

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- �rrival Time: I/ _qQ I Departure'1'ime: County: Y`f i Region: L&-,S_8L0
Farm Name: Coln Owner Email:
Owner Name: 5 Phone: 5 1 rag 0
Mailing Address: Z_ - f3p_ c.�r A _► nQ 5 I�crt�_ i�l R- �( N aat9
P !�4 �v„. -T--
Physical Address:
Facility Contact: hon,00 r 1�,5 Title:
Onsite Representative: _bo�_, diQ r
Certified Operator: too Smy-
Back-up Operator:
Location of Farm:
Swine
Wean to Finish
Wean to Feeder
Feeder to Finish
Farrow to Wean
Farrow to Feeder
Farrow to Finish
Gilts
Boars
Other
❑ Other
a
Latitude:
Phone No:
Integrator:
Operator Certification Number: fa a ``la
Back-up Certification Number:
Design Current Design Current
Capacity Population Wet Poultry Capacity Population
❑ Layer
h❑ Non -Layer
Dry Poultry
❑ Layers
❑ Non -Layers
❑ Pullets -
Turk
❑❑
Turkints
tyP:o
❑ Other
Discharees & Stream Impacts
1. Is any discharge observed from any part of the operation?
Discharge originated at: ❑ Structure ❑ Application Field ❑ Other
a. Was the conveyance man-made?
11 Longitude: ®° ®& Q "
.0Vic q
0 t-u rn
Design Current
Cattle Capacity Population
❑
Dairy Cow
❑
Dairy Calf
❑
Dairy Heifer
❑
Dry Cow
Qf
Non -Dairy
00
Beef Stocker
❑
Beef Feeder
❑
Beef Brood Cow
Number of Structures: ELI;
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 9 No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes
❑ No
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Yes
❑ No
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Yes
❑ No
❑ Yes
No
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Yes
No
❑ NA
❑ NE
12128104 Continued

Facility Number: q I—
� Date of Inspection Z-Q o Ta5o
Waste Collection & Treatment
4. Is storage capacity (structural plus storm storage plus heavy rainfall) less than adequate?
❑ Yes
� No ❑ NA ❑ NE
a. If yes, is waste level into the structural freeboard?
❑ Yes
❑ No ❑ NA ❑ NE
Structure I Structure 2 Structure 3 Structure 4
Structure
5 Structure 6
Identifier: .Tj YrU STQC�__
Spillway?:
Designed Freeboard (in):
Observed Freeboard (in):
5. Are there any immediate threats to the integrity of any of the structures observed?
❑ Yes
4No ❑ NA ❑ NE
(ie/ large trees, severe erosion, seepage, etc.)
6. Are there structures on -site which are not properly addressed and/or managed
El Yes
p(J No ❑ NA ❑ NE
)A
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 L�Q 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
XNo ❑ 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 Drift ❑ Application Outside of Area
12. Crop type(s)
13. Soil type(s)
14. Do the receiving crops differ from those designated in the CAWMP?
❑ Yes
XNo
❑NA
❑ NE
15. Does the receiving crop and/or land application site need improvement?
❑ Yes
No
X
ElNA
ElNE
16. Did the facility fail to secure and/or operate per the irrigation design or wettable acre determination;
❑ Yes
❑ No
t&
❑ 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
Reviewer/Inspector Name Q v l:; ' uE •` Phone: 11 l . ro 0
Reviewer/Inspector Signatur IF Date:
' 12128104 Continued

Facility Number: — Dlef Inspection d �
Re uired Records &Documents
A
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 El Maps El Other
21. ;Waste
s :cord keeping need improvement? If yes, Ghee a appropriate boZeii
W. , ,_ [�s,j Yes ❑ No ❑ NA ❑ NE
A licat' Waste Analysis Anal sis L11'Vhaste TransfersN� YY
Rainfa Stocking ❑ rop Yield , a . ns onthly a ❑ Weather Code
22. Did the facility fail to install and maintain a rain gauge? 0-4- k*UIV ❑ Yes KNo ❑ NA ❑ NE
23.
If selected, did the facility fail to install and maintain rainbreakers on irrigation equipment?
❑ Yes
❑ No
ONA
❑ NE
24,
Did the facility fail to calibrate waste application equipment as required by the permit?acA
No ❑ Yes
No
❑ NA
❑ NE
25.
Did the facility fail to conduct a sludge survey as required by the permit?
❑ Yes
No
[ KNA
❑ NE
26.
Did the facility fail to have an actively certified operator in charge'?
❑ Yes
XNo
❑ NA
❑ NE
27.
Did the facility fail to secure a phosphorus loss assessment (PLAT) certification?
❑ Yes
❑ No
gNA
❑ NE
Other Issues
28. ere any additional problems noted which cause non-compliance of the permit or CAWMP?
UV
Yes
[INo
[I NA
El NE
29.
Did the facility fail to properly dispose of dead animals within 24 hours and/or document
❑ Yes
No
ElNA
❑ NE
and report the mortality rates that were higher than normal?
30.
At the time of the inspection did the facility pose an odor or air quality concern?
❑ Yes
No
❑ NA
❑ NE
If yes, contact a regional Air Quality representative immediately
31.
Did the facility fail to notify the regional office of emergency situations as required by
❑ Yes
No
❑ NA
❑ NE
General Permit? (ie/ discharge, freeboard problems, over application)
32.
Did Reviewerllnspector fail to discuss review/inspection with an on -site representative?
❑ Yes
KNo
❑ NA
❑ NE
33.
Does facility require a follow-up visit by same agency?
❑ Yes
NfNo
❑ NA
❑ NE
Additional Comments and/or Drawings:
as �) aj
r aac
0
f = S -�N F 1
A,4 w/ T 306
�0 (14ar— or- bee-f U-)RS+e- C
�d5o SeAferQ` r5. T5 "Ih plan
" 10 - l3 , FeSCue. Paster

JType of Visit OO Compliance Inspection O Operation Review O Lagoon Evaluation
(Reason for Visit OO Routine O Complaint O Follow up O Emergency Notification O Other ❑ Denied Access
Facility Number 97 27
Date of Visit: 7/8/2044 Time:
NNot O erational O Below Threshold
Permitted ® Certified 13 Conditionally Certified [3 Registered Date Last Operated or Above Threshold:.. ...............
FarmName: Dpri.SparM..................................................................................................... County: W..jWs ............................................... 1?4rS A......,.
OwnerName: An .......................................... sparm ......................................................... Phone No: 33.6-9,57:-.9.t..........................................................,
Mailing Address: 1242.1'�Riat .Sril�g.>i�t..................................................................... IRQuir g..ttAYim..NC........................... . 2B.6.6.9 .............
Facility Contact: ftark.Sp rka..................................................... Title:................................................................ Phone No:(09212,914 .........................
Onsite Representative: Dplq,Spgrks................... ... Integrator:......
Certified Operator: JQoAl..C..................................... SpArm .............................................. Operator Certification Number:22.14,2.............................
Location of Farm:
+rom Hwy 268 in Roaring River take White Plains to White Plains Church Road north approx. 3 miles to Hoots Rd, turn A
•fight go approx. 1 mile to farm on right.
❑ Swlne []Poultry ®Cattle ❑ Horse Latitude 36 •
Longitude 80 • 58 37 4*
Design..
Current Desig t
`Current
Design :'Current
Swine Ca acit
Po ulation Poultry Ca aci
o ulation' Cattle
Capacity :Population
❑ Wean to Feeder
. Layer
❑ Dairy
❑ Feeder to Finish
❑ Non -Layer
®Non -Dairy
200 3
❑ Farrow to Wean
❑ Farrow to Feeder
❑Other
❑ Farrow to Finish
Total Design Capacity
200
❑ Gilts
❑ Boars
Total'SSLW :
160,000
Number of Lagoons
0
0
No Liquid Waste Management Svstem
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? (1f 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 1 Structure 2 Structure 3 Structure 4 Structure 5 Structure 6
Identifier: ................................... ................................................................................................................................................................................
Freeboard (inches):
12112103 Continued

Facility Number: 97--27 Date of Inspection 1 7/8/2004 6 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 ❑ Yes ® No
closure plan?
(If any of questions 4-6 was answered yes, and the situation poses an
immediate public health or environmental threat, notify DWQ)
7. Do any of the structures need maintenance/improvement? ❑ Yes ® No
8. Does any part of the waste management system other than waste structures require maintenance/improvement? ❑ Yes ® No
9. Do any stuctures lack adequate, gauged markers with required maximum and minimum liquid level ❑ Yes ❑ No
elevation markings?
Waste Application
10. Are there any buffers that need maintenance/improvement? ❑ Yes ® No
11. Is there evidence of over application? If yes, check the appropriate box below. ❑ Yes ® No
❑ Excessive Ponding ❑ PAN ❑ Hydraulic Overload ❑ Frozen Ground ❑ Copper and/or Zinc
12. Crop type Corn (Silage & Grain)
13. Do the receiving crops differ with those designated in the Certified Animal Waste Management Plan (CAWMP)? ❑ Yes ® No
14. a) Does the facility lack adequate acreage for land application? ❑ Yes ® No
b) Does the facility need a wettable acre determination? ❑ Yes ®No
c) This facility is pended for a wettable acre determination? ❑ Yes ® No
15. Does the receiving crop need improvement? ❑ Yes ®No
16. Is there a lack of adequate waste application equipment? ❑ Yes ® No
Odor Issues
17. Does the discharge pipe from the confinement building to the storage pond or lagoon fail to discharge at/or below ❑ Yes ❑ No
liquid level of lagoon or storage pond with no agitation?
18. Are there any dead animals not disposed of properly within 24 hours? ❑ Yes ® No
19. Is there any evidence of wind drift during land application? (i.e. residue on neighboring vegetation, asphalt, ❑ Yes ® No
roads, building structure, and/or public property)
20. At the time of the inspection did the facility pose an odor or air quality concern? If yes, contact a regional ❑ Yes ®No
Air Quality representative immediately.
1 S ' ` I I! I - , E, f tl 4^ E.. ! Eli 1
CorfttnenU (refer to question #):'Explain any YES answers srid/or ahy recommendations orany other comments £ 3a1 F nE& V
Use'drawmgs of facility to, bettef'explain situations. (use additional pages as' necessary) o Field Copy ® Final Notes
. Dry stack was empty.
1. Operator/owner is to receive a new permit this Fall.
left blank are not applicable to this facility at this time.
has obtained cost -share assistance and plans to install several hundred feet offencing and dig a well to exclude cattle from
waters near his home.
Reviewer/Inspector Name Melis$g Rosebrock.
Reviewer/Inspector Signatu
11
.E
y0 h x Date: ' 7 Iq D
L bf J l✓V✓ l Urfisilil[Gu

Facility Number: 97-27 Wf Inspection 71$/2004 •
Required
Records _&_Documents
21.
Fail to have Certificate of Coverage & General Permit'or other Permit readily available?
® Yes
❑ No
22.
Does the facility fail to have all components of the Certified Animal Waste Management Plan readily available?
(ie/ WUP, checklists, design, maps, etc.)
❑ Yes
® No
23.
Does record keeping need improvement? If yes, check the appropriate box below.
❑ Yes
®No
❑ Waste Application ❑ Freeboard ❑ Waste Analysis ❑ Soil Sampling
24.
Is facility not in compliance with any applicable setback criteria in effect at the time of design?
❑ Yes
® No
25.
Did the facility fail to have a actively certified operator in charge?
❑ Yes
®No
26.
Fail to notify regional DWQ of emergency situations as required by General Permit?
(ic/ discharge, freeboard problems, over application)
❑ Yes
® No
27,
Did Reviewer/Inspector fail to discuss review/inspection with on -site representative?
❑ Yes
® No
28.
Does facility require a follow-up visit by same agency?
❑ Yes
® No
29.
Were any additional problems noted which cause noncompliance of the Certified AWMP?
❑ Yes
® No
NPDES Permitted Facilities
30.
Is the facility covered under a NPDES Permit? (If no, skip questions 31-35)
❑ Yes
®No
31.
If selected, did the facility fail to install and maintain rainbreakers on irrigation equipment?
❑ Yes
❑ No
32.
Did the facility fail to install and maintain a rain gauge?
❑ Yes
❑ No
33.
Did the facility fail to conduct an annual sludge survey?
❑ Yes
❑ No
34.
Did the facility fail to calibrate waste application equipment?
❑ Yes
❑ No
35.
Does record keeping for NPDES required forms need improvement? If yes, check the appropriate box below.
❑ Yes
❑ No
❑ Stocking Form ❑ Crop Yield Form []Rainfall ❑ Inspection After l" 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 visit.
3. Need to obtain poultry litter sample this week.
9. Need to add T-277 F-8 & 9 as soon as possible since litter was already applied to these fescue fields. Owner says these are newly
[eared fields.
9. Need to add T-JAFI and JAF2 to the chart in the WUP. They were highlighted on the maps, but I could not locate them in Mr.
parks' WUP chart.
9. The acreage listed in Mr. Sparks' records for T-389 Fields 1-4 (14.72) does not seem to match the acreage in the WUP (4.6). See
;clinical specialist for confirmation.
12112103

