790005_INSPECTIONS_20171231

Type of Visit: Compliance Inspection 0 Operation Review 0 Structure Evaluation 0 Technical Assistance
Reason for Visit: 'Q Routine 0 Complaint 0 Follow-up 0 Referral 0 Emergency 0 Other 0 Denied Access
Date of Visit: j Arrival Time: Departure Time: County:lxkngh[Apyl Region:WS�O
Farm Name: ��22,yt � 12, YJr0.S. D�tiry SAYM Owner Email: ��
yy��
�, gyq yA3l - To nny
Owner Name:'`�hhyl\I 4 Cyi�' ayl P$ Eleyi I I P, Phone: q3b 3i19 (4bK. - CWy-JtS I bvvG.&
Mailing Address: ICAO 1%zQ.V)aia I dSyille NC 11?d-0
Physical Address: V
Facility Contact: jlkmn\ &vl l Ie, Title:
Onsite Representative: A
Certified Operator:
v
Back-up Operator: I fxyI PS Imo'\/ I I I Pi
Location of Farm:
Latitude:
Integrator:
Certification Number: huurS
Certification Number:
Longitude:
Wr
t sR
1 Rc 1 1
]E'f 11
1 Y '1 1
M
t3I
aib
t.. t
■
'®��
� � +4 �,:; e�"
t 1t tl '-
t'�'i.R v � � �<w1 F
fl � t..11
Y`■LLYISYi{�9���
'
'co-.■
� ..�
��
j!■
1 �
��
�
i,'24 t n �; 4 ��y�y�F--`
i `�ti yy {�p+�' fit.`. $$
9id■���
}f, ■���
�t
t¢c � IV 3F
C .. A
Y
�' }'f
;
Discharges and Stream Impacts
I. Is any discharge observed from any part of the operation?
❑ Yes
14 No
❑ NA
❑ NE
Discharge originated at: ❑ Structure ❑ Application Field ❑ Other:
a. Was the conveyance man-made?
❑ Yes
❑ No
❑ NA
❑ NE
b. Did the discharge reach waters of the State? (If yes, notify DWR)
❑ Yes
❑ No
❑ NA
❑ NE
c. What is the estimated volume that reached waters of the State (gallons)?
d. Does the discharge bypass the waste management system? (II'yes, notify DWR)
❑ Yes
❑ No
❑ NA
❑ NE
2. Is there evidence of a past discharge from any part of the operation?
❑ Yes
1�4 No
❑ NA
❑ NE
3. Were there any observable adverse impacts or potential adverse impacts to the waters
❑ Yes
No
❑ NA
❑ NE
of the State other than from a discharge?
Page I of'3 2/412015 Continued

Facili Number: • Date of inspection:
Waste Collection & Treatment
4. Is storage capacity (structural plus storm storage plus heavy rainfall) less than adequate?
❑ Yes
❑ No
❑ NA
❑ NE
a. If yes, is waste level into the structural freeboard?
❑ Yes
❑ No
❑ NA
❑ NE
Structure 1 Structure 2 Structure 3 Structure 4
Structure 5
Structure 6
Identifier: UMLY _ WfN
Spillway?:
Designed Freeboard (in):
l Observed Freeboard (in): (% / _ O n
5. Are there any immediate threats to the integrity of any of the structures observed?
❑ Yes
No
❑ NA
❑ NE
(i.e., large trees, severe erosion, seepage, etc.)
6. Are there structures on -site which are not properly addressed and/or managed through a
❑ Yes
No
❑ NA
❑ NE
waste management or closure plan?
If any of questions 4-6 were answered yes, and the situation poses an immediate public health
or environmental
threat,
notify DWR
7. Do any of the structures need maintenance or improvement'?
❑ Yes
� No
❑ NA
❑ NE
8. Do any of the structures lack adequate markers as required by the permit?
❑ Yes]
No
❑ NA
❑ NE
(not applicable to roofed pits, dry stacks, and/or wet stacks)
9. Does any part of the waste management system other than the waste structures require
❑ Yes
`� No
❑ NA
❑ NE
maintenance or improvement?
Waste Application '
10. Are there any required buffers, setbacks, or compliance alternatives that need
❑ Yes
No
❑ NA
❑ NE
maintenance or improvement?
11. Is there evidence of incorrect land application? If yes, check the appropriate box below. ❑ Yes 1] 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): ��o.1I ckran 02y pL yi—e_ CUVY1 S-d w,
13. Soil Type(s):
14. Do the receiving crops differ from those designated in the CAWMP?
15. Does the receiving crop and/or land application site need improvement?
16. Did the facility fail to secure and/or operate per the irrigation design or wettable
acres determination?
17. Does the facility lack adequate acreage for land application?
18. Is there a lack of properly operating waste application equipment?
Required Records & Documents
19. Did the facility fail to have the Certificate of Coverage & Permit readily available?
20. Does the facility fail to have all components of the CAWMP readily available? If yes, check
the appropriate box.
❑ WUP ❑Checklists ❑ Design ❑ Maps ❑ Lease Agreements
❑ Yes �Q No
❑ Yes &No
❑ Yes [J No
❑ Yes No
❑ Yes No
❑ Yes No
❑ Yes No
❑ Other:
21. Does record keeping need improvement? If yes, check the appropriate box below. ❑ Yes ❑ No
Waste Application 4 Weekly Freeboard 0 Waste Analysis Elsm4,4n_Lysi 1it4ke+rnnsfers
Rainfall NStocking 1P Crop Yield P 120 Minute Inspections Monthly and I" Rainfall Inspections
2. Did the facility fail to install and maintain a rain gauge? ❑ Yes No
23. If selected, did the facility fail to install and maintain rainbreakers on irrigation equipment? ❑ Yes] No
Page 2 of 3
❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ NA ❑ NE
"'Weather Code
❑-5=wlsry
❑ NA ❑ NE
NA ❑ NE
21412015 Continued

Facili Number: Date of Inspection:
24. Did the facility fail to calibrate waste application equipment as required by the permit? ❑ Yes No
25. Is the facility out of compliance with permit conditions related to sludge? If yes, check ❑ Yes No
the appropriate boxes) below.
❑ Failure to complete annual sludge survey ❑ Failure to develop a POA for sludge levels
❑ Non -compliant sludge levels in any lagoon
List structure(s) and date of first survey indicating non-compliance:
26. Did the facility fail provide documentation of an actively certified operator in charge?
27. Did the facility fail to secure a phosphorus loss assessments (PLAT) certification?
Other Issues
28. Did the facility fail to properly dispose of dead animals with 24 hours and/or document
and report mortality rates that were higher than normal?
29. At the time of the inspection did the facility pose an odor or air quality concern?
If yes, contact a regional Air Quality representative immediately.
30. Did the facility fail to notify the Regional Office of emergency situations as required by the
permit? (i.e., discharge, freeboard problems, over -application)
31. Do subsurface tile drains exist at the facility? If yes, check the appropriate box below.
❑ Application Field ❑ Lagoon/Storage Pond ❑ Other:
32. Were any additional problems noted which cause non-compliance of the permit or CAWMP?
33. Did the Reviewer/Inspector fail to discuss review/inspection with an on -site representative?
34. Does the facility require a follow-up visit by the same agency?
❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes
�] No
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Yes
❑ No
NA
❑ NE
❑ Yes
No
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Yes
MI No
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Yes
L No
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Yes
No
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Yes
No
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Yes
No
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Yes
No
❑ NA
❑ NE
Comments (refer to question #):. Explain any YES answers and/or any, -,additional recommendations or any other comments..
Use drawings of facility to better explain situations (use additional pages as necessary).
yQG Y D nDj lbfrf)b(lu,QGwtr�, ltVvd)Gikii�h/s°bY)4tbi LJUE
CherK �bI6 Cq�iblZL+i0V1 . (A � I It5l T)u4,-
l
10, >�S �60 � ��
.46
�JSP"s 16p� r�r�a�-
Yvtln-iit. (:9Vk 1'361 V) x
to 111111 5.13
Reviewer/Inspector
Reviewer/Inspector
Page 3 of 3
Phone: C1105
Date: k\jtj 11
21412015

I yPe ut visit: psc.uutPnance msPecuuu V vperauun nev,ew lJ structure evamauun t j t ecnmcat Assistance
Reason for Visit: % Routine 0 Complaint 0 Follow-up 0 Referral 0 Emergency 0 Other 0 Denied Access
Date of Visit: 111 I q I If_ I Arrival Time: SQ Departure Time: County: ROCW44M Region: WSJ"a
Farm Name: WIILLL,6- fft$ DA(Z%l M Owner Email:
Owner Name: ..)0*P 1 } cwuz Q&VI a,E Phone: '349,4937
Mailing Address: 11.50o 136WA inn. WDWiu.6 . N _ a7396
Physical Address:
Facility Contact: .9Q WJNUyI Title:
Onsite Representative:
Certified Operator:
Back-up Operator: C"AkJ.(;S S6V I a.
Location of Farm:
Latitude:
Phone: q746
Integrator:
Certification Number: GS (5i 31 18
Certification Number:
Longitude:
Design C�r�rent
Swine Capacity Pop.'
Design
Wet Poultry Capacity
Current
Pop.
D�esilgn
Cattle a t testy
Dairy Cow
Current o
Pop.
Wean to Finish
La er
Wean to Feeder
Non -La er
Dairy Calf
Feeder to Finish
Design
Trpacit
Current
P,p .
Dairy Heifer
Farrow to Wean
Dry Cow
Farrow to Feeder
Non -Dairy
Farrow to Finish
Layers
Beef Stocker
Gilts
Non -Layers
Beef Feeder
1
Boars
Qther
Pullets
Turkeys
I
t.
lBeef Brood Cow
a
k
il I
ti
Turkey Poults
Other I
I
Other
Discharges and Stream Impacts
I. Is any discharge observed from any part of the operation?
Discharge originated at ❑ Structure ❑ Application Field ❑ Other:
a. Was the conveyance man-made?
b. Did the discharge reach waters of the State? (If yes, notify DWR)
c. What is the estimated volume that reached waters of the State (gallons)?
d. Does the discharge bypass the waste management system? (If yes, notify DWR)
2. Is there evidence of a past discharge from any part of the operation?
3. Were there any observable adverse impacts or potential adverse impacts to the waters
of the State other than from a discharge?
❑ Yes No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes No
❑ Yes El No
❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ NA ❑ NE
Page I of 3 21412015 Continued