IType of Visit Worppliance Inspection O Operation Review O Lagoon Evaluation
Reason for Visit (/Routine O Complaint O Follow up O Emergency Notification O Other
Facility Number Date of Visit:
YPermitted 0 Certified 0 Conditionally Certified 0 Registered
arm Name: .....
Owner Name:
Mailing Address: ---1
Facility Contact: ».Cis:p.1�� `__ ..___ Title:
Onsi to Representative:
Certified Operator:..__hQ
Location of Farm:
Not
❑ Denied Access
ional O Below Threshold
Date Last Operate�d� or Above Threshold:
County:.......
' Phone No: ...IL. I J—_62,101 _ .._... _._..
---------- Phone No �} _ !
Integrator:
C... -
Operator Certification Number:.,. 2 j_q .2 ,
❑ Swine ❑ Poultry Vcattle ❑ Horse Latitude 0 ^^ 1 1 At Longitude • ®1 It
Des
Sv� .. Ca
r Design = Cnr
n. yCattle { ;,�' ..Csttacitv.. Potxil
Wean to Feeder
s f
❑Layer
Feeder to Finish
Non -Layer
Farrow to Wean
gip.
Other
Farrow to Feeder
Farrow to Finish
Tote Des>y
❑ Gilts
a r'
Boars`r
Dischames & Stream impacts
1. Is any discharge observed from any part of the operation?
Discharge originated at: ❑ Lagoon ❑ Spray Field ❑ Other
& 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/rain?
d. Does discharge bypass a lagoon system? (If yes, notify DWQ)
2. Is there evidence of past discharge from any part of the operation?
❑ Yes XNo
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ 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? wey ❑ Yes No.
Structure 1 Structure 2 Structure 3 Structure 4 Structure 5 Structure
Identifier: _.-K. .
__...... _ .._._....... _ .._.».._ .........._........ __.» ........._.».».» ........ ».»».._..... _... ..... ».»» »».».» .....
Freeboard (inches):
12112103 CoAdnued

Facility Number: Date of Inspection
5. Are there any immediate threats to the Pgrity of any of the structures observed? Oe/ treed, severe erosion, YesVNO
❑
seepage, etc.) )(No
6. Are there structures on -site which are not properly addressed and/or managed through a waste management or ❑Yes
closure plan?
(If any of questions 4-6 was answered yes, and the situation poses an
immediate public health or environmental threat, notify DWQ)
7. Do any of the structures need maintenance/improvement? ❑ Yes No
8. Does any part of the waste management system other than waste structures require maintenance/improvement? ❑ Yes o
9. Do any stuctures lack adequate, gauged markers with required maximum and minimum liquid level ell mso
elevation markings?
Waste Application
10. Are there any buffers that need maintenance/improvement? ❑ Yes No
11. Is there evidence of over application? If yes, check the appropriate box below. ❑ Yes KNo
❑ Excessive Ponding PAN ❑ Hydraulic Overload ❑ Frozen Ground ElCopper and/or Zinc
12. Crop type
13. Do the receiving crops differ with those designated in the Certified Animal Waste Management Plan (CAWNiP)? ❑ Yes No
14. a) Does the facility lack adequate acreage for land application? ❑ Yes No
b) Does the facility need a wettable acre determination? ❑ Yes No
c) This facility is pended for a wettable acre determination? ❑ Yes No
15. Does the receiving crop need improvement? ❑ Yes No
16. Is there a lack of adequate waste application equipment? ❑ Yes No
Odor issues
17. Does the discharge pipe from the confinement building to the storage pond or lagoon fail to discharge at/or below EfTes
liquid level of lagoon or storage pond with no agitation?
18. Are there any dead animals not disposed of properly within 24 hours? ❑ Yes o
19. Is there any evidence of wind drift during land application? (i.e. residue on neighboring vegetation, asphalt, ❑ Yes fNo
roads, building structure, and/or public property)
20. At the time of the inspection did the facility pose an odor or air quality concern? If yes, contact a regional ❑ Yes
Air Quality representative immediately.%1NO
1 es r s u ^�� use x u�,r r,>L �_r t+ I'M
Cosaments (retetr to questto '#} F* Qi any,JYES ii s ers anu os any recomn enaatioas or aay�othzr comments. 7� rr , `'
t ¢ .L''..i L' f,...s@ r.. r €a�:€rJr� 393si 9 rjg h tIIS, 3 r if tit•#;'"' iti€ e'tts.��.r k€rd)f .:�rf.i: iH i f.i ?:: t ? k.�w-v:...^ _. rsl..,f,.�s .r.,.:�sa.»»H,€.GS«a,:.dd�yAj pa a q f aft;
Use d�raw,ags ofAaeaitty,to better mplsin siatuat io= {use add:t onal pages as necessary} .Ie ❑Field Copy Final Notes r 3 %
i�: ;.# :� i,rt;};'t' r,.. «-s �+ cit h daa !`'t# t - -r• €. `�,}.. :( a i'€€:57 ' -
..actr+,?Jr:rS:_1v::i.�7da;L:vi:t%,lit w;..w-:�:a3.aeJaA'���3F.a'�ala�>s�:�l,?:£ae�t.�...��.'a;�a:�?a}�.�.�E.i£�.�<!?€�.���::ibiui:,;czi@itu.�.U9�Pii%yr,��:i�;..'�r3rrn_a���i'•.!tm��,!�:�"�`�.,_I;
76E &6tb�L�) LA-VI-0 'tJ.X0 UAd
<� ;6'° >" ;
d .i' ; r r1, tar'If'i ¢#e ¢r� "
Reviewerllnspector Name ,r , _._� r_' r� s�t�au�!�i�J ✓ t 'r » wins r
Reviewer/Inspector Signature: Date:
r �n�ma

Facility Number:q of Inspection
Required Records & Documents
21. FaiI to have Certificate of Coverage & General Permit or other Permit readily available? A 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 )(V o
23_ Does record keeping need improvement? yes, check the appropriate b x below. flyes ❑ No
❑ WApplication -bWaste Analysis ❑ S 1 mpling
24. Is facility not in compliance with any applicable setback criteria in effect at the time of design? ❑ Yes No
25. Did the facility fail to have a actively certified operator in charge? ❑ Yes No
26. Fail to notify regional DWQ of emergency situations as required by General Permit?
(ie/ discharge, freeboard problems, over application) ❑ Yes No
27. Did Reviewer/Inspector fail to discuss review/inspection with on -site representative? ❑ Yes o
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? AYes o
NPDES Permitted Facilities
30. Is the facility covered under a NPDES Permit? (If no, skip questions 31-35) ❑ Yes o
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
113 No violations or deficiencies were noted during this visit. You will receive no further correspondence about this visit.
:TftF 1 944 -T-,TA F,�__
up( a'y �J �-.
`1vrvo3J U Q! p

nical Assistance Site Visit
DhWn of Soil and Water Conservation
Natural Resources Conservation Service
Soil and Water Conservation District
Other...
Facility Number 97 - 27 Date: 3130104 Time: 1 9:15 Time On Farm
Farm Name Don Sparks County Wilkes
70 WSRO
Phone: [phone]
Mailing Address 1242 Poplar Srings Rd Roaring River NC 28669
Onsite
Representative Don Sparks integrator
Type Of Visit
Operation Review
Compliance Inspection (pilot only)
Technical Assistance
Confirmation for Removal
❑ No Animals -Date Last Operated:
❑ Operating below threshold
❑ Swine ❑ Poultry ® Cattle ❑ Horse
Design Current
Capacity Population
❑ Wean to Feeder
❑ Feeder to Finish
❑ Farrow to Wean
❑ Farrow to Feeder
❑ Farrow to Finish
❑ Gilts
❑ Boars
PurQose Of Visit
OO Routine
O Response to DWQ/DENR referral
O Response to DSWC/SWCD referral
Q Response to complaint/local referral
O Requested by producer/integrator
O Follow-up
O Emergency
O Other...
Design Current
Capacity Population
❑ Layer
❑ Non -Layer
❑ Dairy
® Non -Dairy
PurQose Of Visit
OO Routine
O Response to DWQ/DENR referral
O Response to DSWC/SWCD referral
Q Response to complaint/local referral
O Requested by producer/integrator
O Follow-up
O Emergency
O Other...
Design Current
Capacity Population
❑ Layer
❑ Non -Layer
❑ Dairy
® Non -Dairy
❑ Dairy
® Non -Dairy
zoo
ss
Iff Other
GENERAL QUESTIONS:
1. Is waste discharging from any part of the operation and reaching surface waters or wetlands? ❑ yes N no
2. Is there evidence of a past waste discharge from any part of the operation that waste reached ❑ yes N no
surface waters or wetlands?
3. Does any problem pose an immediate threat to the integrity of the waste structure (large trees, ❑ yes N no
seepage, severe erosion, etc.)?
4. Is there evidence of nitrogen over application, hydraulic overloading or excessive ponding ❑ yes N no
requiring DWQ notification?
5. Is there evidence of improper dead animal disposal that poses a threat to the environment ❑ yes N no
and/or public health?
6. Is the waste level within the structural freeboard elevation range for any waste structure? ❑ yes ❑ no
Structurel Structure 2 Structure 3 Structure 4 Structure 5
Identifier Dry -stack
Level (Inches) 60
CROP TYPES [Fescue -graze IFescue-hay I 1corn, Silage eat
SPRAYFIELD
SOIL. TYPES PaD PcB2 PcC2 Ma132 SLB
7. What type of technical assistance does the onsite representative feel is needed? (list in comment section)
03/10/03

a
Facility Number 97 - 27 Date:
3/30/04
PARAMETER
pO 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
❑
❑
[310. Level in structural freeboard
Conditional
❑
❑
❑ 11. Level in storm storage
26. Waste Plan Amendment
27. Review or Evaluate Waste Plan wlproducer
❑
❑
❑ 12. Waste structure integrity Compromised
❑ 13. Waste structure needs maintenance
28. Forms Need (list in comment section)
❑
❑
29. Missing Components (list in comments)
❑
❑
❑ 14. Over application >= 10% & 10 lbs.
❑
❑
[115. Over application < 10% or < 10 lbs.
30. 21-1.0200 re -certification
❑ 16. Hydraulic overloading
31. Five & Thirty day Plans of Action (PoA)
❑
❑
32. Irrigation record keeping assistance
❑
❑
❑ 17. Deficient irrigation records
❑ 18. Late/missing waste analysis
33. 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 removallclosure 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
❑
❑
Resaulatory Referrals
41. Site evaluation
❑
❑
❑ Referred to DWQ Date:
42. Irrigation Calibration
❑
❑
❑ Referred to NCDA Date:
43. Irrigation design/installation
❑
El
❑ Other...
system
Date:
44. Secure irrigation Information (maps, etc.)
❑
❑
LIST IMPROVEMENTS
45. Operating improvements (pull signs, etc.)
❑
❑
11. MADE BY OPERATION
46. Wettable Acre Determination
❑
❑
47. Evaluate WAD certification/rechecks
❑
❑
48. Crop ova luationlrecommendations
❑
❑
2.
49. Drainage worklevaluation
❑
❑
50. Land shaping, subsoiling, aeration, etc.
51. Runoff control, stormwater diversion, etc.
❑
❑
❑
❑
3
52. Buffer improvements
❑
❑
53. Field measurements(GPS, surveying, etc.)
❑
❑
4.
54. Mortality BMPs
❑
❑
55. Waste operator education (NPDES)
❑
❑
5'
56. Operation & maintenance education
❑
❑
57. Record keeping education
❑
❑
6.
58. Croplforage management education
❑
❑
59. Soil and/or waste sampling education
❑
❑
03/10/03

•
Facility Number 97 - 27 Date: 3130104
COMMENTS:
Waste analysis: 2-04-04 SLB 26.3 Ibs.N/ton B, SLB 27.9 ibs.Nlton B
* Facility and records appear to be in compliance.
Still need to locate the COC and General Permit.
TECHNICAL SPECIALIST IRocky Durham
SIGNATURE
Date Entered: 12104
Entered By: lRocky Durham
3 03/10/03

Type of Visit C mpliance Inspection O Operation Review O Lagoon Evaluation
Reason for Visit gkRoutine O Complaint O Follow up O Emergency Notification O Other ❑ Denied Access
Date of Visit: 06120/2003 Time; 1215
Facility Number 97 27
Not O erational O Below Threshold
Permitted a Certified ❑ Conditionally Certified 0 Registered Date Last Operated or Above Threshold- :............
Farm Name: Kant.Spxticks.................................. .:.....`....::............................... ..................... County: Wj%cs ............................................... WSRQ........
OwnerName: DQu.......................................... S{tatU...... ....:.............................................. Phone No: 3 Cr. ,�z- 01.............................................:.............
Mailing Address: l7M.Pt?FlAII A1a&S.J....::.::.....:...................................I................. R.4A1171g1gRIlnir..KC.................... ......................... M.6,69 ..............
Facility Contact: X?ant.Sp,>trS...........
.................... :..................... Title:............... Phone No.
Onsite Representative:JDi!]A.SRa11kS...........%..:.:................................................................. Integrator:.......................................................................:..............
Certified Operator:Doia.0..................................... .Spa1:6.............................................. Operator Certification Number:22142.............................
Location of Farm:
rout Hwy 268 in Roaring River take White Plains to White Plains Church Road north approx. 3 miles to Hoots Rd, turn A
ight go approx. 1 mile to farm on right.
❑ Swine ❑ Poultry ® Cattle ❑ Horse- Latitude 36 ' 14 f 39 if , Longitude 80 • 58 6 37 64
Design
.. a�sn�.nr A . _
Current Vie.°Design 'Current
,r - ti e! �a v: r �r :440".s
1: �y De !gn, Current}"
one, „ : T` ; C-a 'acit
Population Poultry Ca acit Po elation
Cattl_ a "" Capacjty,VIPelation
k. ❑ Wean to Feeder
❑ Layer
❑Dairy
:
'
❑ Feeder to Finish
m
❑Non -Layer
®Non -Dairy
200
0
z
�
❑ Farrow to Wean
1
❑ Farrow to Feeder
-
; ❑Other .. - _ . - -__ � .,; : � ' s �;�
Trotal Design Capacity' 200
❑ Farrow to Finish
❑ Gilts
_ -
❑ Boars
,° ", TaL1 ySSLW 160,000
4 k
'fly:
F�
Number of Lagoons, ®
❑Subsurface Drains Present 110Lagoon Area ❑ Spray Field Area
Holding Ponds /Solid Traps ®EFS
-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 Q21jection & Treatment
4. Is storage capacity (freeboard plus storm storage) less than adequate? ❑ Spillway
Structure I Structure 2 Structure 3 Structure,4 : _ Structure 5
Identifier: ........Dry..stack................................:..........•.................................... .......... ......................... ...................................
Freeboard (inches): 45 _
05103101
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes ® No
® Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes ® No
Structure 6. ,
Conf'inued