Facili Number: 39 Q 5 11 Iq Jac
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: Upm LO W GIC
Spillway?:
Designed Freeboard (in):
Observed Freeboard (in): 60
5. Are there any immediate threats to the integrity of any of the structures observed?
❑ Yes
W 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
[R No
❑ NA
❑ NE
waste management or closure plan?
If any of questions 4-6 were answered yes, and the situation poses an immediate public health
or environmental
threat,
notify DWR
7. Do any of the structures need maintenance or improvement?
❑ Yes
" No
❑ NA
❑ NE
8. Do any of the structures lack adequate markers as required by the permit?
❑ Yes
XNo
❑ NA
❑ NE
(not applicable to roofed pits, dry stacks, and/or wet stacks)
9. Does any part of the waste management system other than the waste structures require
❑ Yes
lIIJ No
❑ NA
❑ NE
maintenance or improvement?
Waste Application
10. Are there any required buffers, setbacks, or compliance alternatives that need
[:]Yes
® No
❑ NA
❑ NE
maintenance or improvement?
11. Is there evidence of incorrect land application? If yes, check the appropriate box below. Yes [gNo ❑ NA ❑ NE
�css;�,.., .ng -U rrymm,,,�,-.!oad .0-Fozerr6r round Heavy Metals Cu, Zn, etc.
❑ PAN ❑ PAN > 10% or 10 lbs. o a sphorus ❑ 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): W(4&K UJ416,1 , biVU4 ; cow
t3. 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
X No
❑ NA
❑ NE
16.
Did the facility fail to secure and/or operate per the irrigation design or wettable
❑ Yes
M, No
❑ NA
❑ NE
acres determination?
17.
Does the facility lack adequate acreage for land application?
❑ Yes
R No
❑ NA
❑ NE
18.
Is there a lack of properly operating waste application equipment?
❑ Yes
No
❑ NA
❑ NE
Required
Records & Documents
19.
Did the facility fail to have the Certificate of Coverage & Permit readily available?
❑ Yes
❑ No
❑ NA
❑ NE
20.
Does the facility fail to have all components of the CAWMP readily available? If yes, check
YesIIJo
(
❑ NA
❑ NE
the appropriate box.
❑WUP ❑Checklists ❑Design ❑Maps ❑ Lease Agreements
❑Other:
21. Does record keeping need improvement? If yes, check the appropriate box below. ❑ Yes N No ❑ NA ❑ NE
rq n— Iy�— —I= •ice &lyws ^Q`waaec .o i of e
❑S[oc g ie � a=r�ie�irrfa.rinspectiens+ "' --
22. Did the facilit®1ai to install and maintain a rain gauge? ❑ Yes ® No ❑ NA ❑ NE
Ofselected, did the facility fail to install and maintain rainbreakers on irrigation equipment? ❑ Yes ❑ No N NA ❑ NE
Page 2 of 3 21412015 Continued

Facility Number: - r-C, dih. I Date of Inspection: I
24. Did the facility fail to calibrate waste applTation equipment as required by the permit?
❑ Yes
[kNo
❑ NA
❑ NE
25. Is the facility out of compliance with permit conditions related to sludge? If yes, check
❑ Yes
❑ No
CRt NA
❑ NE
the appropriate box(es) below.
❑ Failure to complete annual sludge survey [:]Failure to develop a POA for sludge levels
❑ Non -compliant sludge levels in any lagoon
List structure(s) and date of first survey indicating non-compliance:
26. Did the facility fail provide documentation of an actively certified operator in charge?
❑ Yes
No
❑ NA
❑ NE
27. Did the facility fail to secure a phosphorus loss assessments (PLAT) certification?
❑ Yes
❑ No
� NA
❑ NE
Otherlssues
28. Did the facility fail to properly dispose of dead animals with 24 hours and/or document
and report mortality rates that were higher than normal?
29. At the time of the inspection did the facility pose an odor or air quality concern?
If yes, contact a regional Air Quality representative immediately.
30. Did the facility fail to notify the Regional Office of emergency situations as required by the
permit? (i.e., discharge, freeboard problems, over -application)
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 M No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes V No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes M No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes M, No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes
® No
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Yes
No
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Yes
[4 No
❑ NA
❑ NE
Comments (refer to question#)::Explain any YES answers and/or'any additional recommendations or any other comments.'
Use drawin¢s of facility to better explain situations (use additional paces as necessary).
91).SokL.Tr5'1 p�� 1$• �wRS 1,
ay) d 1 G rA-L \fZiW'r1o1J
PONC W X014 ? )-."N W\t.t.._ LY66D Iro
g6- s&,rs eio NC'()A r4>F,
�0* 1►WPrtws13, n:5 Cu l2n
nP-C—Nor W"2fi0`. gy W1r'TGftS
— MML Rt66QoA.(() FPS To qwmW
kRzkGA-r(" Its I I. p- I I stk eA-.- 4ainS L o ok G�GNT
a 1, tc 1.1a5\)
F£5cue C��Ecti .pEc��nw wnrr�)
Reviewer/Inspector Name:
Reviewer/Inspector Signatm
Page 3 of 3
1.) = 5-a 4 kb 110M C,&" 4 [ a5' Ic
N = 0.73 N %11000 "L 01 [X4'Ic tic Trcf )
Phone: 33 G- 40 C- 4R93
Date: 10
214615

Visit: QD Routine O Complaint O Follow-up O Referral O Emergency O Other O Denied Access
Date of Visit: D Arrival � Time: Departure Time: County:hj Region: W$ao
Farm Name: I)/i.LIP, 3i \t-
-D5. Cl31rV Far M Owner Email:
A�"�'" N3 9- 37 � nn /
Owner Name: �DiIYIV\�l °f VVIw 195 tIIP. Phone: Lr {j(;t^IE5 349 — g Jr lii
Mailing Address:
Physical Address:
Facility Contact: Z0 i1 f. YN y _beAib LI ei Title:
Onsite Representative: I
Certified Operator
Back-up Operator:
Location of Farm:
Phone:
Integrator:
Certification Number:
ehar6 _6"i (Ile- Certification Number:
Latitude: 3tp� ifs-/ I S t t
Longitude: 71 q z / ' t
E . ane5 Mi0 t c tu� ":f
2 6uhn'tvyq howl Mill PA -
6ecmauktat P-
i_ 8 enter a M o
/o b� L ffwy IS$ EJ
Fa r-Yn o l .
Swine
Wean to Finish
Design Current
Capacity Pop.
Design
Wet Pouitry Capacity
Layer)(]Dairy
Current
Pop.
Design Current
Cattle Capacity Pap.
Cow
Wean to Feeder
I
INon-Layer
I
Dairy Calf
Feeder to Finish
Dairy Heifer
Farrow to Wean
Farrow to Feeder
Farrow to Finish
Design
Di, P,oult . Ca aci +
Layers I
Current
P,o
Dry Cow
Non -Dairy
Beef Stocker
Gilts
Non -Layers
Beef Feeder
Boars
Other
Other
Pullets
Turkeys
Turkev Poults
Other
Beef Brood Cow
Discharges and Stream Impacts
1. Is any discharge observed from any part of the operation?
❑ Yes
0 No
❑ NA
❑ NE
Discharge originated at: ❑ Structure ❑ Application Field ❑ Other:
a. Was the conveyance man-made?
❑ Yes
❑ No
❑ NA
❑ NE
b. Did the discharge reach waters of the State? (If yes, notify DWR)
❑ Yes
❑ No
❑ NA
❑ NE
c. What is the estimated volume that reached waters of the State (gallons)?
d. Does the discharge bypass the waste management system? (If yes, notify DWR)
❑ Yes
❑ No
❑ NA
❑ NE
2. Is there evidence of a past discharge from any part of the operation?
❑ Yes
No
❑ NA
❑ NE
3. Were there any observable adverse impacts or potential adverse impacts to the waters
❑ Yes
T(� No
❑ NA
❑ NE
of the State other than from a discharge?
77
Page I of 3 21412014 Continued

Facility Number: - 0 Date of Inspection:
Waste Collection & Treatment
4. Is storage capacity (structural plus storm storage plus heavy rainfall) less than adequate? ❑ Yes No ❑ NA ❑ NE
a. If yes, is waste level into the structural freeboard? ❑ Yes ❑ No ❑ NA ❑ NE
Structure I Structure 2 Structure 3 Structure 4 Structure 5 Structure 6
Identifier: �IF'� WOjec
Spillway?:
Designed Freeboard (in):
Observed Freeboard (in):
5-7
5. Are there any immediate threats to the integrity of any of the structures observed?
(i.e., large trees, severe erosion, seepage, etc.)
6. Are there structures on -site which are not properly addressed and/or managed through a
waste management or closure plan?
❑ Yes Od No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes Z No ❑ NA ❑ NE
If any of questions 4-6 were answered yes, and the situation poses an immediate public health or environmental threat, notify DWR
7. Do any of the structures need maintenance or improvement? Yes ❑ 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 No ❑ NA ❑ NE
maintenance or improvement? ,{
11. Is there evidence of incorrect land application? If yes, check the appropriate box below. ❑ Yes I AI No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Excessive Pending ❑ Hydraulic Overload ❑ Frozen Ground ❑ Heavy Metals (Cu, Zn, etc.)
❑ PAN ❑ PAN > 10% or 10 lbs. ❑ Total Phosphorus ❑ Failure to Incorporate Manure/Sludge into Bare Soil
❑ Outside of Acceptable Crop Window ❑ Evidence of Wind Drift ❑ Application Outside of Approved Area
12. Crop Type(s): L
13. Soil Type(s):
14. Do the receiving crops differ from those designated in the CAWMP? ❑ Yes eNo ❑ 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
[X No
❑ NA
❑ NE
18. Is there a lack of properly operating waste application equipment?
❑ Yes
F No
❑ NA
❑ NE
Required Records & Documents
19. Did the facility fail to have the Certificate of Coverage & Permit readily available?
❑ Yes
No
❑ NA
❑ NE
20. Does the facility fail to have all components of the CAWMP readily available? If yes, check
❑ Yes
No
❑ NA
❑ NE
the appropriate box.
❑ WUP []Checklists []Design ❑ Maps ❑ Lease Agreements ❑Other:
�21. es record keeping need i rovement? F€yesreWeel ❑ Yes No ❑ NA ❑ NE
ste Appli ation ekly Freeboard Waste Analysis Soil Analysis transfers --other Code
Rainfall "Pi ooct.�ing Crop Yield 120 Minute Inspections Monthly and I"Rainfall Inspections I"t
22. Did the facility fail to install and maintain a rain gauge? ❑ Yes IX No ❑ NA ❑ NE
23. If selected, did the facility fail to install and maintain rainbreakers on irrigation equipment? ❑ Yes ❑ No rZ NA ❑ NE
Page 2 of 3 21412014 Continued

Facili Number: - O,S jDate of Inspection: J 0 S �[
24. Did the facility fail to calibrate waste application equipment as required by the permit? ❑ Yes I XI No
25. Is the facility out of compliance with permit conditions related to sludge? If yes, check ❑ Yes ❑ No
the appropriate boxes) below.
❑ Failure to complete annual sludge survey ❑Failure to develop a POA for sludge levels
❑ Non -compliant sludge levels in any lagoon
List structure(s) and date of first survey indicating non-compliance:
❑NA ❑NE
0 NA ❑ NE
26. Did the facility fail to provide documentation of an actively certified operator in charge? [:]Yes �[ No ❑ NA ❑ NE
27. Did the facility fail to secure a phosphorus loss assessments (PLAT) certification? ❑ Yes IXI No ❑ NA ❑ NE
Otherlssues i
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?
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 [)g No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes 0 No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes '""""J No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes 1 No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes X No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes to No ❑ NA ❑ NE
(Comments (refer to question #):Explain any;YES answers and/or any additional recommendations or any other,comments. I
Use drawines of facility to better explain situations (use additional"pages as necessary).
Reviewer/Inspector Name:
Reviewer/Inspector Signature:
Page 3 of 3
a()/4 ?
Phone: 7-7 —
Date: 11,10q.(}
2/4/2014

(Type of Visit: go Compliance Inspection U Operation Review Q Structure Evaluation Q Technical Assistance I
Reason for Visit: IRoutine 0 Complaint Q Follow-up 0 Referral Q Emergency Q Other . Q Denied Access
Date of Visit: I Z Arrival Time: Departure Time: ' County:1"ion:
Farm Name: V&1ILK 2_05, U01'rV farm
Owner Name: T2knnd tth0-r 1f-5 Biwi lle
Mailing Address..
Physical Address:
W
Facility Contact: ,J Title:
Onsite Representative:
Certified Operator
Owner Email:
N 3q,?-Llq 37 _
Phone: rl{o c le-Z 3 g 9- L F/-
1111L. NG A-73AQ
To
Phone:
Integrator: ------
Certification Number:
Back-up Operator: 0. tr� �rJ �-vI l �� Certificate n Number: Ff,W y
Location of Farm: L �%� ,"`f �'/ La hYd �man �n oPA ngi[ude: y �'� L ` E
1s$ E. to /Vlor)ro�ton ,
Farm o,n fe-+'+
nn;ng ham i
J
Design Current
Design Current
Design Current
Swine
Capacity Pop.
Wet Poultry
Capacity Pop.
Cattle
Capacity Pop.
Wean to Finish
La er
DairyCow
Wean to Feeder
Non -La er
DairyCalf
Feeder to Finish
DairyHeifer
Farrow to Wean
Design Current
Dry Cow
Farrow to Feeder
Di. P.oultr
Ca ace P,o
Non -Dairy
Farrow to Finish
Layers
Beef Stocker
Gilts
Non -Layers
Beef Feeder
Boars
Pullets
lBeefBroodCow
Turkeys
Other
Poults
Other
—Turkey
Other
Discharges and Stream Impacts
1. Is any discharge observed from any part of the operation?
❑ Yes
[yNo
❑ NA
❑ NE
Discharge originated at: ❑ Structure ❑ Application Field ❑ Other:
a. Was the conveyance man-made?
❑ Yes
❑ No
❑ NA
❑ NE
b. Did the discharge reach waters of the State? (If yes, notify DWR)
❑ Yes
❑ No
❑ NA
❑ NE
c. What is the estimated volume that reached waters of the State (gallons)?
d. Does the discharge bypass the waste management system? (If yes, notify DWR)
❑ Yes
❑ No
❑ NA
❑ NE
2. Is there evidence of a past discharge from any part of the operation?
❑ Yes
Z No
❑ NA
❑ NE
3. Were there any observable adverse impacts or potential adverse impacts to the waters
❑ Yes
ONo
❑ NA
❑ NE
of the State other than from a discharge?
Page I of 21412014 Continued

Facili Number: 21 Date of Inspection:
Waste Collection & Treatment
4. Is storage capacity (structural plus storm storage plus heavy rainfall) less than adequate? ❑ Yes 4-110 ❑ 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: U P pP� _Ld0_%Le.t%
Spillway?:
Designed Freeboard (in):
Observed Freeboard (in): 2L_ ; "'
5. Are there any immediate threats to the integrity of any of the structures observed? ❑ Yes I tyrvo ❑ NA ❑ NE
(i.e., large trees, severe erosion, seepage, etc.)
6. Are there structures on -site which are not properly addressed and/or managed through a
❑ Yes
I ro
❑ NA
❑ NE
waste management or closure plan?
�
If any of questions 4-6 were answered yes, and the situation poses an immediate public health
or environmental
threat,
notify DWR
7. Do any of the structures need maintenance or improvement?
❑ Yes
No
❑ NA
❑ NE
8. Do any of the structures lack adequate markers as required by the permit?
❑Yes
No
❑ NA
❑ NE
(not applicable to roofed pits, dry stacks, and/or wet stacks)
9. Does any part of the waste management system other than the waste structures require
❑ Yes
ZNo
❑ NA
❑ NE
maintenance or improvement?
Waste Application
10. Are there any required buffers, setbacks, or compliance alternatives that need
❑ Yes
No
❑ NA
❑ NE
maintenance or improvement?
11. Is there evidence of incorrect land application? If yes, check the appropriate box below. ❑ Yes XNo ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Excessive Ponding ❑ Hydraulic Overload ❑ Frozen Ground ❑ Heavy Metals (Cu, Zn, etc.)
❑ PAN ❑ PAN > 10% or 10 lbs. ❑ Total Phosphorus ❑ Failure to Incorporate Manure/Sludge into Bare Soil
❑ Outside of Acceptable Crop Window ❑ Evidence of Wind Drift ❑ Application Outside of Approved Area
A,_
12. Crop Type(s): l a1 i ; A" 1 .l�f Aa /t}.,(/
13. Soil Type(s):
14. Do the receiving crops differ from those designated in the CAWMP?
15. Does the receiving crop and/or land application site need improvement?
16. Did the facility fail to secure and/or operate per the irrigation design or wettable
acres determination?
17. Does the facility lack adequate acreage for land application?
18. Is there a lack of properly operating waste application equipment?
Required Records & Documents
19. Did the facility fail to have the Certificate of Coverage & Permit readily available?
20. Does the facility fail to have all components of the CAWMP readily available? If yes, check
the appropriate box.
❑ Yes y_,No
❑ Yes I XNo
❑ Yes �o
❑ Yes EX,
[:]Yes gf No
❑ Yes �o
❑ Yes No
❑ WUP ❑Checklists ❑ Design ❑ Maps ❑ Lease Agreements ❑Other:
2 Yboes record keeping need
[RO aste Applica n
ainfall StockiPLE
22. Did the facility fail to i5st
❑ NA ❑ NE
❑NA ❑NE
❑NA ❑NE
❑NA ❑NE
❑NA ❑NE
❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes No ❑ ❑ NE
Analysis MWaste Transfers Weather Code
and I" Rainfall Inspections �Slr� uasy551r-1 rG� fGG
❑ Yes 1� No ❑ NA ❑ NE
23. If selected, did the facility fail to install and maintain rainbreakers on irrigation equipment? ❑ Yes ❑ No DR"9A ❑ NE
Y�eekly Free boar [Waste Analysis
Crop Yield 120 Minute Inspections
and maintain a rain gauge?
Page 2 of 3
21412014 Continued

Facility Number: - 0 AyDate of Inspection:
24. Did the facility fail to calibrate waste app tion equipment as required by the permit? ❑Yes No ❑ NA ❑ NE
25. Is the facility out of compliance with permit conditions related to sludge? If yes, check ❑ Yes ❑ No NA ❑ NE
the appropriate box(es) below.
❑ Failure to complete annual sludge survey ❑ Failure to develop a POA for sludge levels
❑ Non -compliant sludge levels in any lagoon
List structure(s) and date of first survey indicating non-compliance:
26. Did the facility fail to provide documentation of an actively certified operator in charge? ❑ Yes No ❑ NA ❑ NE
27. Did the facility fail to secure a phosphorus loss assessments (PLAT) certification? ❑ Yes 1$ No ❑ NA ❑ NE
Other Issues
28. Did the facility fail to properly dispose of dead animals with 24 hours and/or document
and report mortality rates that were higher than normal?
29. At the time of the inspection did the facility pose an odor or air quality concern?
If yes, contact a regional Air Quality representative immediately.
30. Did the facility fail to notify the Regional Office of emergency situations as required by the
permit? (i.e., discharge, freeboard problems, over -application)
31. Do subsurface tile drains exist at the facility? If yes, check the appropriate box below.
❑ Application Field ❑ Lagoon/Storage Pond ❑ Other:
32. Were any additional problems noted which cause non-compliance of the permit or CAWMP?
33. Did the Reviewer/Inspector fail to discuss review/inspection with an on -site representative?
34. Does the facility require a follow-up visit by the same agency?
❑ Yes D6 No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes 9No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes 2�No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes P& ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes A No
❑ Yes P No
❑ Yes �No
❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ NA ❑ NE
❑NA ❑NE
Comments (refer to question #)t Explain any YES answers`and/or any additional recommendations or any other comments.
Use drawings of facility to better explain situations (use additional pages as necessary).
I
�t
�I i 14
&Ile / I � : S, q6 llgs. IVII666 Id l . R/ISldz I � : 4. 35 1 A5 . nl
Reviewer/Inspector Name:
Reviewer/Inspector Signature:
Page 3 of 3
-776 — 96 Phone: 1 �/
Date: f I/ a4p /
21412014