Facility Number: 97-27 1 0 Date of Inspection 06/20/2003 .
5. Are there any immediate threats to the integrity of any of the structures observed? (ie/ trees, severe erosion, ❑ Yes ® No
seepage, etc.)
6. Are there structures on -site which are not properly addressed and/or managed through a waste management or
closure plan? ❑Yes ®No
(If any of questions 4.6 was answered yes, and the situation poses an
immediate public health or environmental threat, notify DWQ)
7. Do any of the structures need maintenance/improvement? ❑ Yes ® No
8. Does any part of the waste management system other than waste structures require maintenance/improvement? ®'Yes ❑ No
9. Do any stuctures lack adequate, gauged markers with required maximum and minimum liquid level
elevation markings? ❑ Yes ❑ No
Waste Application
10. Are there any buffers that need maintenance/improvement? ❑ Yes ® No
11. Is there evidence of over application? ❑ Excessive Ponding ❑ PAN ❑ Hydraulic Overload ❑ Yes ® No
12. Crop type Fescue (Hay)
13. Do the receiving crops differ with those designated in the Certified Animal Waste Management Plan (CAWMP)? ® Yes ❑ No
14. a) Does the facility lack adequate acreage for land application? ❑ Yes ® No
b) Does the facility need a wettable acre determination? ❑ Yes ® No
c) This facility is pended for a wettable acre determination? ❑ Yes ® No
15. Does the receiving crop need improvement?
16. Is there a lack of adequate waste application equipment?
Required Records_&_Documents
17. Fail to have Certificate of Coverage & General Permit or other Permit readily available?
18. Does the facility fail to have all components of the Certified Animal Waste Management Plan readily available?
(ie/ WUP, checklists, design, maps, etc.)
19. Does record keeping need improvement? (ie/ irrigation, freeboard, waste analysis & soil sample reports)
20. Is facility not in compliance with any applicable setback criteria in effect at the time of design?
21. Did the facility fail to have a actively certified operator in charge?
22. Fail to notify regional DWQ of emergency situations as required by General Permit?
(ie/ discharge, freeboard problems, over application)
23. Did Reviewer/Inspector fail to discuss review/inspection with on -site representative?
24. Does facility require a follow-up visit by same agency?
25. Were any additional problems noted which cause noncompliance of the Certified AWMP?
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes ® No
® Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes ® No
IN Yes ❑ No
0 No violations or deficiencies were noted during this visit. You will receive no further correspondence about this visit.
Comments (refer to question #): Explafn any YE5 answers and/or any recommendations or any other comments
Use drawings of facility to better explain situations. use additional pages as necessary : ❑ Field Copy ® Final Notes
3. and 8. Stocktrail run-off is greatly improved and creek looks much better. Continue efforts to manage last bit of run-off with ditching
_
(operator wants to install roofing over stocktrail).
13. and 25. Operator's records indicate that beef waste was applied to T-9860 F-1 (25.81 acres) on fescue but could not find this field in
DWQ copy of the WUP. DWQ only only lists corn and small grain. Need to add "fescue" and "field I" to WUP. See SWCD for
assistance.
18. Operator did not have a copy of the CAWMP. See SWCD for copy of the latest version.
w
Reviewer/Inspector Name IMelin Rosebrock
Reviewer/Inspector Slgnatur Date:
05103101 1- - - f - v - Continued

Facility Number: 97-27 pie' inspection 06/20/2003 0
Odor Issu"
26. Does the discharge pipe from the confinement building to the storage pond or lagoon fail to discharge at/or below
liquid level of lagoon or storage pond with no agitation?
27. Are there any dead animals not disposed of properly within 24 hours?
28, Is there any evidence of wind drift during land application? (i.e. residue on neighboring vegetation, asphalt,
roads, building structure, and/or public property)
29. Is the land application spray system intake not located near the liquid surface of the lagoon?
30. Were any major maintenance problems with the ventilation fan(s) noted? (i.e. broken fan belts, missing or
or broken fan blade(s), inoperable shutters, etc.)
31. Do the animals feed storage bins fail to have appropriate cover?
32. Do the flush tanks lack a submerged fill pipe or a permanent/temporary cover?
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes ® No
[]Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes IN No
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes ❑ No
INdditionallIQ0mmentsIan_ orb _raw_ ngs:
- Records looked good but operator didn't have a copy of the WUP to check. Soils and waste analyses ok. Copper is 1601
on T-389 F-3 and 2062 on T-97611 (Cook) . Must cease application of animal waste onto fields when copper reaches 3000.
Poultry - WSRO/DWQ received complaint this week alleging overapplication of litter and stockpiling of waste too close to the creek
running through fields next to the cattle operation. Looked at site today. Litter is being stockpiled too close to a freshwater ditch
(10') and needs to be moved back at least 100' or land applied immediately. Application of litter needs to be back 25' or more from
a creek. Per operator, all the stockpiled litter is to be moved within a week.
05103101

ra 95, AiexarJe_r
'I.0OAk
wh
a Dfvisiioit ei Water Qaallty r� 1 t "t; { "
.,
:�
Division flf Sall and Winter Cuuservatlon V{ w E { P sl
j3
a t. ._. ' :,. ,'� E � ! SSxE - Y-i E d , 33YY�' f{{ (.. { Y. 1 " �.'Ft _3' f - - �.� it1 tl � E. {', •33 &E dj�E i..,} Z E fE� di4i}2�9i 3S ?i'i3,�a.p.
p�A.-6-}'BCE fEi£ Yi4
VN1Y 6vi {3 I ia'.ft i_f� i f 6 t
IE
: r: � f= 4 `°
3r @t� s d t I,i tl,'p r ads f iil
'`
, . ;. ,..E- :
, . _. � =t; � _BE � . r •,� '� EPf , � , .. ,f � -s
Type of Visit Compliance Inspection 0 Operation Review 0 Lagoon Evaluation
Reason for Vislt Routine 0 Complaint 0 Follow up 0 Emergency Notification 0 Other ❑ Denied Access
Date of Visit: Time:
Facility Number
Not O erational arBelow Threshold
Permitted Certified
0 Conditionally Certified 0 Registered Date Last Operated or Above Threshold: _Q (
,
Farm Name:
County:
Owner Name:
CLr Phone No: ' q�7y
Mailing Address:
_
004—
Facility Contact:
Tit] . one No:
OnsiteRepresentative:
—l��t—�- Integrator:
Certified Operator:
r�
Operator Certification Number. L Z
Location of Farm:
❑ Swine ❑ Poultry
Swine,
I" ❑Wean to Feeder
❑ Feeder to Finish
❑ Farrow to Wean
r, ❑Farrow to Feeder
Farrow to Finish
In Gilts
Cattle ❑ Horse Latitude E20 N �u
resign Gurr"ent Design Current
kpaCitv.'PQpjjIAtio6.. Poult . -1`ICa 0 acitv`r4a"ulatiti'
Number of Lagoons
Holdifng.Ponds PSolid'Traps
E r ' Des-
C1 DD +: Non -Layer er i ❑ Non g
I �� ❑ Other I
' TotkLDeA9n1' Cap
-,Total S
❑ Subsurface Drain
No Liquid Waste
M
r C
IIL.W'LLQ
apt
noon Area 10 Snrav Field Ares
RischarQes & tream 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 oL=qatiaLadverse impacts to the Waters of the State other than from a discharge?
Waste Codection & Treatment
4. Is storage capacity (freeboard plus storm storage) less than adequate? ❑ Spillway
Structur 1 Structure 2 Structure 3 Structure 4 Structure S
Identifier: T
❑ Yes XNo
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes No
Yes 10-ONo
❑ Yes KNO
Structure 6
Freeboard (inches):
05103101 Continued

Facility Number: C77— Date of Inspection
5. Are there any immediate threats to the integrity of any of the structures observed? (ie/ trees, severe erosion,
❑ Yes
No
seepage, etc.)
6. Are there structures on -site which are not properly addressed and/or managed through a waste management or
closure plan?
(If any of questions 4-6 was answered yes, and the situation poses an
El Yes
No
,,,,////���•
immediate public health or environmental threat, notify DWQ)
7. Do any of the structures need maintenance/improvement?
❑ Yes
No
8. Does any part of the waste management system other than waste structures require maintenance/improvement?
Yes
❑ No
9. Do any stuctures lack adequate, gauged markers with required maximum and minimum liquid level
elevation markings?
o
Waste Aonlication
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
13. Do the receiving crops Afer with those designated in the Certified Animal Waste Management Plan (CAWMP)?
Yes
❑ No
14. a) Does the facility lack adequate acreage for land application?
El Yes - I
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
[ N0
18. Doe ciiity fail to have all components of the Certified Animal Waste Management Plan readily available?
XYes
`
(ie/ P hecklists, design, maps, etc.)
❑ No
19. Doe record keeping need improvement? (ie/ irrigation, freeboard, waste analysis & soil sample reports)
❑YesNo
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?
ElYes
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
o
24. Does facility require a follow-up visit by same agency?
❑Yes
rNo
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.
( q ) l y A Comments- refer, to uestion # : Ex` lain"an YES answers.aad/or,any rec6mmeodatioas o`r an ;o er comments'.'' �,� ty Y mm���� f �,
Use drawiQgs of facility to better explain sttuahons; (use addltional pages as necessary) _ ( ' E
• , , , , � Copv ❑ Final Notes
Fteld
u ux - o ff' �r i s reel-1 i out ro vE
0.)he
d a-
�e� lob�S m �c-h }��'� Cap. -fin u e e ��o r+5
4-t�mnlas+ b if of ran-o T'r' c�.��d t -kh a r--
Reviewer/Inspector Name
Reviewer/Inspector Signature: 9 Jja Date:
a.vrsursacu

Facility Number:
• F I 1 0
Date of inspect inn
Odor Issues
26. Does the discharge pipe from the confinement building to the storage pond or lagoon fail to discharge atlor 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?
Additional Comments andlor Drawings:
!>. U;�y &p P rr-+ar5 (-ec.o rdb 5ho Lo `-6cc�f bee.F
ue�out
v�u po �co
ed
Py
U Q. See.
❑ Yes No
[] Yes No
GE
❑ Yes No
❑ Yes rlo,
T-
bLoQ off'
o h� l i Sf.S ad n o rrCv- s n2 Q
�S�.��l
u�Ei l/
e.ld
Oper'afor dick "-�
5e-e. Sco c-D.
h"e- &Py e-C co 0 F>.
POOL+r-Mi?ecoras too �_ 1d 100+ J �d ' �uup
at Q na.� s ► 5 c�
CL) 1
&-se G+O i COL4�' o n w hex e q p"er i 5> 3 ooca
Pou li2�
�wQ _-ems P.� re cie�� L�n� la.� a� �a � 1 °1�► �S
att 1 3 ©vcrcf,l (c��an o-` 114er 4* C"16ft 11
4ito �'Cuo -�D 1)&A- a6 C*
0 C) P, d AA 5't � e- _r J,�5 &.OL -8 Cy-
CL40
gMM6& 4rn &[+C'h 6- W
�f np10AC, A?t "n Ue-A
(c)
osioria bo-a—, lco' 6 r mo�� C.o q tc�,.�,o A� p 1 i cad-ioh o'� Ij -ffet''
ee&
Lb�i ta��� ,5{�etC�;ied m be Moved w/tVla w2etc.