Type of Visit: Q Compliance Inspection 0 Operation Review Q Structure Evaluation Q Technical Assistance
Reason for Visit: 0 Routine Q Complaint 0 Follow-up O Referral Q Emergency O Other O Denied Access
Date of Visit: )10 Arrival Time: ® Departure Time: aLL� County: �Megion: W 5w
Farm Name: Bey i 1 I4— Bros. 1Gl,t r y Far m Owner Email: 14 Owner AmeTO LPhone: • 3jj,& � �937L_1.
Mailin �� eAl t i lt2_ R-a • �L ids V' t Ll , 1�3 Cam' 7 3 �d
Physical Address: I Ss d �0. a ' P-A '
Facility Contact: J op hn04 Title: Phone:
Onsite Representative: f0 k /1) n1 Integrator:
Certified Operator: /t 1 W Certification Number:
Back-up Operator: C YIA I" t e S Certification Number:
� it
Location of Farm: Latitude: 3 (.0 IS-
I N � Longitude: -7 9 y Z ti a
I578 E its Amroe•"n 2 Cunnihart Il BcnaJcL Rd.
Farin 6h lef+
Swine
Wean to Finish
Design
Capacity
Current
Pop.
Design
Wet Poultry Capacity
La er
Current
Pop.
Design Current
Cattle Capacity Pop.
DairyCow a
Wean to Feeder
Non -La er
DairyCalf
Feeder to Finish
Dairy Heifer
Farrow to Wean
Farrow to Feeder
Farrow to Finish
Design
Dr,+ P,oulh. Ga aci
La ers
Current
P,o
Dry Cow
Non -Dairy
Beef Stocker
Gilts
Non -La ers
Beef Feeder
Boars
Pullets
Turke s
Turke Poults
Other
Beef Brood Cow
Other
Other
Discharges and Stream Impacts
I. Is any discharge observed from any part of the operation?
Discharge originated at: ❑ Structure ❑ Application Field ❑ Other:
a. Was the conveyance man-made?
b. Did the discharge reach waters of the State? (If yes, notify DWQ)
c. What is the estimated volume that reached waters of the State (gallons)?
d. Does the discharge bypass the waste management system? (If yes, notify DWQ)
2. Is there evidence of a past discharge from any part of the operation?
3. Were there any observable adverse impacts or potential adverse impacts to the waters
of the State other than from a discharge?
❑ Yes I No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes 6No
❑ Yes %No
❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ NA ❑ NE
Page 1 of 3
21412011 Continued

Facility Number: - • Date of Inspection: j
Waste Collection & Treatment
4. Is storage capacity (structural plus storm storage plus heavy rainfall) less than adequate? ❑ Yes A No ❑ NA ❑ NE
a. If yes, is waste level into the structural freeboard? ❑ Yes ❑ No ❑ NA ❑ NE
,tStructure I Structure 2 Structure 3 Structure 4 Structure 5 Structure 6
Identifier: . Lo vi e1-
Spillway?:
Designed Freeboard (in):
Observed Freeboard (in): 5
5. Are there any immediate threats to the integrity of any of the structures observed? ❑ Yes CA
❑ NA
❑ NE
(i.e., large trees, severe erosion, seepage, etc.)
6. Are there structures on -site which are not properly addressed and/or managed through a ❑ Yes No No
9'
❑ 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 JU`&o
❑ NA
❑ NE
(not applicable to roofed pits, dry stacks, and/or wet stacks)
9. Does any part of the waste management system other than the waste structures require ❑ Yes IX No
❑ NA
❑ NE
maintenance or improvement?
Waste Application ���///
10. Are there any required buffers, setbacks, or compliance alternatives that need ❑ Yes I p No
1
❑ NA
❑ NE
maintenance or improvement?
11. Is there evidence of incorrect land application? If yes, check the appropriate box below. ❑ Yes I XI No
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Excessive Pending ❑ Hydraulic Overload ❑ Frozen Ground ❑ Heavy Metals (Cu, Zn, etc.
❑ PAN ❑ PAN > 10% or 10 lbs. ❑ Total Phosphorus ❑ Failure to Incorporate Manure/Sludge into
Bare Soil
❑ Outside of Acceptable Crop Window ❑ Evidence of Wind Drift ❑ Application Outside of Approved Area
12. Crop Type(s)
13. Soil Type(s): 1 "-7T
V
14. Do the receiving crops differ from those designated in the CAWMP?
❑ Yes
No
❑ NA
❑ NE
15. Does the receiving crop and/or land application site need improvement?
❑ Yes
No
❑ NA
❑ NE
16. Did the facility fail to secure and/or operate per the irrigation design or wettable
❑ Yes
No
❑ NA
❑ NE
acres determination?
17. Does the facility lack adequate acreage for land application?
❑ Yes
No
❑ NA
❑ NE
18. Is there a lack of properly operating waste application equipment?
❑ Yes
IAA No
❑ NA
❑ NE
Required Records & Documents
19. Did the facility fail to have the Certificate of Coverage & Permit readily available?
❑ Yes
XNo
❑ NA
❑ NE
20. Does the facility fail to have all components of the CAWMP readily available? If yes, check
❑ Yes
�SrNo
❑ NA
❑ NE
the appropriate box.
❑WUP ❑Checklists ❑Design []Maps ❑ Lease Agreements []Other:
2l Does record keeping need i provement? re app ❑ Yes ZNo ❑ NA ❑ NE
Waste Applic 'lion [Weekly Freeboar Waste Analysis Soil Analysis I'� "- [Weather Code
Rainfall Stocking ,L rcrop Yield 120 Minute Inspections Monthly and V Rainfall Inspections o SI•S,ludg� ueSu �e;e��
22. Did the facility fail to install and maintain a rain gauge? ❑ Yes] No ❑ NA ❑ NE
23. If selected, did the facility fail to install and maintain rainbreakers on irrigation equipment? ❑ Yes No NA ❑ NE
Pagel of 21412011 Continued

Facility Number: Date of Inspection: .3
24. Did the facility fail to calibrate waste apploon equipment as required by the permit? ❑ Yes No ❑ NA ❑ NE
25. Is the facility out of compliance with permit conditions related to sludge? If yes, check ❑ Yes 9 No [!54A ❑ NE
the appropriate box(es) below.
❑ Failure to complete annual sludge survey [:]Failure to develop a PDA 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 C%No ❑ NA ❑ NE
Other Issues
28. Did the facility fail to properly dispose of dead animals with 24 hours and/or document ❑ Yes NrNo ❑ NA ❑ NE
and report mortality rates that were higher than normal?
29. At the time of the inspection did the facility pose an odor or air quality concern?
❑ Yes
% No
❑ NA
❑ NE
If yes, contact a regional Air Quality representative immediately.
30. Did the facility fail to notify the Regional Office of emergency situations as required by the
❑ Yes
No
❑ NA
❑ NE
permit? (i.e., discharge, freeboard problems, over -application)
31. Do subsurface tile drains exist at the facility? If yes, check the appropriate box below.
❑ Yes
No
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Application Field ❑ Lagoon/Storage Pond ❑ Other:
32. Were any additional problems noted which cause non-compliance of the permit. or CAWMP?
❑ Yes
No
❑ NA
❑ NE
33. Did the Reviewer/Inspector fail to discuss review/inspection with an on -site representative?
❑ Yes
No
❑ NA
❑ NE
34. Does the facility require a follow-up visit by the same agency?
❑ Yes
N No
❑ NA
❑ NE
Comments (refer to question #): Explain any YES answers and/or any additional recommendations or any othermm zcoentsa'?a + a1
Use drawings of facility to better explain situations (use additional pages as necessary).,
SoII 4esf- resu(f5 bt✓ 22qTrriga!�H'ot-\ &&b bra+'6r1 Co{111 ��+e� �GrSPA
USe-J -4 Cah h rated I rx 3 ? NONE a- EV-r'[ 0.�o►1
.�6u I C..e,.\t +rotted ao la. -bve �oL, W. P-\ol l t^1
Reviewer/Inspector Name:
Reviewer/Inspector Signature:
Page 3 of 3
Date: I D IRLI a o 1 3
21412011

I�
for
Referral
0 Other 0 Denied Access
Date of Visit:
Arrival Time:
Departure Time: County:
Pnr t1 Md\-) ft fin: ALOM
�\11
Farm Name:
V14y-M
Owner Email:
Owner Name:
Mailing Address:
Physical Address:
Facility Contact: _TOhr�y Title:
Onsite Representative:
Phone: q—
u. 3'f
a-7,3cX 0
Phone:
Integrator:
Certified Operator: ap n Y\\ zayi `� Certification Number:
Back-up Operator:
Location of Farm:
Latitude:
Certification Number:
Longitude:
Design Current
Swine Capacity Pop.
Design Current
Wet Poultry Capacity Pop.
Design Current
Cattle Capacity Pop.
can to Finish
La er
DairyCow
(�
can to Feeder
Non -La er
Dairy Calf
Feeder to Finish
Dairy Heifer
Farrow to Wean
Farrow to Feeder
Farrow to Finish
Design Current
Dr P,oultr. CiP
La ers
Dry Cow
Non-Dairy
Beef Stocker
Gilts
Non -La ers
Beef Feeder
Boars
PulletsI
JBeefBroodCow
Other1
Other
Turke s
11uLyPoults
Other
Discharges and Stream Impacts
1. Is any discharge observed from any part of the operation?
Discharge originated at ❑ Structure ❑ Application Field ❑ Other:
a. Was the conveyance man-made?
b. Did the discharge reach waters of the State? (If yes, notify DWQ)
c. What is the estimated volume that reached waters of the State (gallons)?
d. Does the discharge bypass the waste management system? (If yes, notify DWQ)
2. Is there evidence of a past discharge from any part of the operation?
3. Were there any observable adverse impacts or potential adverse impacts to the waters
of the State other than from a discharge?
❑ Yes riNo ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes ❑ No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes ❑ No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes No ❑ NA ❑ NE
Page I of 3 21412011 Continued