Type of Visit O Compliance Inspection © Operation Review O Lagoon Evaluation
Reason for Visit *Routine O Complaint O Follow op O Emergency Notification O Other ❑ Denied Access
Facility Number 97 27 Dale ur Visit: 1 10/23/2002 '1'iuse: 1 -.25
Q Not O erational Q Below Threshold
0 Permitted ® Certified ❑ Conditionally Certified 0 Registered Date Last Operated or Above Threshold : .........................
FarmName: l?ant.S.P,arM..................................................................................................... County:Wj%g,5 ............................................... !'I$RQ........
OwnerName: Dant.......................................... Sparks ......................................................... Phone No: 33.6-9,57-2801 ...........................................................
Mailing Address: 124,Z.Pnplar.5x.imgs..Rd..................................................................... lioa3rj09.Rh9r.-N.C............................................. U669 .............
FacilityContact: ................ .............................................................. Title:................................................................ Phone No:...................................................
Onsite Representative: D.9ja.Sl ax'.ks.................................................................................. Integrator:......................................................................................
Certified Operator: Dou..C..................................... SpArkS .............................................. Operator Certification Number:22142 .............................
Location of Farm:
?ram Hwy 268 in Roaring River take White Plains to White Plains Church Road north approx. 3 miles to Hoots Rd, turn +
-fight go approx.1 mile to farm on right.
❑ Swine ❑ Poultry ® Cattle ❑ Worse Latitude 36 • 14 f =11 Longitude 80 ' S8 6 37 6*
Dest'Current Design Current Designs °` Current
,. . ;. gr , ,a,
Swine ,._ Ca sett ..1?o uletion Poultry ,,Ca acif aiPo ulatton Cattle ,VCa sett . Po ulation
isR
.-r
.. .V i
' Number of Lagoons u ❑ Subsurface Drains Present ❑ Lagoon Area ❑ Spray Field Area
I''
Holding Ponds / 5oiid Traps ® No Liquid Waste Management System
r0 Gilts
y
❑ Wean to Feeder
❑ Feeder to Finish
Layer
❑Non-Layer®Non-Dai
❑Dairy
Discharges R� " re In Impacts
I. Is any discharge observed from any part of the operation? ❑ Yes ® No
Discharge originated at: ❑ Lagoon ❑ Spray Field ❑ Other
a. if discharge is observed, was the conveyance man-made? ❑ Yes ❑ No
b. If discharge is observed, did it reach Water of the State? (if yes, notify DWQ) ❑ Yes ❑ No
c. If discharge is observed, what is the estimated flow in gal/min`?
d. Does discharge bypass a lagoon system? (If yes, notify DWQ) ❑ Yes ❑ No
2. Is there evidence of past discharge from any part of the operation? ❑ Yes ® No
3. Were there any adverse impacts or potential adverse impacts to the Waters of the State other than from a discharge? ❑ Yes ® No
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: .........drystack.........................................................................................................................................................................................
Freeboard (inches): 36
05103101 Continued

Facility Number: 97-27 Date. of Inspection 10/23/2002
5. Are there any immediate threats to the integrity of any of the structures observed? (ie/ trees, severe erosion,
seepage, etc.)
6. Are there structures on -site which are not properly addressed and/or managed through a waste management or
closure plan?
(If any of questions 4-6 was answered yes, and the situation poses an
immediate public health or environmental threat, notify DWQ)
7. Do any of the structures need maintenance/improvement?
8. Does any part of the waste management system other than waste structures require maintenance/improvement?
9. Do any stuctures lack adequate, gauged markers with required maximum and minimum liquid level
elevation markings?
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes ❑ No
Waste Application
10. Are there any buffers that need maintenance/improvement? ❑ Yes ® No
11. Is there evidence of over application? ❑ Excessive Ponding ❑ PAN ❑ Hydraulic Overload ❑ Yes ® No
12. Crop type Corn (Silage & Grain) Fescue (Graze) millet 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
IN No
22.
Fail to notify regional DWQ of emergency situations as required by General Permit?
(ie/ discharge, freeboard problems, over application)
❑ Yes
® No
23.
Did Reviewer/Inspector fail to discuss review/inspection with on -site representative?
❑ Yes
® No
24.
Does facility require a follow-up visit by same agency?
❑ Yes
® No
25.
Were any additional problems noted which cause noncompliance of the Certified AWMP?
❑ Yes
® No
13 No violations or deficiencies were noted during this visit. You will receive no further correspondence about this visit.
Co menu fer to u lion # : Explain any YES a we and/or any recommendations or any othe comments.
1 se wings of facil't o better explain situations. a additional pages as necessary): ❑Field Copy ®Final Notes
13. T9860 field # I doesn't appear to be in the waste plan.
_
Be sure the N rate on the dry form 2 matches the N rate on the table # 2.
Facility is in compliance with the above exception.
Reviewer/Inspector Name Rocky Durham
Reviewer/Inspector Signature: Date:
05103101 Continued

Facility Number: 47-27 Da nspcction 10/23/2002
dor Issues
26. Does the discharge pipe from the confinement building to the storage pond or lagoon fail to discharge atlor 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
ALI
05103101

lType of Visit O Compliance Inspection O Operation Review O Lagoon Evaluation I
Reason for Visit *Routine O Complaint O Follow up O Emergency Notification O Other ❑ Denied Access
Facility Number 97 27 1 1.
Date or visit: 6/20/2002 1'tmc; 0420
FO Not Operational Q Below Threshold
Permitted ® Certified 0 Conditionally Certified 0 Registered Date Last Operated or Above Threshold:..................
Farm Name: DQt1l.Spxt><k&........................................:........................................................ .. County:M11cP.s............................................... WSR.Q.........
OwnerName: DQtx..........................................Spa]rk.&..:...................................................... Phone No: C:9"7-2aSOt.........................................:.................
Mailing Address: 1242AF1ax SxlXtgs tid ..................................................................... RQUIPaRinir...NC............................................. ZHU .............
Facility Contact: Mu Sg,�ka......................................................Title:................................................................ Phone No: 33.G.9212974...('ea-4)
Onsite Representative: Doll.SRatkfi................................................................................. Integrator:............
..........................................................................
Certified Operator:J)oln..0..................................... S.Pelt u.............:................................ Operator Certification Number: 22142 ............................ .:
Location of Farm:
From Hwy 268 in Roaring River take White Plains to White Plains Church Road north approx. 3 miles to Hoots Rd, turn +
right go approx. 1 mile to farm on right.
❑ Swine ❑ Poultry IN Cattle ❑ Horse Latitude =• 14 • 3964 Longitude 80 ' S8 A 37 ff
1� J. f ah -- '4f. YSYIiSr r' 4
5 "C D ' C
:'.
'a
T,
Swine tied � �
Ca acit
� esr n urrent
Current �; ►u'rrent - g F y�
���- Poult . U. a ��
Po ulation r'Y .Ca acit Po ulation � Cattle„ ��Ca
Djscharges & Stregull i act
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/rain?
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: ........JDgstack...................................................................................... ...
Freeboard (inches): 48
05/03/01 Continued

Facility Number: 97-27 Date of Inspection 6/20/2002 0
5. Are there any immediate threats to the Regrity of any of the structures observed? (ic/ trees, severe erosion,
seepage, etc.)
6. Are there structures on -site which are not properly addressed and/or managed through a waste management or
closure plan?
(If any of questions 4-6 was answered yes, and the situation poses an
immediate public health or environmental threat, notify DWQ)
7. Do any of the structures need maintenance/improvement?
8. Does any part of the waste management system other than waste structures require maintenance/improvement?
9. Do any stuctures lack adequate, gauged markers with required maximum and minimum liquid level
elevation markings?
Waste Application
10. Are there any buffers that need maintenance/improvcment?
11. Is there evidence of over application? ❑ Excessive Ponding ❑ PAN ❑ Hydraulic Overload
12. Crop type Pearl millet Rye graze
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes ® No
13. Do the receiving crops differ with those designated in the Certified Animal Waste Management Plan (CAWMP)? IN Yes ❑ No
14. a) Does the facility lack adequate acreage for land application? ❑ Yes ® No
b) Does the facility need a wettable acre determination? ❑ Yes ® No
c) This facility is pended for a wettable acre determination? ❑ Yes ® No
15. Does the receiving crop need improvement?
16. Is there a lack of adequate waste application equipment?
Required Record$ & Document
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 n actively certified operator in charge?
22. Fail to notify regional DWQ of emergency situations as required by General Permit?
(iel discharge, freeboard problems, over application)
23. Did Reviewer/Inspector fail to discuss review/inspection with on -site representative?
24. Does facility require a follow-up visit by same agency?
25. Were any additional problems noted which cause noncompliance of the Certified AWMP?
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes IN No
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes ® No
® Yes ❑ No
E3 No violations or deficiencies were noted during this visit. You will receive no further correspondence about this visit.
Comments refer to u tion Explain any YES an veers and/or any recommendations or any other comments.
Mrlawi`ngsf facil t to etter explain situations. Fu additional pages as necessary : ❑Field Copy ® Final Notes
8. Silage leachate problem has been corrected with an underground tank that is pumped periodically. Looks great!
encing and other work on and around the stock trail looks good, too.
13. and 25. Tract-9860 Field-7 has had cattle waste applied to millet but this crop is not listed in the CAWMP for application in the
Spring. PAN of 135 that operator is using in his records for this is not in the CAWMP either. Suggested that Mr. Sparks contact the
WCD for any waste plan revisions.
25. Tract 389 lists PAN as 100 in the CAWMP but operator is using 200. Suggested he contact SWCD for any possible revisions to
CAWMP.
r
Reviewer/Inspector Name [Melissa Rosebrock
Reviewer/Inspector Signaturojli k 0) Date:
O5103101 Continued

Facility Number: 97-27 M0 lnspcctim, 6/20/2002 •
dor 15�ues
26. Does the discharge pipe from the confinement building to the storage pond or lagoon fail to discharge at/or below
liquid level of lagoon or storage pond with no agitation?
27. Are there any dead animals not disposed of properly within 24 hours?
28. Is there any evidence of wind drift during land application? (i.e. residue on neighboring vegetation, asphalt,
roads, building structure, and/or public property)
29. Is the land application spray system intake not located near the liquid surface of the lagoon?
30. Were any major maintenance problems with the ventilation fan(s) noted? (i.e. broken fan belts, missing or
or broken fan blade(s), inoperable shutters, etc.)
31. Do the animals feed storage bins fail to have appropriate cover?
32. Do the flush tanks lack a submerged fill pipe or a permanent/temporary cover?
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes ❑ No
�&l
J
05103101

•
q.;36 wy)
Type of Visit Compliance Inspection O Operation Review O Lagoon Evaluation I
Reason for Visit �Routine 0 Complaint O Follow up 0 Emergency Notification Q Other ❑ Denied Access
Facility Number Date of Visit: o?b 0 Z Time:
N t Operational- 0 RelowThreshold
©Permitted 0 Certified 0 Conditionally Certified © Registered Date Last Operated or Above Threshold:
Farm Name: Don 5 i7Ar K S County: l KeS
Owner Name: Don S Qa r Y=:S Phone No: 3Ae . 9s 7 . 2 g al
Mailing Address: A r r I i1 G 41 i Vex-
Facility Contact: hO r e 1 S�+� �LS Title: Phone No: 33 U 7 ' a
Onsite Representative: S�ar�.S Integrator: �J
Certified Operator: _ r'1 �41^ �� Operator Certification Number: a i
Location of Farm:
❑ swine ❑ Poultry 4 Cattle ❑ Horse Latitude 0 [�` E� c4 Longitudg ®0 ®` ®"
Design
Current
Swine Capacity
Population
❑ Wean to Feeder
❑ Feeder to Finish
❑ Farrow to Wean
❑ Farrow to Feeder
❑ Farrow to Finish
❑ Gilts
❑ Boars
Number of Lagoonn s
%HoldinZfonds I Solid'Traps,
a
Design Current Design Current
Poultry Capacity Population Cattle 'Capacity Population
❑ Layer Dairy
❑ Non -Layer 1 1. 1 C RU Non-Dai .c I
❑ Other
Total Design Capacity a4(j
Total SSLW' Q dd�.
`pJLJ Subsurface Drains Present JLJ Lagoon Area
No Liquid Waste
Discharges _ Stream a t
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?
WasteCgilection 8& Treatment
4. is storage capacity (freeboard plus storm storage) less than adequate? ❑ Spillway
Structure I Structure 2 Structure 3 Structure 4 Structure 5
Identifier: s
Freeboard (inches):
05103101
❑ Yes �J No
❑ Yes !❑ No
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes XNo
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes ANo
Structure 6
Continued

,
Facility Number: 1 — "] Date of Inspection O O
5. Are there any immediate threats to the integrity of any of the structures observed? (ie/ trees, severe erosion,
❑ Yes
N(No
seepage, etc.)
6. Are there structures on -site which are not properly addressed and/or managed through a waste management or
closure
Yes
XNo
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
XNo
8. Does any part of the waste management system other than waste structures require maintenance/improvement?
❑ Yes
*0
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?
❑ Yes
.gNo
11. Is there evidence of over application? ❑ Excessive Ponding ❑ PAN ❑ Hydraulic Overload
❑ Yes
o
v
12. Crop type
13. Do the receivi g crops differ with those designated in the Certifiedjtmal"Zste Management n (C MP).
Yes
❑ 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
Vij No
c) This facility is pended for a wettable acre determination?
❑ Yes
`� No
15. Does the receiving crop need improvement?
❑ Yes
,XrNo
16. Is there a lack of adequate waste application equipment?
❑ Yes
XNo
Reauired Records & Documents
t 7. 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.) I /
El Yes
No
AA ✓/
✓
19. Does record keeping need improvement? (ie/ 1RTIghtion, fcacboard, 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?
21. Did the facility fail to have a actively certified operator in charge?
❑ Yes
YNO
22. Fail to notify regional DWQ of emergency situations as required by General Permit?
❑ Yes
(ie/ discharge, freeboard problems, over application)
tNo
23. Did Reviewer/Inspector fail to discuss review/inspection with on -site representative?
❑ Yeso
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?
A Yes
❑ No
No violations or deficiencies were noted during this visit. You will receive no further correspondence about this visit.
Comments.(refer;to:questlon,#) Explain arty YES answers and/or any recommendations or any other ciinments. "
�.
:Use drawings of facility to better explalnsltu;ations,.(use additional pages as necessary}°.� .Field Copy El Final Notes
UY vo
Reviewerllnspect ame Q p G
ti r.
Reviewerllnspector Signature:
Date: o?d 2.
05103101 t Continued

R'
0
Facility Number: —
0
Date of Inspection a0 0
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?
Additional Comments and/or Drawings:
❑ Yes [-No
❑ Yes )(No
T- 7�-
-Q�f' C°HU-�AcQ
/haz, as tea PA/0
05103101
1
11 1 ; ' ►, , ;; ,, �, 1
r�

I I'
V,,i ' .:...r.1 :° 'Yh lil .r,.`!(. i I -t- lE,`f}f IIP r il{,€"�I Et:i t !h!Q$ijli I E { F,�€y `:�u' -;.Y' {, iF fi1 €�'i€r �1,: - €F F 1114 �;'" I I{Q, - i € i "1 1-''".11
vssion of Water ualit ,
�
€1,,{!i'�.rlf+',r,tP ill
" .' ision.afiSoil'.#andalWaterConservat.ionl:,;ri4 i. Illtl ilaP� 1, aiPil= Ildslll,�Irl�iall�tl#IEPI�I�f,PQP�l�r#,I€�r�li
€ , - i,rr II,I:.} on.( t.E"i.,-:i €€ 1 „' .�,,F .. it !,� a ll. 1. �.�� Mr�e. ,".=:.. f J
�€ IEE ,.. € ;,!.- .gal ,! :�fa �,1,1 .i I,I i i� i ,1,,...� �._I,sf 1. E ..I.1
t1 tii' ! ;lPi,i€ t'olrill ,,l. ,11,.}i.OtherrA enc ;,, ¢ f;'rilJ(Ef,I 3�j fjf j�f} #fQP i. I Qf,; .F,rE €,{,.I!
lV y P91,}i,l.Q(13�I,IF�f!{f�lf�li���JIlI.1i3EIl, I Q{ �i I. I t 11 l
i €, ,.. � I I € P I t�, # �,� i li 11.1 I� rPi�l i J i
IIN
E
r;l'I -:,- ��,, .,,- .,-• ,... � -; u � .. ..� lk u�u�h r rFlr€..,;tls!IAIII,�Ir�IIII�IIJI< il:.,.... uF�r;.��:,,r,. ., ,:..,. .'�a:,. I' t�. �.n,_.. , f ,
I
Type of Visit O Compliance Inspection O Operation Review O Lagoon Evaluation
Reason for Visit O Routine O Complaint 0 Follow up 0 Emergency Notification 0 Other ❑ Denied Access
Facility Number 97 27 Date of Visit: 11/t/2001 'rime:
O Not Operational 0 Below Threshold
13 Permitted ® Certified f] Conditionally Certified 0 Registered Date Last Operated or Above Threshold:.. .......................
FarmName:t.?.art.S.Psi:M ................................................................................................... . County:l'.E'.ifti............................................... !'.E'SRQ........
OwnerName: I).= .......................................... Sparks......................................................... Phone No: 33.6-9.5Z:Z8V.1...........................................................
Mailing Address: U4.Z.JrQp1ax.S.djaV..>.id..................................... ............................ MttxbaRiyu..N.C............................................. 28.6.6.9 ..............
Facility Contact:..............................................................................Title:................................................................ Phone No:
...................................................
Onsite Representative: D.Qu.,9pu.k5 ................................................................ . Integrator:....................
Certified Operator:D.Qja..0. ................................... sp;jrka .............................................. Operator Certification Number:A2141.
Location of Farm:
rom Hwy 268 in Roaring River take White Plains to White Plains Church Road north approx. 3 miles to Hoots Rd, turn
ight go approx. 1 mile to farm on right.
❑ Swine ❑ Poultry ® Cattle ❑ Horse Latitude 36 " 14 1 39 Li Longitude 1 80 • 58 37
Design Current
Swine Cnnaeitv Panulatinn
❑ Wean to Feeder
❑ Feeder to Finish
❑ Farrow to Wean
❑ Farrow to Feeder
❑ Farrow to Finish
❑ Gilts
❑ Boars
Design Current Design 'Current
Poultry Ca acit , population ' Cattle . Capacity Population
❑ Layer ❑ Dairy
❑Non -Layer ® Non -Dairy 200 80
❑ Other
T61aI Design Capacity 200
Total SSLW : 160,000
Number:of Lagoons 0 ❑ Subsurface Drains Present ❑Lagoon Area ❑Spray field Area
Holding Ponds/.1 Solid Traps ® 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. 1f 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
ldntifier D tank
❑ Yes 0 No
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes 0 No
❑ Yes 0 No
❑ Yes 0 No
Stricture 6
cz#- ........................................................................................................................................................................................
Freeboard (inches): 48
05103101 Continued

Facility Number. 97-27 Date of Inspection 11/1/2001
5. Are there any immediate threats to the integrity of any of the structures observed? (ie/ tree*vere erosion,
seepage, etc.)
6. Are there structures on -site which are not properly addressed and/or managed through a waste management or
closure plan?
(If any of questions 4-6 was answered yes, and the situation poses an
immediate public health or environmental threat, notify DWQ)
7. Do any of the structures need maintenance/improvement?
8. Does any part of the waste management system other than waste structures require maintenance/improvement?
9. Do any stuctures lack adequate, gauged markers with required maximum and minimum liquid level
elevation markings?
Waste Application
10. Are there any buffers that need maintenance/improvement?
❑ Yes
®No
❑ Yes
® No
❑ Yes
® No
❑ Yes
® No
❑ Yes
❑ No
❑Yes
®No
11. Is there evidence of over application? ❑ Excessive Pending ❑ 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 ❑ No
15. Does the receiving crop need improvement?
16. Is there a lack of adequate waste application equipment?
Re uired Records & Documents
17. Fail to have Certificate of Coverage & General Permit or other Permit readily available?
18. Does the facility fail to have all components of the Certified Animal Waste Management Plan readily available?
(ie/ WUP, checklists, design, maps, etc.)
19. Does record keeping need improvement? (ie/ irrigation, freeboard, waste analysis & soil sample reports)
20. Is facility not in compliance with any applicable setback criteria in effect at the time of design?
21. Did the facility fail to have a actively certified operator in charge?
22. Fail to notify regional DWQ of emergency situations as required by General Permit?
(ie/ discharge, freeboard problems, over application)
23. Did Reviewer/Inspector fail to discuss review/inspection with on -site representative?
24. Does facility require a follow-up visit by same agency?
25. Were any additional problems noted which cause noncompliance of the Certified AWMP?
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes ® No
113 No violations or deficiencies were noted during this visit. You will receive no further correspondence about this visit. 7-7
Commentsli 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 ®Final Notes
# 19. Mr. Sparks has not applied beef waste since March. No small grain has been planted on the beef waste application fields. Mr.
+
Sparks said he would come back with corn silage in the Spring. Mr. Sparks has installed a concrete tank to catch the silage leachate and
some concrete curbing to prevent runoff from the stock trail.
Mr. Sparks has planted rye on the poultry application field that the cattle will be able to graze along with fescue pasture.
Had 2001 soil analysis.
erllnspector Name RockyDurhamer/Inspector
E
Signature: Date:
O5103101 Continued

t
Facility Number: 97-27 U o! Inspection 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
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?
- l l� lu '1 A:1 J. iiif r:lt<Iflll.11 �i11�111if31FAiiA1
analysis: 1-19-01 SSB 7.91bs.N/ton B, 10.81bs.N/ton SI
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes ❑ No
05103101

Facility Number 97 27 "Hit, of Visit: 6/28J2001 Time: 0910 Printed on: 7/2/2001
Not Operational G Below Threshold
0 Permitted E Certified 0 Conditionally Certified [3 Registered Date Last Operated or Above Threshold: ...............
FarmName: 1?ant.S.parks....................................................................................................• County: Wike,5................................................ WSRQ........
OwnerName: Una .......................................... Spairks........................................................ Phone No: 336- 57.72801......-•----..........----...........----.............---•.
Mailing Address: 1242.PQ91ar5xills..R d..................................................................... 1toarin g.Rinr..N.C.........---................................. ZA09 .............
Facility Contact: D.Rug.S*Arks..................................................... Title:................................................................ Phone No: 33.6,90,2974 .......................
OnsiteRepresentative: DoaSparks..................................................................................lntegrator:......................................................................................
Certified Operator:D)am........... ------ Sparks .............................................. Operator Certification Number:22142.........---......---.------.
Location of Farm:
From Hwy 268 in Roaring River take White Plains to White Plains Church Road north approx. 3 miles to Hoots Rd, turn AL
right go approx. 1 mile to farm on right. w
❑ Swine ❑ Poultry ® Cattle ❑ Horse Latitude 36 • 14 6 39 {, Longitude SO • 58 ° 37 {i
Discharees & StrSaM Impac
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)
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 8& Treatment:
4. Is storage capacity (freeboard plus storm storage) less than adequate? ❑ Spillway
Structure I Structure 2 Structure 3 Structure 4 Structure 5
Identifier: ........ D rystack....................................................................... .......
❑ Yes ❑ No
® Yes ❑ No
® Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes ® No
Structure h
Freeboard (mches): +
05103101 Continued

Facility Number: 97-27 1 Date of Inspection 6/28/2001 • Printed on: 7/2/2001
5. Are there any immediate threats to the iMe ity of any of the structures observed? (ie/ trees, severe erosion,
seepage, etc.)
b. Are there structures on -site which are not properly addressed and/or managed through a waste management or
closure plan?
(Ir 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
12. Crop type Corn (Silage & Grain) Fescue (Hay) ' Pearl millet
[] Yes ® No
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes ® No
® Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes ® No
13. Do the receiving crops differ with those designated in the Certified Animal Waste Management Plan (CAWMP)? ® Yes []No
14. a) Does the facility lack adequate acreage for land application? ❑ Yes ® No
b) Does the facility need a wettable acre determination? ❑ Yes ® No
c) This facility is pended for a wettable acre determination? [I Yes ® No
15. Does the receiving crop need improvement?
16. Is there a lack of adequate waste application equipment?
Required Recoil s & ]2ogµments
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?
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes ® No
® Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes ® No
IN Yes ❑ No
25. Were any additional problems noted which cause noncompliance of the Certified AWMP? ® Yes ❑ No
10 No violations or deficiencies were noted during this visit. You will receive no further correspondence about this visit.
❑ Field Copy ® Final Notes
Discharge of silage and manure waste is coming from silo and stocktrail and traveling through washed-out area (4' by I I F) into cl
worse this year. NOI.
and 8. Streambank and erosion run-off are worse this year.
3. Pearl millet is not in WUP and was planted this year instead of corn silage. May want to revise WUP.
2. Did not receive call from operator notifying us of the condition in #2.
4. DWQ and/or SWCD need to re -check once the stocktrail run-off is contained.
5. Poultry Tract 445 is on map but not in WUP. Tract 437 map is in WUP for poultry but is labeledfield 11. Should be I. Need to
Reviewer/Inspector Name
Reviewer/Inspector Signal
Date:
O5103101 Continued

Facility Number: 97_27 Q f Inspection 6/28/2001 Printed on: 7/2/2001
Odor Issues
26. Does the discharge pipe from the confinement building to the storage pond or lagoon fail to discharge at/or below
liquid level of lagoon or storage pond with no agitation?
27. Are there any dead animals not disposed of properly within 24 hours?
28. Is there any evidence of wind drift during land application? (i.e. residue on neighboring vegetation, asphalt,
roads, building structure, and/or public property)
29. Is the land application spray system intake not located near the liquid surface of the lagoon?
30. Were any major maintenance problems with the ventilation fan(s) noted? (i.e. broken fan belts, missing or
or broken fan blade(s), inoperable shutters, etc.)
31. Do the animals feed storage bins fail to have appropriate cover?
32. Do the flush tanks lack a submerged fill pipe or a permanent/temporary cover?
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes ❑ No
05103101

Ird
Type of Visit (I Compliance Inspection O Operation Review O Lagoon Evaluation
Reason for Visit Routine O Complaint O Follow up O Emergency Notification O Other ❑ Denied Access
Facility Number Date of Visit: Time:
Q Not O erational Below Threshold oo
© Permitted TC_ertitied [r Conditionally Certified 13 Registered Date Last Operated or +A`boovee Threshold:
10
Farm Name: .�Y..)..spax.Y $.........F :rra.. County:..1 ..�J....f.4 s .................................................
Owner Name: ........Lot,......
SS(3(s................................................................ Phone No: 3�14e.' 7.S-7!...... �Za.$ �L................. ....:'./
FacilityContact: .....: E �} .. .......................Title:................................................................ Phof a No: a�......dZ...YZ T
I t�- •i
Mailing Address: Jl..:.T..1.........PIZ)P.t✓.�r.....7.�r�.... �...}....1 ...�.n: ��.v�Ir��....a....... .6.9
c
Onsite Representative: ,,,�,Qr\.....,,,,J. ....................... Integrator:......................
Certified Operator: .... h.:li...] .... .. .� ..................................................... Operator Certification Number:........ap+; .......�Cr.
Location of Farm:
I--�' V 1113 rk 1 OAt Vatitude �' �� ®�� Longitude
Swing eultry Catt koran
Design Carre,nt a
Canacity Ponulation
❑ Wean to Feeder
❑ Feeder to Finish
❑ Farrow to Wean
❑ Farrow to Feeder
❑ Farrow to Finish
❑ Gilts
❑ Boars
Number of Lagoons
Holding Ponds I Solid:Traps;.
Design 'Current, Design , , Cure
Poultry .Ca aci Population Cattle Ca ci Po' uh
❑ Layer ❑ Dairy
❑ Non -Layer Non-DairyZa
10 Other I 1 I
TotW. Desigh Capacity. 200
Dischar es & Stream Impacts
1. Is any discharge observed from any part of the operation?
ToW SSLw ., 1 toOi Oao
�❑ Subsurface Drains Present ❑ Lagoon Area ❑ Spray Field Area
No Liquid Waste Management System
Yes ❑ No
Discharge originated at: ❑ Lagoon ❑ Spray Field Other
a. If discharge is observed, was the conveyance man-made? ❑ YesXNo
b. If discharge is observed, did it reach Water of the State? (If yes, notify DWQ) Yes ❑ No
c. If discharge is observe j.whaaat is the estimated flow in gal/min? t W i
d. Does discharge bypass a emsystenO (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
Structure I Structure 2 Structure 3
Identifier: _!> ry.6. L
Structure 4 Structure 5 Structure b
.....................................................................................................
Freeboard (inches):
5100 Continued on back

acility Number: — z 7 Date of Inspection '�f�'S •
5. Are there any immediate threats to the integrity of any of the structures observed? (ie/ trees, severe erosion, ❑ Yes JXNo
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 part of the waste management system other than waste structures require maintenance/improvement? j Yes ❑ No
9. Do any stuctures lack adequate, gauged markers with required maximum and minimum liquid level
elevation markings?-9 Ves--B-Pia
Waste Application
10. Are there any buffers that need maintenance/improvement? ❑ Yes KNo
11. Is there evidence of over application? ❑ Excessive Ponding ❑ PAN ❑ Hydraulic Overload ❑ Yes No
12. Crop type L 0M . AI GLQ� �Qli1Ar �V11 mil ' . T��r7C"J Q SS `
13.
Do the receiving crops differ wiM those designated in the Certified Animal Waste Mantement 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
KNo
Required Records & Documents
17.
Fail to have Certificate of Coverage & General Permit readily available?
AFes—EJ
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
X No
19.
Does record keeping need improvement? (ie/ irrigation, freeboard, waste analysis & soil sample reports)
❑ Yes
P(No
20.
Is facility not in compliance with any applicable setback criteria in effect at the time of design?
❑ Yes
kTNo
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)
A Yes
❑ No
23.
Did Reviewer/Inspector fail to discuss review/inspection with on -site representative?
❑ Yes
O 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?
KYes
❑ No
YIQl;a>iignis o#' 0efejeo01" •ftCe )ao ed• 00669 s;vst; • Y00 01111-treboiye Oi fufi �
icor'res' oridence: ahaut: this "Visit:
i'4 3 uestion # E lain an � YES answers and/o
Comments (refer to q ) xp y _ . r any recommendations orraay oti>er;cogqupnieitts. << U.
q. CFI.„
4- man U lx . e.. is n 04
� g
1 ID 5�o� a�
C)U+ aro
s U30r" 1 s y 60—.- rN o)
Reviewer/Inspector Name E . , 3 � ' y� �; r h �
Reviewer/Inspector SignaUui Date: 3/00