Facili Number: • Date of inspection: b 0
Waste Collection & Treatment
4. Is storage capacity (structural plus storm storage plus heavy rainfall) less than adequate? ❑ Yes No ❑ NA ❑ NE
a. If yes, is waste level into the structural freeboard? ❑ Yes ❑ No ❑ NA ❑ NE
Structure 1 Structure 2 Structure 3
Identifier:
4#e LoweI
Spillway?:
�T�
Designed Freeboard (in):
Observed Freeboard (in):
Structure 4 Structure 5 Structure 6
5. Are there any immediate threats to the integrity of any of the structures observed?
(i.e., large trees, severe erosion, seepage, etc.)
6. Are there structures on -site which are not properly addressed and/or managed through a
waste management or closure plan?
❑ Yes (!VNo ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes 0 No ❑ NA ❑ NE
If any of questions 4-6 were answered yes, and the situation poses an immediate public health or environmental threat, notify DWQ
7. Do any of the structures need maintenance or improvement? ❑ Yes No ❑ NA ❑ NE
8. Do any of the structures lack adequate markers as required by the permit? ❑ Yes No ❑ NA ❑ NE
(not applicable to roofed pits, dry stacks, and/or wet stacks)
9. Does any part of the waste management system other than the waste structures require ❑ Yes I y No ❑ NA ❑ NE
maintenance or improvement? 7'
Waste Application /
10. Are there any required buffers, setbacks, or compliance alternatives that need ❑ Yes I WNo ❑ NA ❑ NE
maintenance or improvement? E
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?
❑ Yes
Lj 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 ZNo ❑ NA ❑ NE
20. Does the facility fail to have all components of the CAWMP readily available? If yes, check [:]Yes ()jNo ❑ NA ❑ NE
the appropriate box.
❑WUP ❑Checklists ❑Design []Maps ❑ Lease Agreements ❑Other:
21. Does record keeping need im ovement? I ❑ Yes No ❑ NA ❑ NE
Waste Application Weekly Freeboard Waste Analysis Soil Analysis ❑ Weather Code
[a �ainfall [1]Stg ka ❑Crop Yield ULO Minute Inspections Monthly and 1"Rainfall Inspections ciS{ud�
22. Did the facility fail to install and maintain a rain gauge? ❑ Yes 4No ❑/NA ❑ NE
23. If selected, did the facility fail to install and maintain rainbreakers on irrigation equipment? ❑ Yes ❑ No 11ly NA ❑ NE
Page 2 of 3 21412011 Continued

Facilit Number: j a - . Date of Inspection:
24. Did the facility fail to calibrate waste application equipment as required by the permit? ❑ Yes I XI No
25. Is the facility out of compliance with permit conditions related to sludge? If yes, check ❑ Yes ❑ No
the appropriate box(es) below. _ --
❑ Failure to complete annual sludge survey ❑ Failure to develop a POA for sludge levels
Non -compliant sludge levels in any lagoon
List structure(s) and date of first survey indicating non-compliance: y [y
26. Did the facility fail to provide documentation of an actively certified operator in charge? I] Yes , I-xLI,Vo NA NE
27. Did the facility fail to secure a phosphorus loss assessments (PLAT) certification? Yes �M No \� NA NE
Other Issues \
28. Did the facility fail to properly dispose of dead animals with 24 hours and/or document Yes [XNo I] NA ❑ NE
and report mortality rates that were higher than normal?
29. At the time of the inspection did the facility pose an odor or air quality concern? ❑ Yes I y No NA ❑ NE
If yes, contact a regional Air Quality representative immediately. T
30. Did the facility fail to notify the Regional Office of emergency situations as required by the [—]Yes [No ❑ NA ❑ NE
permit? (i.e., discharge, freeboard problems, over -application)
NA NE
I9 NA NE
31. Do subsurface tile drains exist at the facility? If yes, check the appropriate box below.
❑ Application Field ❑ Lagoon/Storage Pond ❑ Other:
❑ Yes 06 No I] NA ❑ NE
32. Were any additional problems noted which cause non-compliance of the permit or CAWMP? Yes [ No NA NE
33. Did the Reviewer/Inspector fail to discuss review/inspection with an on -site representative? Yes No NA NE
34. Does the facility require a follow-up visit by the same agency? Yes WNo NA NE
Comments (refer to question #): Explain any YES answers and/or any additional recommendations or any other comments.
Use drawines of facility to better explain situations (use additional mazes as necessarv).
�i
1
R➢�eaeL9..(yyp�e�m.� /
j
�'�rfl Ia LS 10'1 rri�Ou on =
jIa3'1l = LSD = 1.0 Ilas 1-jT 000
Reviewer/Inspector Name:
Reviewer/Inspector Signature:
Page 3 of 3
C1y____
0,79 /h_5-N11000
11 lh-5. N11000 Z4;A,^s
Phone: 1, I S7Q g 9
Date: 0 0 2
21412011

y
9 N•1� � # i � 3'i'q,,
( �.k %
,� z .t «�'alrs+l0 — gp .r.�. a •t`_ y!h
Type of Visit: 9D Compliance Inspection 0 Operation Review 0 Structure Evaluation 0 Technical Assistance
Reason for Visit: I Routine 0 Complaint 0 Follow-up 0 Referral 0 Emergency 0 Other 0 Denied Access
Date of Visit: F ,5 / Iq,/ / 1Arrival Time: Departure Time: County: m I/ /eY�v�„Region:
8 f05. , � �I' ��1
Farm Name: I � �e Q l F70—rM Owner Email:
-- Phone: VpAE (t
3Vq—Yg37
Z}� DL[I-to- R�• P�I�l%I tie- Address: a -73a 0
Physical Address: 5OLM 'I°
Facility Contact: SO h Vh VN U G,R V 1 t �_ Title:
Onsite Representative: ��� �nn 2n1 t l le'
Certified Operator: SO iN n rN U 2yeyi, 11-�L
Back-up Operator:
Location of Farm:
Phone:
Integrator:
Certification Number:
Certification Number:
Latitude: 7Jt/O° s1 1$t I Longitude: Q a' y �2t
icy 151 E % Movl roe -1-1nn I (L) ov\- Cunn i vQ h 4M Ai C•i ov)
0en o 'I cForm ork te-
Discharges and Stream Impacts
I. Is any discharge observed from any part of the operation? ❑ Yes 1� No ❑ NA ❑ NE
Discharge originated at: ❑ Structure ❑ Application Field ❑ Other: �`
a. Was the conveyance man-made? ❑ Yes ❑ No ❑ NA ❑ NE
b. Did the discharge reach waters of the State? (If yes, notify DWQ) ❑ Yes ❑ No ❑ NA ❑ NE
c. What is the estimated volume that reached waters of the State (gallons)?
d. Does the discharge bypass the waste management system? (If yes, notify DWQ)
,\2. Is there evidence of a past discharge from any part of the operation?
`Were there any observable adverse impacts or potential adverse impacts to the waters
the State other than from a discharge?
;age 1 of 3
❑ Yes ❑ No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes 1j71 No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes 7 No ❑ NA ❑ NE
21412011 Continued

Facili Number: -1 Date of Inspection:
Waste Collection & Treatment
4. Is storage capacity (structural plus stone storage plus heavy rainfall) less than adequate? ❑ Yes [� No
a. If yes, is waste level into the structural freeboard? ❑ Yes uL No
Identifier:
Spillway?:
Designed Freeboard (in):
Observed Freeboard (in):
❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ NA ❑ NE
Structure l Structure 2 Structure 3 Structure 4 Structure 5 Structure 6
Up V4-jr LOWer
No NO
:3 3-1
5. Are there any immediate threats to the integrity of any of the structures observed?
(i.e., large trees, severe erosion, seepage, etc.)
6. Are there structures on -site which are not properly addressed and/or managed through a
waste management or closure plan?
❑ Yes 1�No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes 0 No ❑ NA ❑ NE
If any of questions 4-6 were answered yes, and the situation poses an immediate public health or environmental threat, notify DWQ
7. Do any of the structures need maintenance or improvement? ❑ Yes 1� 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 WNo ❑ 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?
❑ 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
0 No
❑ NA
❑ NE
18. Is there a lack of properly operating waste application equipment?
❑ Yes
777Y"'tS�'No
❑ NA
❑ NE
Required Records & Documents
19. Did the facility fail to have the Certificate of Coverage & Permit readily available?
❑ Yes
�WNNo
❑ NA
❑ NE
20. Does the facility fail to have all components of the CAWMP readily available? If yes, check
❑ Yes
I �YNo
❑ NA
❑ NE
the appropriate box.
iii""""`
❑WUP ❑Checklists ❑Design ❑ Maps ❑ Lease Agreements [:]Other:
21. Does record keeping nercwrecpYield
rovement? F€yes�checl�the appropriate box bel ❑Yes No �A ❑ NE
Waste Application ekly Freeboard L`"J( Waste Analysis oil Analysis 9_wa te�ransfers Weather Code
Rainfall 12(5 ing [�120 Minute Inspections Monthly and 1" Rainfall Inspections _Q_%udge-S=ey
22. Did the facility fail to install and maintain a rain gauge? ❑ Yes 0 No ❑ NA ❑ NE
23. If selected, did the facility fail to install and maintain rainbreakers on irrigation equipment? [-]Yes [:]No NA ❑ NE
Page 2 of 21412011 Continued

Facility Number: - Date of Inspection: $
qw
24. Did the facility fail to calibrate waste app ation equipment as required by the permit? ❑ Yes '7" ❑ NA ❑ NE
25. Is the facility out of compliance with permit conditions related to sludge? If yes, check ❑ Yes ❑ No j NA ❑ NE
the appropriate box(es) below. T'
❑ 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 �j No ❑ NA ❑ NE
27. Did the facility fail to secure a phosphorus loss assessments (PLAT) certification? ❑ Yes TT❑ No NA ❑ NE
Otherlssues
28. Did the facility fail to properly dispose of dead animals with 24 hours and/or document ❑ Yes I XI 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 J�j No ❑ NA ❑ NE
If yes, contact a regional Air Quality representative immediately.
30. Did the facility fail to notify the Regional Office of emergency situations as required by the ❑ Yes No ❑ NA ❑ NE
permit? (i.e., discharge, freeboard problems, over -application)
31. Do subsurface tile drains exist at the facility? If yes, check the appropriate box below. ❑ Yes Id No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Application Field ❑ Lagoon/Storage Pond ❑ Other:
32. Were any additional problems noted which cause non-compliance of the permit or CAWMP? ❑ Yes No ❑ NA ❑ NE
33. Did the Reviewer/Inspector fail to discuss review/inspection with an on -site representative? ❑ Yes jjQ No ❑ NA ❑ NE
34. Does the facility require a follow-up visit by the same agency? ❑ Yes No ❑ NA ❑ NE
Comments (refer to question #): Explain any YES answers and/or any additional recommendations or any otherlcomments'°obi,€" -
Use drawings of facility to better explain situations (use additional pages as necessa ).
a ao10 sat 1 �esFs?
� - Pressures cu,�e, r+,_Ptac P_3 ? .
�2
6&4tq�
Reviewer/Inspector Name:
Reviewer/Inspector Signature:
Page 3 of 3
De.C, AVat�
Phone: — A
Date:
2/4/20h