Facility Number: —z Oc of Inspection
Odor Issues
26. Does the discharge pipe from the confinement building to the storage pond or lagoon fail to discharge at/or below -ems-4E -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 KNO
28. Is there any evidence of wind drift during land application? (i.e. residue on neighboring vegetation, asphalt, ❑ Yes A No
roads, building structure, and/or public property)
29. Is the land application spray system intake not located near the liquid surface of the Iagoon? o
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?
oinments'an or;? awin 'grK:. { ' 'f zf I
0 i
Si l el nc r u h -a ��' ? pa 5`�v�reS MAN) ba la t)ct
13, Pal
h
I
hS��t Urn s" I e. �g m a want
n A (-
o'? 4.. t WQ atra o r- N RX,5 I��e d1 ` C C`iP---
Oniihaaled
,(0
do
WJ I -
ILI MAMIW-771-�Z--! =0!
Rid10

E
I
Facility Number 97 27 Date ur visit. t2/4/2000 Time: IUAo
Q Not O erational Q Below Threshold
Permitted 0 Certified 0 Conditionally Certified r] Registered Date Last Operated or Above Threshold:... ......................
Farm Name: t?RpIAparM..................................................................................................... County: WA.kJ:,S................................................ ]'.1rSRQ........
OwnerName: DRtx.......................................... SRgrb..... .................................................... ' Phone No: 336,-M-2SOt................................... ... .... .................
FacilityContact:.............................................................................. Title:................................................................ Phone No: 336:927.074 ......................
Mailing Address: J24Z.P9ulax.Sj-jags..8d..................................................................... Iiaair w Fortir..NC.............---.---.------.................. 20 6t9...I——....4
OnsiteRepresentative:........................................................................................................... Integrator:......................................................................................
Certified Operator:D.0im.....
Location of Farm:
Spat[ka.............................................. Operator Certification Number: 22JL42 ......
From Hwy 268 in Roaring River take White Plains to White Plains Church Road north approx. 3 miles to Hoots Rd, turn K
right go approx. 1 mile to farm on right.
❑ Swine ❑ Poultry ® Cattle ❑ Horse Latitude 36 • 14 39 LongitudeF 80 • 58 37
` t ;Destgnr
'
diS /:l:b��@°G'.,
.CurrentDestgn
�.
}WU, 53 IiE'.�AIiV: 4,`�' aV -.,F A 4-.-.K ". L-8�1.'C..• .
Current i°5 y ° - ©estgn CCurrent
�` "' "ulatio``
.t,Swine (?anacit
P,o ulation
Poultry Ca act P,o ulation Cattlea,� l Ca sett . Po
,'
❑ Layer I j[] Dairy
".",j
❑ Wean to Feeder
❑ Feeder to Finish
❑Non -Layer y ®Non -Dairy 200
❑ Farrow to Wean
yWs., r r
", 71
❑ Farrow to Feeder
❑Other
y " t"
' l W Total Destgn" C aaty 200
❑ Farrow to Finish
;h
�,I= W�';'; ;
' " f 'I'otagltS'' 160,0O0
❑ Gilts
❑Boars
j t �r �� ,
��j�1il �'L)Nrl�la
Y ✓N..I .��F.fYi h�' �„'.WYi:Fl1flY.�Y.f
Number of Lagoons l�
❑Subsurface Drains Present ❑ Laga>n Area
I[] Spray Field Area
® No Liquid Waste Management System
Holding Ponds / Solid Traps �0
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 gallmin?
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
W115t Collection K 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:..........drystack..............................................................................................
Freeboard (inches): 60
5100 Continued on back

Facility Number: 97-27 1Date of Inspection 12/4/2000 i'
5. Are there any immediate threats to the i9rity of any of the structures observed? (ic/ 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 Application
10. Are there any buffers that need maintenance/improvement? ❑ Yes ® No
It. Is there evidence of over application? ❑ Excessive Ponding ❑ PAN ❑ Hydraulic Overload ❑ Yes ® No
12. Crop type Corn (Silage & Grain)
13. Do the receiving crops differ with those designated in the Certified Animal Waste Management Plan (CAWMP)? ❑ Yes ® No
14, a) Does the facility lack adequate acreage for land application? ❑ Yes ® No
b) Does the facility need a wettable acre determination? ❑ Yes ® No
c) This facility is pended for a wettable acre determination? ❑ Yes ® No
15. Does the receiving crop need improvement?
16. Is there a lack of adequate waste application equipment?
Required Records & Documents
17. Fail to have Certificate of Coverage & General Permit readily available?
18. Does the facility fail to have all components of the Certified Animal Waste Management Plan readily available?
(ie/ WUP, checklists, design, maps, etc.)
19. Does record keeping need improvement? (ie/ irrigation, freeboard, waste analysis & soil sample reports)
20. Is facility not in compliance with any applicable setback criteria in effect at the time of design?
21. Did the facility fail to have a actively certified operator in charge?
22. Fail to notify regional DWQ of emergency situations as required by General Permit?
(ie/ discharge, freeboard problems, over application)
23. Did Reviewer/Inspector fail to discuss review/inspection with on -site representative?
24. Does facility require a follow-up visit by same agency?
25. Were any additional problems noted which cause noncompliance of the Certified AWMP?
No•violatitiris;or- deficiencies -were noted duriitg•th;i9 v OL 'YOu:will :receive• fib.fttrther, : ,
nor.respondence: about this :visit:
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes ® No
® Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes ® No
-The stream immediately below the barns appears to have been fenced out since DWQ inspection in July.
-A surge stone check dam is in place between the silage trenchs and the pipe under the stock trail. This area will need to be monitored
to determine if additional measures need to be taken to handle the silage leachate.
-Records could not be reviewed at the time of inspection as Mr. Sparks did not keep the appointment.
12/7/00--Mr. Sparks had the Wilkes Field Office fax copies of records to me on 12/6/00. The nitrogen balance sheets have been
:ompleted as required by DWQ inspection of 7/00 and there have been no additional applications since animals have been pastured.
1W
Reviewer/Inspector Name sDaphne Cartner
Reviewer/Inspector Signature: Date: 5/00

:wFacilIV Number: 97-27 I�ol' Inspection
Odor .' 12/4/2000
Od5 0
26. Does the discharge pipe from the confinement building to the storage pond or lagoon fail to discharge at/or below ❑ Yes ❑ No
liquid level of lagoon or storage pond with no agitation?
27. Are there any dead animals not disposed of properly within 24 hours? ❑ Yes ® No
28. Is there any evidence of wind drift during land application? (i.e. residue on neighboring vegetation, asphalt, ❑ Yes ® No
roads, building structure, and/or public property)
29, Is the land application spray system intake not located near the liquid surface of the lagoon? ❑ Yes ❑ No
30. Were any major maintenance problems with the ventilation fan(s) noted? (i.e. broken fan belts, missing or
or broken fan blade(s), inoperable shutters, etc.) ❑ Yes ® No
31. Do the animals feed storage bins fail to have appropriate cover? ❑ Yes ® No
32. Do the flush tanks lack a submerged fill pipe or a permanent/temporary cover? ❑ Yes ❑ No
5100

Date ur vis
Facility Number it: 7/20/21100 I'imc; 1315 Priatrd a+t: 7/21/2000
97 27
Q Not Operational Q Below Threshold
© Permitted 0 Certified [3 Conditionally Certified 0 Registered Date Last Operated or Above Threshold:.. ...................
Farm Name: D.01I.S.i arM............................ .......................................................... County:W..itkp,s................................................ W.SRQ........
OwnerName: D.Qa.......................................... 'SDarb........................................................ Phone No: fr-�S.2- Q1...........................................................
FacilityContact: Dmx.S.Farka..................................................... Title: ..................................... .... ........ I .... I ....... .. Phone No: 33.6,,9Z7.,;Z".4 .......................
Mailing Address: 1;Z4;Z.Popjax..Sxi>t gS..Rd..................................................................... Roariva.River...HC............................................. 26.6.69 .............
Onsite Representative: I?oA1,S�tarAiS,,...
Certified Operator: Dolq..C+.................................... SvArks ...................
Location of Farm:
Integrator:
Operator Certification Number:22142 .............................
❑ SWIne ❑ Poultry IN Cattle ❑ Horse Latitude 35 • Z4 + 39 {f Longitude 80 • 58 . 37 +L
Discharees & Stream Impacts
1. Is any discharge observed from any part of the operation? ❑ Yes ® No
Discharge originated at: ❑ Lagoon ❑ Spray Field ❑ Other
a. If discharge is observed, was the conveyance man-made'? ❑ Yes ❑ No
b. if discharge is observed, did it reach Water of the State'? (if yes, notify DWQ) 0 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
jyp5je Collection & Treatment
4. Is storage capacity (freeboard plus storm storage) less than adequate? ❑ Spillway
Structure I Structure 2 Structure 3 Structure 4
Identifier: .........Dry..stack..........................................................................................................
Freeboard (inches): NIA
Structure 5
❑ Yes ® No
Structure b
Continued on back

Facility Number: 47-27 Date of Inspection 7/20/2000 Printed on: 7/21/2000
5. Are there any immediate threats to the Quity of any of the structures observed? (ie/ tre0evere erosion, ❑ Yes ® No
seepage, etc.)
6. Are there structures on -site which are not properly addressed and/or managed through a waste management or
closure plan? ❑ Yes ® No
(If any of questions 4-6 was answered yes, and the situation poses an
immediate public health or environmental threat, notify DWQ)
7. Do any of the structures need maintenance/improvement? ❑ Yes ® No
8. Does any part of the waste management system other than waste structures require maintenance/improvement? ® Yes ❑ No
9. Do any stuctures lack adequate, gauged markers with required maximum and minimum liquid level
elevation markings? ❑ Yes ® No
Waste Application
10. Are there any buffers that need maintenance/improvement? ❑ Yes ® No
11. Is there evidence of over application? ❑ Excessive Ponding ❑ PAN ❑ Hydraulic Overload ❑ Yes ® No
12. Crop type Corn (Silage & Grain)
13. Do the receiving crops differ with those designated in the Certified Animal Waste Management Plan (CAWMP)? ❑ Yes ® No
14. a) Does the facility lack adequate acreage for land application? ❑ Yes ® No
b) Does the facility need a wettable acre determination? ❑ Yes ® No
c) This facility is pended for a wettable acre determination? ❑ Yes ® No
15. Does the receiving crop need improvement?
16. Is there a lack of adequate waste application equipment?
Rejjuired 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?
�1io yialations;or deficiencies •were mated ducift - this visit. ;You:wil)E ir6Cbiive-rto•fu;rther• : ;
correspondence: about this' isit', : • : • :: : • :::: • : • : ::::::::::::::::::::
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes 3 No
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes ® No
® Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes ® No
n a.
a
About 130 on pasture at other fields (S. Lomax Rd. and Poplar Springs Rd.). Operator is taking hay to pasture to feed and cattle are
getting water from creek.
2. Past evidence of silage discharge to the stream (see 1999 NOV). Suggest contacting Wilkes SWCD for suggestions prior to filling
silage trench.
8. Cattle are starting to denude and damage streambank on pasture behind barns.
19. Need to start keeping nitrogen (PAN) balance. I will send forms.
Reviewer/Inspector Name imeltsA Rose r ck
Reviewer/Inspector Signature: r Date:
r

Facility Number: 97-27 Q of Inspection 7/20/2000 Printed on: 7/21/2000
Odor Issues
26. Does the discharge pipe from the confinement building to the storage pond or lagoon fail to discharge at/or below ❑ Yes ❑ No
liquid level of lagoon or storage pond with no agitation?
27. Are there any dead animals not disposed of properly within 24 hours? ❑ Yes ® No
28. Is there any evidence of wind drift during land application? (i.e. residue on neighboring vegetation, asphalt, ❑ Yes ® No
roads, building structure, and/or public property)
29. Is the land application spray system intake not located near the liquid surface of the lagoon? ❑ Yes ❑ No
30. Were any major maintenance problems with the ventilation fan(s) noted? (i.e. broken fan belts, missing or
or broken fan blade(s), inoperable shutters, etc.) ❑ Yes ® No
31. Do the animals feed storage bins fail to have appropriate cover? ❑ Yes ❑ No
32. Do the flush tanks lack a submerged fill pipe or a permanent/temporary cover? ❑ Yes ❑ No
MLd d I 067H—UMJMn un �ng
A6