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: .i Zto D Arrival Time: Departure Time: 2; County: V Region: IJl P`a
Farm Name: T3 CV+ ef ; a�fh i' Owner Email:
Owner Name:'✓Iolttnnt, �a//Gf II✓ ��t' Pho/one: 'T1tnd9
Mailing Address: 2-7d `6e✓ill e K d, e [d'rVt%�t �G 2 3Z0
J Physical Address: a M e-
Facility Contact: ✓o�nnt .(Ky,'Je Title: Phone No:
Onsite Representative:
Integrator:
Certified Operator: 7�✓'7/e Operator Certification Number:
Back-up Operator:
Location of Farm:
Back-up Certification Number:
Latitude: Mo ®' /® '. Longitude: ® o © '
Nwy I59 E, `o Monrae�rt 0
4A'1;4JA0L ,
M;if •>9 5e,1aj F�.1
i0" Bn le �
q / ✓;ale
Rd
Design Current
Design Current
Design Curren[
Swine
Capacity Population
Wet Poultry
Capacity Population
Cattle
Capacity Population
❑ Wean to Finish
❑ Layer
Dai Cow
❑ Wean -to Feeder
❑Non -Layer
❑ DairyCalf
❑ Feeder to Finish
❑ DairyHeifer
❑ Farrow to Wean
Dry Poultry
❑ D Cow
❑ Farrow to Feeder
❑ Layers
❑ Non -Dairy
❑ Farrow to Finish
❑ Non -Layers
El Beef Stocker
❑ Gilts
❑ Pullets
❑Beef Feeder
❑ Boars
❑ Turkeys
❑ Beef Brood Cow
Other
❑ Turke Poults
Number of Structures:
❑ Other
❑Other
Discharges & Stream Impacts
1. Is any discharge observed from any part of the operation?
Discharge originated at: ❑ Structure ❑ Application Field ❑ Other
a. Was the conveyance man-made?
b. Did the discharge reach waters of the State? (If yes, notify DWQ)
e. 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 }ENO ❑NA ❑NE
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ NA
❑ NE
0
❑ NA
'
❑ NE
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes XNo
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Yes >(No
❑ NA
❑ NE
12128104
Continued

Facility Number: — �S • Date of Inspection OS t7 •
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?
❑ Yes 1251 No
El Yes /❑ No
❑NA El NE
❑ NA ❑ NE
Structure 1 Structure 2 Structure 3 Structure 4 Structure 5 Structure 6
Identifier: Lot j ey
Spillway?: 1-U 6
Designed Freeboard (in):
n
Observed Freeboard (in): 7
5. Are there any immediate threats to the integrity of any of the structures observed? ❑ Yes XNo El NA [I NE
(ie/ large trees, severe erosion, seepage, etc.) �� /
6. Are there structures on -site which are not properly addressed and/or managed El Yes XNo El NA El NE
through a waste management or closure plan? /
If any of questions 4-6 were answered yes, and the situation poses an immediate public health or environmental threat, notify DWQ
7. Do any of the structures need maintenance or improvement? XYes ❑ No ❑ NA ❑ NE
8. Do any of the stuctures lack adequate markers as required by the permit? ❑ Yes XNo ❑ NA ❑ NE
(Not applicable to roofed pits, dry stacks and/or wet stacks)
9. Does any part of the waste management system other than the waste structures require ❑ Yes XNo ❑ NA ❑ NE
maintenance or improvement?
Waste Application
10. Are there any required buffers, setbacks, or compliance alternatives that need ❑ Yes !!��No ❑ NA ❑ NE
maintenance/improvement?
11. Is there evidence of incorrect application? If yes, check the appropriate box below. ❑ Yes >(No ❑ NA [INE
ElExcessive Ponding ElHydraulic Overload ElFrozen 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
0 NA
❑ NE
15.
Does the receiving crop and/or land application site need improvement?
❑ Yes WNo
❑ NA
❑ NE
16.
Did the facility fail to secure and/or operate per the irrigation design or wettable acre determination ?
❑ Yes XNo
❑ 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?
YYes ❑ No
❑ NA
❑ NE
I 0 t M Qa, rite g 4, (I,��O-e—� Q1YlJk re- ;9'r'` ors q Lol
7, �'0/J-M/ ut, r•bw 1^1 vl y +u` IMe
%3Hrrou 4tu�es o. t'M�.iCnays VA
i`
Reviewer/Inspector Name "ti!! is-11
<tYE=*Y*q ¢ $asS tY asr r; . Phone: - SL
Reviewer/Inspector Signature r Ad4 ) Date: ps d
Page 2 of 3 T 12128104 Continued

Facility Number: — 0-51 Oof Inspection dS •
Required Records & Documents
19. Did the facility fail to have Certificate of Coverage & Permit readily available? ❑ Yes XNo ❑ NA ❑ NE
20. Does the facility fail to have all components of the CAWMP readily available? If yes, check ❑ YesNo ❑ NA ❑ NE
the appropriate box. ❑ WUP El Checklists ❑ Design ❑ Maps El Other
21. Does record keeping need improvement. ❑ Yes ❑ No ❑ NA ❑ NE
[Waste Application ISW,,...,e,/,erkly Freeboard__,,,,��0 Waste Analysis []'$,o��il//Analysis ,.
gKainfall 93 Stocking L+T Crop Yield [9 20 Minute Inspections M Monthly and V Rain Inspections eweather 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?
❑ YesANo
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes No
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes ;<No
❑ Yes XNo
❑NA ❑NE
XNA ❑ NE
❑ NA ❑ NE
XNA ❑ NE
❑ NA ❑ NE
El NA ❑NE
❑ Yes P4No
❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes ><No
❑ NA ❑ NE
0 Yes XNo
El NA El NE
I� Yes ❑ No
❑ NA ❑ NE
❑•Yes 124No
((XNo
❑NA El NE
❑ Yes
❑ NA ❑ NE
21, 2_X J aor'/ ' R', re,;w/�s ? 2,010 fert,lb7? L,,,�09
ZOl 01 3 / Jaen t 7a Cst�� ✓W Q iT t_l qfk ; r 44x e_ M0 X le re/ ah W,-A y-,
q A"I/ , t+
r A
Page 3 of 3 12128104

Division of Water Quality.
Facility Number
Q
Division of Soil and Water Conservation
Other Agency
PM
Type of Visit N Compliance Inspection
0 Operation Review 0 Structure Evaluation 0 Technical Assistance
Reason for Visit XRoutine 0 Complaint 0 Follow up 0 Referral 0 Emergency 0 Other
❑ Denied Access
Date of Visit: 1X151 o q Arrival
Time: nK
Departure Time: 'County:
Region:
Farm Name: 8V l lle, ,bQI
Y'U FA Jr M
Owner Email:
Owner Name: WC, Sohn
It- Gn6L4' k5
3e vl � It Phone: To kh yl�l0)
wi '7
30q, —Yq 3J
Mailing Address: do e RPN
t 110 Pd .
e, d 6y i de; N C a-7 3ao
Physical Address:
Facility Contact: 10
PJW! te-
Title: Phone No:
Onsite Representative:
Certified Operator: • —RPw/ I lie
Back-up Operator:
Integrator:
Operator Certification Number: h0ur5 net&
Back-up Certification Number:
`1 1'a3ilo9
Location of Farm: Latitude: �o �F Longitude: WO 1_q9 RML
Ffwti IS$ E tm Monroeton • it h+Onfa Cunnin�q ham V11 k Le ( onto
�n aJ ei- 2d . FoLrrn a le �'+ o-+ 3� ✓ i lTe l d . .
Swine
Wean to Finish
Wean to Feeder
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
LJ Dairy Calf
❑ Dairy Heifer
❑ Dry Cow
❑ Non -Dairy
❑ Beef Stocket
❑ Beef Feeder
❑ Beef Brood Cow
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)?
Number of Structures: ©,
d. Does discharge bypass the waste management system? (If yes, notify DWQ)
2. Is there evidence of a past discharge from any part of the operation?
3. Were there any adverse impacts or potential adverse impacts to the Waters of the State
other than from a discharge?
❑ Yes XNo ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes
❑ No
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Yes
❑ No
❑ NA
❑ NE
0
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Yes
❑ No
❑ Yes
eNNo
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Yes �No ❑ NA ❑ NE
12128104 Continued

Facility Number: -] t7s • Date of Inspection J- 0 •
Waste Collection & Treatment
4. Is storage capacity (structural plus storm storage plus heavy rainfall) less than adequate? ❑ Yes 111111�No El 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: 1IDDj-y' l.C�t�etr
Spillway?: V 5
Designed Freeboard (in): �f
Observed Freeboard (in): 5
5. Are there any immediate threats to the integrity of any of the structures observed? ❑ Yes 0 No ❑ NA ❑ NE
(ie/ large trees, severe erosion, seepage, etc.) Imo/
6. Are there structures on -site which are not properly addressed and/or managed ❑ Yes L1tl No ❑ NA ❑ NE
through a waste management or closure plan? f`
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 LEI No ❑ NA ❑ NE
8. Do any of the stuctures lack adequate markers as required by the permit? ❑ Yes Lip 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 Ly( No ❑ NA ❑ NE
maintenance or improvement? I ,
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 11(J 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) AAAA w 11 60 A I ')
13.
Soil type(s) v
14.
Do the receiving crops differ from those designated in the CAWMP?
❑ Yes
No
❑ NA
ElNE
15.
Does the receiving crop and/or land application site need improvement?
❑ Yes
KNo
❑ NA
❑ NE
16.
Did the facility fail to secure and/or operate per the irrigation design or wettable acre determination?❑ Yes
No
❑ NA
❑ NE
17.
Does the facility lack adequate acreage for land application?
❑ Yes
No
❑ NA
❑ NE
18.
Is there a lack of properly operating waste application equipment?
❑ Yes
&No
❑ NA
❑ NE
IComments (refer to question #): Explain any YES answers and/or any recommendations or any other comments. I
Use drawings of facility to better explain situations. (use additional pages as necessary):
r � II ,f Ir t � �: Ms
Reviewer/Inspector Name
Reviewer/Inspector Signal
Phone:
Date: ;
12128104 Continued

Facility Number: 1 I — 0-5DaTe of Inspection 2 •
Required Records & Documents 1
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 appropriate box. ❑ WUP ❑ Checklists ❑ Design ❑ Maps ❑ Other
21. Does ecord keeping need improvement? ❑ Yes CSlNo ❑ NA ❑ NE
aste Applicat' ❑ Wee y Freeboard Waste Analysis Soil nalysis Waste Transfers iex
Rainfall Stocking Crop Yield 120 Minute Inspections KJ Monthly and I" Rain Inspections Weather Code
22. Did the facility fail to install and maintain a rain gauge? ❑ Yes kNo
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?
lAdditional Comments and/or Drawings:
ait. aws eAli braa;orcocwpl�ted ?
❑ Yes
❑ Yes
❑ Yes
❑ Yes
❑ Yes
,,❑,,((No
INNo
TT❑1''No
l5J No
No
❑NA ONE
O NA ❑ NE
❑ NA ❑ NE
/
I�NA ❑ NE
❑ NA ❑ NE
El NA ❑NE
❑ Yes
I(yNo
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Yes
XNo
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Yes
No
El NA
El NE
El Yes
ss0,,,,,,(((
I,,,,,,�pNo
/No
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Yes
�����y,yrrr
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Yes
9No
❑ NA
❑ NE
Page 3 of 3 // // 12128104

Facility Number
Type of Visit
Reason for Visit
Date of Visit:
rvision of Water Qualit'
Division of Soil and Water
O Other Agency
la 30pir�
Inspection 0 Operation Review O Structure Evaluation 0 Technical Assistance
Routine O Complaint O Follow up O Referral O Emergency O Other ❑ Denied Access
Arrival Time: Departure Time: County:
Region: 1 )5fl6
Farm Name: 15C1jAIIe� r01­rm Owner Email:
Owner Name: W C'1 roV\ NM Ji,- CK0-,r(e5 Tt/lf i Re— Phone: -To �y%y%4I r) 342 —1 3 a
Mailing Address: it) Be1�' A it) W I ( I e / — (F • J e, J s V I / A—
Physical Address:m� v
ia
Facility Contact: So h t P'Titl 1 �� ol) Poe hone No:
Onsite Representative: �r! t) Integrator: �—
Certified Operator: t e' Operator Certification Number:
Back-up Operator: Back-up Certification Number:
Location of Farm: Latitude: ®o am. Longitude: ®° � • �
WWH 151 1F, -to Yhonraz�n , e+. only Cunni h&)m YVIi II 12 • L-e-r4-on4) •
g 641a ' 61 2d • F&rm ov► I o_-Pf off Bw%t I t 6 • -
Swine
Other
❑ Other
Design Current Design Current
Capacity Population Wet Poultry Capacity Population
❑ Layer
❑ Non -La et
Dry Poultry
❑ La ers
❑ Non -Layers
❑ Pullets
❑ Turkeys
❑ Turkey Poults
❑ Other
Discharges & Stream Impacts
I. Is any discharge observed from any part of the operation?
Discharge originated at: ❑ Structure ❑ Application Field ❑ Other
a. Was the conveyance man-made?
b. Did the discharge reach waters of the.State? (If yes, notify DWQ)
Design Current
Cattle Capacity Population
Dairy Cow
Dairy Calf
❑ Dairy Heifei
❑ Dry Cow
❑ Non -Dairy
❑ Beef Stocket
❑ Beef Feeder
❑ Beef Brood Cow
c. What is the estimated volume that reached waters of the State (gallons)?
Number of Structures:
d. Does discharge bypass the waste management system? (If yes, notify DWQ)
2. Is there evidence of a past discharge from any part of the operation?
3. Were there any adverse impacts or potential adverse impacts to the Waters of the State
other than from a discharge?
❑ Yes �No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes ❑ No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes ❑ No ❑ NA ❑ NE
0
❑ Yes El No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes ����Ll////4 No
❑ Yes No
12128104
❑ NA ❑ NE
El NA ❑NE
Continued

Facility Number' — • Date of Inspection I / y ►��
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:y n dVAf_ .n wew"'
Spillway?:
Designed Freeboard (in): T
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 ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes ❑ No ❑ NA ❑ NE
Structure 5 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 [(Io ❑ NA ❑ NE
8. Do any of the stuctures lack adequate markers as required by the permit? ❑ Yes ❑ NA ❑ NE
(Not applicable to roofed pits, dry stacks and/or wet stacks) TTT
9. Does any part of the waste management system other than the waste structures require ❑ Yes o ❑ NA ❑ NE
maintenance or improvement?
Waste Application
10. Are there any required buffers, setbacks, or compliance alternatives that need
❑ Yes o ❑ NA ❑ NE
maintenance/improvement?
11. Is there evidence of incorrect application? If yes, check the appropriate box below. ❑ Yes L][No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Excessive Pending ❑ Hydraulic Overload ❑ Frozen Ground ❑ Heavy Metals (Cu, Zn, etc.)
❑ PAN ❑ PAN > 10% or 10 lbs ❑ Total Phosphorus ❑ Failure to Incorporate Manure/Sludge into Bare Soil
❑ Outside of Acceptable Crop Window [ Evidence of 'nd Drifl El Application Outside of Area
12. Croptype(s) /•.V 11/VNl 4�1 ✓Y U " �1
13. Soil type(s)
14.
Do the receiving crops differ from those designated in the CAWMP?
❑ Yes
�(No
❑ NA
❑ NE
15.
Does the receiving crop and/or land application site need improvement?
❑ Yes
to
❑ NA
[INE
16.
Did the facility fail to secure and/or operate per the irrigation design or wettable acre determination?❑
Yes
❑ NA
❑ NE
17.
Does the facility lack adequate acreage for land application?
❑ Yes
o
❑ NA
❑ NE
18.
Is there a lack of properly operating waste application equipment?
❑ Yeso
kN
❑ NA
❑ NE
IComments (refer to question #): Explain any YES answers and/or any recommendations or any other comments. I
Use drawings of facility to better explain situations. (use additional pages as necessary):
Reviewer/Inspector Name Ij
Phone: �1 1 I —
Reviewer/Inspector Signature:
Date:

Facility Number: — Q Date of Inspection
Required Records & Documents O
19. Did the facility fail to have Ce ificate of Coverage & Permit readily available? ❑ Yes XNo ❑ NA ❑ NE
20. Does the facility fail to have all components of the CA WMP readily available? If yes, check ❑ Yes 0 No ❑ NA ❑ NE
the approprrate box. ❑ ATUp ❑ Checklists ❑ Design ❑ Maps ❑ Other �/
21. Does cord keeping need ii rovement? If yes, the [he appropriate Vboxelow. ❑ Yes AQ No ❑ NA ❑ NE
Waste Applica 'on U Week Freeboard Waste Analysis alysis Ly Waste Transfers /`[�4�x�
L Rainfall Stocking Crop Yield 120 Minute Inspections ,Mtonthly and l" Rain Inspections eather Code
22. Did the facility fail to install and maintain a rain gauge? -]Yes )(No ❑ NA El NE
23. If selected, did the facility fail to install and maintain rainbreakers on irrigation equipment? ❑ Yes ❑ No �X`NA ❑ NE
24. Did the facility fail to calibrate waste application equipment as required by the permit?�U� El Yes KNo [I NA [I NE
E4 2.od�
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 ((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
XNo ❑ NA
❑ NE
29.
Did the facility fail to properly dispose of dead animals within 24 hours and/or document
❑ Yes
I XNo ❑ 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:
N Si to '? OVL--'�
d
ado g
LG� ®l
I2128104

ty Q� Division of Water Quality= 1
Faeili Number oDivision of Soil and Water Mnserv'ation d/„
0' Other Agency , ,,,/
Type of Visit Compliance Inspection O Operation Review Q Structure Evaluation 0 Technical Assistance
Reason for Visit Routine O Complaint O Follow up O Referral o Emergency 0 Other ❑ Denied Access
Date of Visit: r_yille
Arrival Time: Departure Time: n' vVI County: 'j� Regionh_SFarm Name:0A'4- Owner Email: V
1
Owner Name: Phone: O '�! "(, 3 7
�^1 1 tv D ,, , 1
Mailing Address: d �� cif .vl Ile ' 1 A5 v L `1'Q t'vC ./
Physical Address:
Facility Contact: SOhyj ]nnA!tIte—I& S 0 nQlei phone No:
Onsite Representative: '_Tb�f�'lYl nu (ejfl 1. ei 1 Integrator:
Certified Operator: ��1]n h y_\�'yt 6� Operator Certification Number: oZ 1301
Back-up Operator: Back-up Certification Number:
Location of Farm: Latitude: W �[B" Longitude: a ®®
v 15 4 w j 45S to nroe4en , i`h 4 6a4o Cu>nn in ham
Leal- onto -'Gen e` �-m on Ted+ t ��, ill Ica
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?
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)?
Design Current
Number of Structures: FTJ
d. Does discharge bypass the waste management system? (If yes, notify DWQ)
2. Is there evidence of a past discharge from any part of the operation?
3. Were there any adverse impacts or potential adverse impacts to the Waters of the State
other than from a discharge?
❑ Yes [ No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes
❑ No
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Yes
❑ No
❑ NA
❑ NE
0
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Yes
❑ No
❑ Yes No ElNA [INE
❑ Yes XNo ❑ NA ❑ NE
12128104 Continued

Facility Number:, — • Date of Inspection GZ
Waste Collection & Treatment
4. Is storage capacity (structural plus storm storage plus heavy rainfall) less than adequate?
❑ Yes No ❑ NA ❑ NE
a. If yes, is waste level into the structural freeboard?
❑ Yes ❑ No ❑ NA ❑ NE
Structure 1 Structure 2 Structure 3 Structure 4
Structure 5 Structure 6
Identifier: �oex— bo e r
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
��..{{//
El Yes tHNo El NA El NE
through a waste management or closure plan?
{t �`
If any of questions 4-6 were answered yes, and the situation poses an immediate public health or environmental threat, notify DWQ
7. Do any of the structures need maintenance or improvement?
❑ Yes
No
❑ NA ❑ NE
8. Do any of the stuctures lack adequate markers as required by the permit?
❑ Yes
No
❑ NA ❑ NE
(Not applicable to roofed pits, dry stacks and/or wet stacks)
9. Does any part of the waste management system other than the waste structures require
❑ Yes
[ No
❑ NA ❑ NE
maintenance or improvement?
Waste Application
10. Are there any required buffers, setbacks, or compliance alternatives that need
❑ Yes
No
❑ NA ❑ NE
maintenance/improvement?
///''
11. Is there evidence of incorrect application? If yes, check the appropriate box below.
❑ Yes
Ipl
No
El NA El NE
El Excessive Pending El Hydraulic Overload El Frozen Ground El 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 ❑ App�ltication Outside) of Area
12. Crop type(s) (' �A, [ / MA KJJ f in A 1 i <l Y Ai A 0
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?
No ❑ NA
❑ NE
No ❑ NA
❑ NE
No ❑ NA
❑ NE
,No ❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Yes [ANo ❑ 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):
Vge4!� ors mowed ?
Reviewer/Inspector Name
Reviewer/Inspector Signatur
ro Phone: -1-1 I—Saooq
Date: 5
' 12128104 Continued

Facility Number: — -Date of Inspection �� •
Required Records & Documents
19. Did the facility fail to have Certificate of Coverage &Permit readily available? ❑Yes El NA ❑ NE
20. Does the facility fail to have all components of the CAWMP readily available? If yes, check El Yes Yes No ❑ NA ❑ NE
the appropirate box. ❑ WUP ❑ Checklists ❑ Design ❑ Maps ❑ Other
21. Do record keeping neeVW
rove en' ❑ Yes L1dNo ❑ NA ❑ NE
Waste Appli tion eekly Freeboard Waste Analysis Soil A lysis CirWaste Transfers ❑ .
L\A Rainfall dtocking ❑ Crop Yield 120 Minute Inspections Monthly and V 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
NA
❑ NE
24. Did the facility fail to calibrate waste application equipment as required by the permit? &+ Cg ❑ Yes
XNo
❑ NA
❑ NE
25. Did the facility fail to conduct a sludge survey as required by the permit?
❑ Yes
❑ No
VNA
❑ 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
❑ NA
❑ NE
29.
Did the facility fail to properly dispose of dead animals within 24 hours and/or document
❑ Yes
,[
KJ No
El NA
[I 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
IP No
ElNA
ElNE
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
XNo
—�
❑ NA
❑ NE
Additional Comments and/or Drawings:
/ lg (o-i waste -zoAlL o us D V . (�
1p-SJ b7
OL� 5 1 (o lea n -jh cru lei 01��
12128104

l%
E Division of Water Quality
Division of Soil and Water Conservation
❑ Other Agency
Facility Number: 790005 Facility Status: Active Permit: AWC790005 ❑ Denied Access
Inspection Type: Comorance Inspection _ Inactive or Closed Date:
Reason for Visit: Routine County: Rockingham Region: Winston-Salem
Date of Visit: 09/12/2006 Entry Time:12:35 PM Exit Time: 02:10 PM Incident #:
Farm Name: W.C. Bey Ile and Son Farm (Seville Dairy Farm) Owner Email:
Owner: W C Bey Ile - Phone: [phone]
Mailing Address: 240 Beville Rd Reidsville NC 27320
Physical Address:
Facility Status: ❑ Compliant ❑ Not Compliant Integrator:
Location of Farm: Latitude: 36°15'18" Longitude: 79°42'42"
From WSRO: US Hwy 158 east to Monroeton. Turn right onto Cunningham Mill Rd. Turn left onto Benaja Rd. Farm is on left at
intersection w/ Seville Rd.
Question Areas:
Discharges & Stream Impacts Waste Collection & Treatment Waste Application
Records and Documents Other Issues
Certified Operator: Johnny R Seville
Secondary OIC(s):
On -Site Representative(s): Name
On -site representative Johnny Seville
24 hour contact name Johnny Seville
Operator Certification Number: 21307
Title Phone
Phone: [phone]
Phone: [phone]
Primary Inspector: Melissa Rosebrock Phone:
Inspector Signature:
Secondary Inspector(a):
Inspection Summary:
Date:
3. Operator moved about 100' of spring -fed stream about 10-15' away from the toe of the lower WSP embankment so that he could
mow/maintain the dam more easily and safely. "Stream" is still only 18-24" wide and the streambank has been seeded with
orchardgrass, lover, and fescue. Grass is about 2' tall today. Discussed with operator the proper procedure for stream work.
7. Need to cut woody vegetation and spray for broadleaf weeds on upper WSP.
21. 2006 soil test results ok. Some fields have lower than normal pH. Per operator, most all fields are to receive lime this year at a rate
of 1 ton/acre.
24. Completed July and Sept. 2005. Not due again until October 1, 2008.
6/15/06 waste analysis:Upper
8.8 lbs. N/1000 gal. (12.3 SI).
Check silos next visit.
Page: 1

0
Permit: AWC790005 Owner - Facility: W C Beville
Inspection Date: 09/12/2008 Inspection Type: Compliance Inspection
Regulated Operations
Facility Number: 790006
Reason for Visit: Routine
Design Capacity Current Population
Cattle
O Cattle -Milk Cow 264 205
Total Design Capacity: 264
Total SSLW: 369,600
Waste Stmcturen
Type Identifier Closed Date Stan Date Designed Freeboard Observed Freeboard
Neste Pond
LOWER STAGE
32.00
29.00
Neste Pond
UPPER STAGE
26.00
24.00
Page: 2

Permit: AWC790005 Owner - Facility: W C Beville Facility Number: 790005
Inspection Date: 99/'12/2006 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?
❑
■
.Q
❑
b. Did discharge reach Waters of the State? (if yes, notify DWQ)
❑
■
❑
❑
c. Estimated volume reaching surface waters?
d. Does discharge bypass the waste management system? (if yes, notify DWQ)
❑
■
❑
❑
2. Is there evidence of a past discharge from any part of the operation?
❑
■
❑
❑
3. Were there any adverse impacts or potential adverse impacts to Waters of the State other than from a
■
❑
❑
❑
discharge?
Waste Collection, Storage & Treatment
Yea
No
NA
NE
4. Is storage capacity less than adequate?
❑
■
❑
❑
If yes, is waste level into structural freeboard?
❑
5. Are there any immediate threats to the integrity of any of the structures observed (Le./ large trees, severe
❑
■
❑
❑
erosion, seepage, etc.)?
6. Are there structures on -site that are not properly addressed and/or managed through a waste management ❑
■
❑
❑
or closure plan?
7. Do any of the structures need maintenance or improvement?
■
❑
❑
❑
8. Do any of the structures lack adequate markers as required by the permit? (Not applicable to roofed pits,
❑
■
❑
❑
dry stacks and/or wet stacks)
9. Does any part of the waste management system other than the waste structures require maintenance or
❑
■
❑
❑
improvement?
Waste Application
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

Penult: AWC790005 Owner- Facility: W C Beville
Facility Number:
790005
Inspection Date: 09112/2006 Inspection Type: Compliance Inspection
Reason for Visit: Routine
Waste Application
Yes No
NA NE
PAN?
❑
Is PAN > 10%/10 Ibs.?
❑
Total P205? .
❑
Failure to incorporate manure/sludge into bare soil?
❑
Outside of acceptable crop window?
❑
Evidence of wind drift?
❑
Application outside of application area?
❑
Crop Type 1
Com (Silage)
Crop Type 2
Small Grain (Wheat,
Barley,
Oats)
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?
❑ ■
❑ Cl
16. Did the facility fail to secure and/or operate per the irrigation design or wettable acre determination? ❑ ■
❑ ❑
17. Does the facility lack adequate acreage for land application?
❑ ■
❑ ❑
1 B. 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.
WUP?
❑
Page: 4

Permit: AWC790005 Owner- Facility: W C Beville Facility Number: 790005
Inspection Date: 09/12t2006 Inspection Type: Compliance Inspection Reason for Visit: Routine
Records and Documents Yes No NA NE
Checklists? ❑
Design? ❑
Maps? ❑
Other? ❑
21. Does record keeping need improvement? ❑ E ❑ ❑
If yes, check the appropriate box below.
Waste Application?
❑
120 Minute inspections?
❑
Weather code?
❑
Weekly Freeboard?
❑
Transfers?
❑
Rainfall?
❑
Inspections after> 1 inch rainfall & monthly?
❑
Waste Analysis?
❑
Annual soil analysis?
❑
Crop yields?
❑
Stocking?
❑
Annual Certification 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?
❑
0 ❑ ❑
25. Did the facility fail to conduct a sludge survey as required by the permit?
❑
❑ 0 ❑
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?
❑
❑ ■ ❑
Other Issues
Yes
No NA NE
28. Were any additional problems noted which cause non-compliance of the Permit or CAWMP?
❑
E ❑ ❑
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
❑
■ ❑ ❑
Quality representative immediately.
Page: 5

0
Permit: AWC790005 Owner- Facility: W C Beville
Inspection Date: 09/12/2006 Inspection Type: Compliance Inspection
Other Issues:
31. Did the facility fail to notify regional DWQ of emergency situations as required by Permit?
32. Did Reviewer/Inspector fail to discuss review/inspection with on -site representative?
33. Does facility require a follow-up visit by same agency?
Facility Number: 790005
Reason for Visit: Routine
Yes No NA NE
❑ ■ ❑ ❑
❑ ■ ❑ ❑
❑ ■ ❑ ❑
Page: 6

1 Type of Visit JACompliance Inspection O Operation Review O Structure Evaluation O Technical Assistance
Reason for Visit (XRoutine O Complaint O Follow up 0 Referral O Emergency 0 Other ❑ Denied Access
Date of Visit:
Arrival Time: 1,2: Departure Time:
ty: I `^-" K% �2 tq Kegi oun
Farm Name:
la �C�
��l
ley- Son
Owner Email: �y
Owner Name: 1 TOIJ.Lln 10..Y�f� RPtfi II'e Phone: JO`'1nnm
Mailing Address: a qO �eY I l l� t �1C75 v (� �t° a % 3 20
Physical Address:
Facility Contact: `TO�1 r1 r) U ! JC.y I Title: I S 8b 8G'I Q� $ Phone No:
Onsite Representative: To P1 / Integrator:
Certified Operator: "'ems I L� Operator Certification Number: a 130
Back-up Operator: Back-up Certification Number:
Location of Farm: Latitude: ° Longitude: � ° �- �-
vS Fb•_)Y 168 E. to Mon rt>e-top, . 2+. on* Cunn'lt^ ham ril iI (�,
•
L.e 4 on-b Be-0ejk 4k Rd - �a rm @ i n to rse l l Ieci
o t,
Design Current
Design Current
Design Current
Swine Capacity Population
Wet Poultry Capacity Population
Cattle Capaci Population
❑ Wean to Finish
M Dai Cow a
❑ Wean to Feeder
❑ Non -Layer
M Dairy Calf
❑ Feeder to Finish
❑ Dairy Heifer
❑ Farrow to Wean
Dry Poultry
❑ D Cow
Farrow to Feeder
ElFarrow
La ers
El Non -Dairy
El Farrow to Finish
❑ Non -Layers
El Beef Stocker
❑ Gilts
El Pullets
❑Beef Feeder
❑ Boars
❑ Turkeys
❑ Beef Brood Cow
Other
❑ Other =1
❑ Turkey Poults
❑ Other
Number of Structures:
Discharges
_& Stream Impacts
1. Is any