11
Routine O Complaint O Follow-up of DWQ inspection Q Follow -up -of DSWC review Q Other
Facility Number Date of Inspection
Time of Inspection ffu hr. (hh:mm)
0 Permitted x Certified [a Conditionally Certified © Registered JE3 Not OperationalOperationall Date Last Operated:
Farm Name: ......�bov) ....-+..................F�3........................................................... County:.....W.1..11�- . p.....................!
OwnerName:.... ... pa'- ...................................................................... Phone No:..... ...........p...........
teW
Facility Contact: .........bon,
t.. o.k......P�Q-:�...k:,�7............... Title:............................................................. �. Phone No: �IQ..Q�r�'� 7 ...gn q
Mailing Address:.... .. ....lTQlll �.. �...... .rl. a• .............. l ..Jt.. ..�... 'e:�f........... :....,�;$.6
�lC � � h�
Onsite Representative:. n..ks...................................................... Integrator: .......................................
........ . ... ....... ^ J
Certified Operator:,,....,,, W �„ ,�Q,�(' ..................... Operator Certification Number:....,��,.a,,,
Location of Farm:
b ak.... ......a..l .h`r e. i. t ..au"...�.:. v� �...3..�..%s..E...`.-1-�.:r..�..�
Latitude ' [1], �« Longitude �• M' �" F-1 h•401 , NL�ts IQl<�
vl, [, re' `' Sl n 1 Current rJ
Swy g nt .. �'J.' Deact � Po � ,kCurrent
... �.
g
st n ur ation Point Ca "ulatkon'; Cattle �- Po ufation
e
acY , Po ul = ,:,Ca ac►
❑ Wean to Feeder ❑ Layer ❑Dairy F
i.'
`., ❑ Feeder to Finish Non -Layer Non -Dairy
i ❑ Farrow to Wean
i,. 91F�. -.-4![Ar li�el�pd8�l� �t-.4 a{!I � IJI r
i
❑ Other
❑ Farrow to Feeder f
Farrow to Finish , ' T6tA1,M ign Capacity �i abd
,,, ❑ Gilts '
1 a r€
Tot SL'
[]Boars o d 680
Number°of.Lagoons ❑ Subsurface Drains Present ❑Lagoon Area
I# ¢ 1.. e� .. ..... ... .... .. ... .
Holding Ponds/. Sohd Traps ❑ No Liquid Waste Management System
Discharges & Stream ImRacts
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?
Spray Field Area
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 t Structure 2 Structure 3 Structure 4 Structure 5
❑ Yes XNO
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes ❑ No
j Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes tpo
El Yes /W
Structure 6
Identifier: AA,,
Freeboard(inches): .......... 1.".' ................ ........................... ................................... .................................... .................................... ....................................
5. Are there any immediate threats to the integrity of any of the structures observed? (ie/ trees, severe erosion, ❑ Yes KNO
seepage, etc.)
3123/99 Continued on back

Facility Number: lJ�� — a''] *e of Inspection Q
structures on -site which are I properly addressed and/or managed through a waste management
6. Arethere no
p p y g se g 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 maintenancelimprovement?
❑ Yes XNo
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
�(No
Waste Application
,
10. Are there any buffers that need maintenance/improvement?
Ives No
It. Is there evidence of over application? ❑ Excessive Ponding ❑ PAN
❑ Yes No
12. Crop type
13. Do the receiving crops differ with t se designated in the Certified Animal Waste Management Plan (CAWMP)?
❑ Yes No
14. a) Does the facility lack adequate acreage for land application?
❑ Yes (O(No
b) Does the facility need a wettable acre determination?
❑ Yes *0
c) This facility is pended for a wettable acre determination?
❑ Yes VNo
15. Does the receiving crop need improvement?
❑ Yes )dl%
16. Is there'a lack of adequate waste application equipment?
❑ Yes o
Required Records & Documents
IT, Fail to have Certificate of Coverage & General Permit readily available? N /�
❑ 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 VNo
19, Does record keeping need improvement? (ie/ irrigation, frecboard, 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
�0,0
21. Did the facility fail to have a actively certified operator in charge?
❑ Yes i'No
"�
22. Fail to notify regional DWQ of emergency situations as required by General Permit?
No
(ie/ discharge, freeboard problems, over application)
❑ Yes N
23. Did Reviewer/Inspector fail to discuss review/inspection with on -site representative?
❑ Yes o
24. Does facility require a follow-up visit by same agency?
❑ Yes
25. Were any additional problems noted which cause noncompliance of the Certified AWMP?
❑ Yes] No
1�
........................
yiiila�igns o dtffcjen6e9 •rugs )ipfea• 00r'ing thjs'visjt; • X60 wiij•tecgiye lid fuftj
comes o Bence' a))6uf this visit: -
-'e,3� N .';.,:'e 3t-•' t s.•=.. �.. '<.:E i E," ;: 1H taF ':; ! E i et^; § �x7v;:�.[g � "9 W. n"<f,E3zE � ra9'e=�
Comments'. refer to uestio Ex lain an anew
q n #) p y � - answers and/or any recommendations or4ny,other comments
t _ FYES
. . ,.... , ,,.i L � .r
r . a_
-;Er F-.rygf<a.a -r.:I r ra 'KI J. i„ f P.63,. E d?.'�)'X: �i3h.,>83,.ia.�xSu.�li3 r>.•-,;z h >> :: - r�,,..: �..! E .o:r:: L i ,r...nE <; r '�' �`�.: i.r 3f.'"',� ta.'.#.. r s• :, �i t
kA km Sii a d i sChar -'b `K e S�-erz rv�
v , SU OrJ5 of9 --a-in G� 1Ges �J -ro r
sLO�dkr
-
AD
S �lr� - wS SPr-� P-a,
�-- g �`
_ .,.. _ T"��-` '" 'G"'."—"' i'_..., En,�•:m- 1;€'� �•'�,�-pR:�.P •-*r�r�-y3 ne�sr,{rr�,�C rE u €'Fr•'�n d, �
Reviewer/Inspector Name , 6 , , i E »€ r J , ,t ,
Reviewer/Inspector Signature: l N A Y.(1 A A A� V &d . 1. Date: 6171961W

Facility Number: q l — ,1 l f �e of Inspection
Odor Issues
26. Does the discharge pipe from the confinement building to the storage pond or lagoon fail to discharge at/or below
liquid level of lagoon or storage pond with no agitation? OM I T
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? Ni f Ar
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? OM IT
32. Do the flush tanks lack a submerged fill pipe or a permanent/temporary cover? OM IT
❑ Yes kN-o
❑ Yes XNo
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes *o
El *es B-Ner-

R ` 'h 5? ( isE I _ )D1Vi510n I and Water ConservattoW �0 eration
-�- U k p
1& ,: ..Division JWiI and:Water COI13CrVat104 Compliance€I pectl©ln! P'll f JF�`7 r�{} rr „i < "sl l,a}): f ° r r ''#.7
M21.5IVlsioD.of Wateri(�ukltty CQD1p11anCe IDSpeCt10I1 A J' a F J i�i ` ' t I'
f t; er. )s_ i�J
".t aE�3i U;F, .:'ro a « 'P1,L�.:< 5,7.,., ,L
m Routine O Complaint Q Follow-up of DW ins ection Q Follow -tip of DSWC review Q Other
Facility Number g Date of inspection
Time of Inspection FT11 . p 24 hr. (hh:mm)
© Permitted 14 Certified 0 Conditionally Certified 13 Registered10 Not O erational Date List Operated: p ..........................
Farm Name: Pe7!✓ Count kF............................S!f/S D
Owner Name:.................Dow.............,............S.P/.3.!R. K,S....................................... Phone No:...... ..��.'.�►ir-�`..L'.��.�.............................
Facility Contact: ........... 0.G.!d......... �?.rAGA.4:6.................... Title:.......,.... vy.F .............................. Phone No:...................................................
Mailing Address:.....1..Y...........-pl,.r1...........5,0&ks.......... Ra ................ ........ 1.bo.,q t.0 .......j� . �uG. ...,.,................ ...�......
OnsiteRepresentative: ............... ............................................................................................ Integrator:......................................................................................
Certified Operator: ...................A..m.................. ......... S.P &KS......................... Operator Certification Number:........L.............
Location of Farm:
w.....!�....�.�+..ata...... 8..,.....!.............. �U............y........:..............r.....y..'..................:...............;..,.....................
.......................................... ALi�tJVS G ut2GH R{I...�...........`�..:m:✓..�e....:................:."�'.. � N06T,S -A,1�.P�-n?-..
Latitude ®' 6 Longitude '' • ° 11
.Swine;
!, Design Current
Capacity Po ulation,.,;L
❑ Wean to Feeder
❑ Feeder to Finish
❑ Farrow to Wean
❑ Farrow to Feeder
❑ Farrow to Finish
❑ Gilts
❑ Boars
'E ii' Design Curren
'Y ._ . CaPacity .,P.opulati
-,.�❑ Non -Layer
(❑
Other
,
Total.'!? �Si
1
Design ... ,
Cattle -C;
❑ Dairy
® Non -Dairy
r
.al'SSLW- 140,000
1�uitllber pf;L,agoons., .. �' ❑Subsurface Drains Present ❑Lagoon Area ❑Spray Feld Area
g� b � f
Holdin Ponds /.Solid Traps ❑ No Liquid Waste Management System `
Discharges & Stream Impacts
1. Is any discharge observed from any part of the operation? ❑ Yes E94o
Discharge originated at: ❑ Lagoon ❑ Spray Field ❑ Other
a. If discharge is observed, was the conveyance man-made? ❑ Yes
b. If discharge is observed, did it reach Water of the State'? (If yes, notify DWQ) ❑ Yes
c. If discharge is observed, what is the estimated flow in gal/ruin? N hs
d. Does discharge bypass a lagoon system? (If yes, notify DWQ) ❑ Yes P-1140
2. Is there evidence of past discharge from any part of the operation? ❑ Yes UK
3. Were there any adverse impacts or potential adverse impacts to the Waters of the State other than from a discharge? ❑ Yes JjXo`
Waste Collection & Treatment
4. Is storage capacity (freeboard plus storm storage) less than adequate? ❑ Spillway . ❑ Yes fLW011
Structure I Structure 2 Structure 3 Structure 4 Structure 5 Structure b
Identifier:
Freeboard(inches): ...........�) .".../!.T..................................................................................................................................................................... I....................
5. Are there any immediate threats to the integrity of any of the structures observed? (ie/ trees, severe erosion, ❑ Yes f- fol
seepage, etc.) A�
3/23/99 Continued on back t�U

Facility Number: q7 — 7 . �te of laspvction
6. Are there structures on -site which are not properly addressed and/or managed through a waste management or
closure plan?
(If any of questions 4-6 was answered yes, and the situation poses an
immediate public health or environmental threat, notify DWQ)
7. Do any of the structures need maintenance/improvement?
8. Does any part of the waste management system other than waste structures require maintenance/improvement?
9. Do any stuctures lack adequate, gauged markers with required maximum and minimum liquid level
elevation markings?
Waste Application
10. Are there any buffers that need maintenance/improvement?
11. Is there evidence of over application? ❑ Excessive Ponding ❑ PAN
12. Crop type aGOO , S'M OLL G12A I A)
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 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?
�` Rio �viQla�i¢ns ;or• d�Gciencfes •t��re ��;e�7• d�rrirtg •this;visit; • Yoi� will •�ee�iye �o; #`u�t�gr •
oorrespondettce. about. this visit..
" 3, E EE �. d -'P 3 i i
Comments;(refer to:ques666#) '.Explain any YlE9 answers and/or ally recommitndations or any�otherEcomine
E S.330
❑ Yes Pfiio
❑ Yes L1J1t<o
❑ Yes �o
❑ Yes WO
❑ Yes O4o
❑ Yes �o
❑ Yes R o
❑ Yes E� 510
❑ Yes CD'T fro
❑ Yes �o
❑ Yes �Io
❑ Yes VXo
❑ Yes MXo
❑ Yes �o
❑ Yes 01140
❑ Yes U'&o
❑ Yes ticfNo
❑ Yes t4O
❑ Yes 2110
❑ Yes ,®'No
❑ Yes �o
y .. p ( addittonApages'as necessary `,' [ �� "E a aEi_ E 1, _ €E E� �� t 3r 1
Use drawingsof facilrt to better explain use, � � t � r
A,
Reviewer/Inspector Name
Reviewer/Inspector Signature:
PE -£I! A. }i ei'.:1
Date: __ I _�� I
3123/99

Facility Number: JIZ — 27 �c of Inspection
"Odor Issues
26.
Does the discharge pipe from the confinement building to the storage pond or lagoon fail to discharge at/or below
❑ Yes
[�F<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
ZA
2$.
Is there any evidence of wind drift during land application? (i.e. residue on neighboring vegetation, asphalt,
❑ Yes
U<o
roads, building structure, and/or public property)
29.
is the land application spray system intake not located near the liquid surface of the lagoon?
❑ Yes
`b''" o
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
�,�
I�40
31.
Do the animals feed storage bins fail to have appropriate cover?
❑ Yes
D N- o
32.
Do the flush tanks lack a submerged fill pipe or a permanent/temporary cover?
❑ Yes
E40
itrona omments an or rawtn s y
,...>�>., �.:..�,.,�., �.>.... €€.> ,..:,� .:.�>,
f _
3/23/99

���Siz�
U Division of Std Water Conservation ❑Other ncy
s; t4 Division of Water Quality W, R
P
*Routine O Com Taint 0 Follow-up of DWQ inspection 0 Follow-up of DSWC review 0 Other .
Date of Inspection'
Facility Number 2-Time of Inspection !b : $O 24 hr. (hh:mm}
D Registered ORCertified [3 Applied for Permit [3Permitted 113NotOperational l . , Date Last Operated:
Farm Name:........ e?,ii}...... � ... 1� . County:.........1.1L.kES................................ .I...S.110,
Owner Name: ............ 0.0-N ................................ � P.0.Rk,&..... I......... .... Phone No: .... �.,3�,...�. �5�.,.�.��.�..........................
........... .....
Facility Contact:.................................................................... .. Title: ... Phone No:
Mailing Address:.... a..Y.L.3 ........ ..........R.0..............
Onsite Representative: ................................................................................
Certified Operators............ �.Q,ti%........................ .........Sjop- Rz
Location of Farm:
� .� ........ .i V........................... ...T.L(R.:....
............. Integrator: ..........................................................
Operator Certification Number....2E.I.Ya.............
or.............}... .......... ...... u'�....... ....'....
�'..... ........................................3................... ...-............ .., .. ..1...... S... .
Latitude ®• ° =11 Longitude • ®' 94
urrent :::
❑ Wean to Feeder
❑ Feeder to Finish
❑ Farrow to Wean
❑ Farrow to Feeder
❑ Farrow to Finish
❑ Gilts
❑ Boars
umber of Lagoons/,'Holding Pond
ILI Subsurface Drains Present IJ Lagoon Area JU Spray Field Area
❑ No Liquid Waste Management System v'
General
1. Are there any buffers that need maintenance/improvement?
❑ Yes
(idtvo
2. Is any discharge observed from any part of the operation?
❑ Yes
�Wo
Discharge originated at; ❑ Lagoon ❑ Spray Field ❑ Other
a. If discharge is observed, was the conveyance man-made?
❑ Yes
EK0
b. If discharge is observed, did it reach Surface Water? (If yes, notify DWQ)
❑ Yes
O io
c. If discharge is observed, what is the estimated Flow in gaUmin?
d. Does discharge bypass a lagoon system'? (If yes, notify DWQ)
❑ Yes
❑ Ko'
3. Is there evidence of past discharge from any part of the operation?
❑ Yes
U-No
4. Were there any adverse impacts to the waters of the State other than from a discharge?
❑ Yes
U<o
5. Does any part of the waste management system (other than lagoons/holding ponds) require
❑ Yes
00,110
maintenance/improvement?
6. Is facility not in compliance with any applicable setback criteria in effect at the time of design?
❑ Yes
[D o
7. Did the facility fail to have a certified operator in responsible charge?
❑ Yes
MIvo
7/25/97

Facility Number: q7 — 2
8. Are there lagoons or storage ponds on site which need to be properly closed?
Structures (Lagoons.11olding Ponds, Flush Pits. etc.)
9. Is storage capacity (freeboard plus storm storage) less than adequate?
Structure I Structure 2 Structure 3 Structure 4
Identifier:
Freeboard(ft):...........................................................................................................
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?
❑ Yes OXO
❑ Yes [4o
Structure 5 Structure 6
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 .....�r-44-.Y.11... ..........................................................................................................................
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/]nspector 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?
❑ Yes Qj�i(�o
❑ Yes 0,11Q5
❑ Yes M.°
❑ Yes Do
❑ Yes MIVo
...........................................,,...��..........
❑ Yes &<O
25. We any additional problems noted which cause noncompliance of the Permit?
[PkNo'vidlaifiohs'vii deficiencies.were-noted,during this:visit.- You,will receive,n&furttier-:
. corr&pundeince about tuis:visit.
❑ Yes q].'� Ko
❑ Yes [D.?Io
❑ Yes
❑ Yes WPvo
❑ Yes J,?do
❑ Yes ED-Ko'
❑ Yes 93'Ko
❑ Yes To
❑ Yes PIN-0
Reviewer/Inspector Name
Reviewer/Inspector Signature: =41zDate: 16— 131 9' P

"R Division of So d W 1.1
anater Conservation ❑ Other Agency
�'t ® Division of Water Quality
�w.
® Routine O Cont taint O Follow-u of DWO inspection O Follow-uL of DSWC review O Other
Date of Inspection O 9I 7
Facility Number 2
Time of Inspection ® 24 hr. (hh:mm)
E3 Registered XCertified [3 Applied for Permit © Permitted 0 Not Operational I Date Last Operated:
Epp
FarmName:.......a Q ..... �................................................................. County: ....... vlel�It.............,..............WS.1 Q..,..
Owner Name :........ 1p......................... ...... � J�Prd..................................... Phone No: ....... .L�O.'...�,1�.7.'.,�.��f�..............................
Facility Contact: .............................................................................. Title: .. Phone No:
MailingAddress: .....> G.3....,... "0..........-..................................... ..... .. L....,.........,.......,.......... .... �rr�z. .
Onsite Representative:........... ................................................ Integrator:.............................................................................
.................................. Operator Certification Number:.........................................
Certified Operator;.�..........................
Location of Farm:
Latitude 1 :3 6 Longitude
v Design` Currentk
Design Current k Design Current
Swute "Capacity Population
Poultry
Capacity Population - Cattle Capi)ctty Population
Wean to Feeder,❑Layer
❑Dairy
.:;
Feeder to Finish
PO
❑ Non -Layer
®Non Dairy
r? DD
Q
Farrow to Wean
❑ Other
❑ Farrow to Feeder
x-
" 4
❑ Farrow to Finish
4 Total Design :CaOacity,,,2 00
❑ GiltsJ.
Total:.SAW 160, ODO
r
❑ Boars
Nnmberof Laggons ! Haldtng Pond's
® ❑ Subsurface Drains Present
❑ Lagoon Area ❑ Spray Field Area
�'
... ..6a
'` ❑ No Liquid Waste Management System t
y
General
1. Are there any buffers that need maintenance/improvement?
❑ Yes
14No
2. Is any discharge observed from any part of the operation?
❑ Yes
Q No
Discharge originated at: ❑ Lagoon ❑ Spray Field ❑ Other
a. If discharge is observed, was the conveyance man-made?
❑ Yes
M No
b. If discharge is observed, dill it mach Surlacc. Water'? (If yes, notify DWQ)
El Yes
j$j No
c. If discharge is observed, what is the estimated flow in gaVmin?
Af JA
A. Does discharge bypass a lagoon system? (If yes, notify DWQ)
❑ Yes
XNo
3. Is there evidence of past discharge from any part of the operation?
❑ Yes
No
4. Were there any adverse impacts to the waters of the State other than from a discharge?
❑ Yes
No
5. Does any part of the waste management system (other than lagoons/holding ponds) require
❑ Yes
M No
maintenance/improvement?
6. Is facility not in compliance with any applicable setback criteria in effect at the time of design?
❑ Yes
IN No
7. Did the facility fail to have a certified operator in responsible charge?
Yes
❑ No
7/25197
Continued
on back U'

�•
Facility Number: `r7 — 0
8. Are there lagoons or storage ponds on site which need to be properly closed?
Structures (Lagoons,Iiolding Ponds, Flush fits, etc.)
9. Is storage capacity (freeboard plus storm storage) less than adequate?
Structure i Structure 2 Structure 3 Structure 4 Structure 5
Identifier:
Freeboard(ft):..................................................................
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...diOl?ti.................................................................................................................................................................
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 Perntitt.ed 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.vialations`or. deficient 64e'renotedduring this:visit:-.Y.ou. 411 recei:veno•ftirtlier.
. • correspQndelnce about tl>ris;vi�it.� : . �: � � • : • � : :. � . � . • • .:.:. .: . � ' ::.. . .
7} ViV
.�. fU /97
❑ Yes jo No
❑ Yes t4 No
Structure 6
...............................
❑ Yes No
❑ Yes No
❑ Yes No
❑ Yes No
❑ Yes Lq No
......................................
❑ Yes
KNo
❑ Yes
Do No
❑ Yes
EkNo
❑ Yes
IR No
❑ Yes
j4 No
❑ Yes
RNo
❑ Yes
❑ No
❑ Yes K No
❑ Yes tallo
❑ Yes ,Q No
7/25/97
Reviewer/Inspector Name 6: EOARGE *,
Reviewer/Inspector Signature: Date: -LQ AL Z 27

7
p Division of So' d Water Cons ervat
1
p Division of W Quality
m ry p a� .. r� _ 7 a
-4 1 1 >
..r .dS i. 4*f gas'.
l* Routine p C:ompraint p rorrow-up of uwy inspection p Vc
Facility Number
Registered p Certified p Applied for Permit p Perfnitted
Farm Name: Dan.Sparks..........................................................
OwnerName: Doan .......................................... Sp;irU .............
-up of uawi, review p Vtner
- I III
Date of Inspection
Time of Inspection 24 hr. (hh:mm)
In Not Operatroua Date Last Operated:
County: Wilkes WSRO
Phone No: 9.1I1-95.7-, 2,aQ.1............................................................
Facility Contact: ...................................................................... .Title: ... Phone No:
rti
Mailing Address:. 1.242.Poplar..SAngs.Rfl....... L.y. ......LPxn.an......l n :. Roaring.River.... NC ............................................. z8fJ69 ..............
OnsiteRepresentative: .......................................................................................................... Integrator: ...............................................
Certified Operator: .................................................. .............................................................. Operator Certification Number:
Location of Farm:
.xout. wy. ..fn. oaring. vet:. e.. i e.... aans. tour .. na .nor. .approx.. .m es.to.. aRts.. ,. farrt.f:xg .ga.apprax......
Latitude ®0®1 ©1.6 Longitude ®� ®� ®fil
I
esign ,:, urren ;;° esign: urren esrgn� ;. ;3 urren
Swine, Ca acit . Po'..'Iation. Poulfr Ca acit Po 'ulatibn
p y py p y p Cattle Capacity. Population
❑ Wean to reeder
❑ Feeder to in—
p Farrow to Wean
❑ Farrow to Feeder
❑ Farrow to Finish
pGits
p Boars
p
Layer
❑ a U. E
E" € on -Layer
® on -Dairy 200
43 Other
Total Design Calpac�ty.200
Total SSL'W';'160,000
'NI`l u� m` be'er,,fog�f, LFtl tea p �ruyi' rface Drains Present I ❑a oonsI HoldtngPon
,: .............i oas..anagemenSystem
JEI
General
1. 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: p Lagoon p Spray Field ❑ Other
a, lf'discharge is observed, was the conveyance man-made?
❑ Yes
® No
b. Ifdischarge is observed, did it reach Surface Water? (If yes, notify DWQ)
❑ Yes
® No
c, II'discharge is observed, what: is the estimated flow in gal/min?
d. Does discharge bypass a lagoon system? (I1-yes, notify DWQ)
❑Yes
®No
3. Is there evidence of past discharge from any part of the operation?
❑ Yes
®No
4. Were there any adverse impacts to the waters of the State other than from a discharge?
❑ Yes
®No
5. Does any part of the waste management system (other than lagoons/holding ponds) require
❑ Yes
p 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?
p Yes
❑ No
7/25/97

aci i y um er: 97_27
8. Are there lagoons or storage ponds onWhich need to be properly closed? ❑ Yes N No
Structures (Lagoons,Holding Ponds, Flush Pits, etc.)
9. Is storage capacity (freeboard plus storm storage) less than adequate? p Yes p No
Structure I Structure 2 Structure 3 Structure 4 Structure 5 Structure 6
Identifier:
Freeboard(ft): ................................... ................................... ......... :.......................... .................................. .......................................................................
10. Is seepage observed from any of the structures? p Yes ® No
11. Is erosion, or any other threats to the integrity of any of the structures observed? p Yes ® No
12. Do any of the structures need maintenance/improvement? p Yes N No
(If any of questions 9-12 was answered yes, and the situation poses an
immediate public health or environmental threat, notify DWQ)
13. Do any of the structures lack adequate minimum or maximum liquid level markers? p Yes ® No
Waste Application
14. Is there physical evidence of over application? p Yes ® No
(If in excess of WMP, or runoff entering waters of the State, notify DWQ)
15. Crop type ....... C.orn.4Silage.&.l xak)....... .Small.Craia]1�.(heaz..D,arky,.......................................................................................................................
16. Do the receiving crops differ with those designated in the' Animal Waste Management Plan (A WMP)? p Yes ® No
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 .,oo.veiQ oi+os�nesn.oerle boiucrte:n�iciiseys•iiws�ere.naurgis visa:. You. will.receive nofurther .: .
............................................ ' ' .xKsp. ... .
p Yes N No
p Yes ®No
p Yes M No
p Yes ® No
p Yes ® No
p Yes p No
p Yes p No
p Yes p No
p Yes p No
Goitiititent refer' fo question #): Ezpiain any.I'ES aniwE�atid/ot aaiy,recoinmendatioris br aayYother commentsE:l€
CJse drawings of facility=to better explain situations. (uditional pages as necessary,):
Comments: NIr. Sparks has done an excellent job towards ertificaiton of .0200. The only "minor" problem is a small wash on one
f
of the waterways in which Mr. Sparks has agreed to repair. The plan will be ready to certify when this is com777
:..
ins
.: _
r __7
'
A �
h
4 i
t GC / 41 i h
r
712519�?t
Reviewer/inspector Name lGlichael: W:Pardue t. WIN,
NWANSW�d N ` aE.
Reviewer/Inspector Signature: Date: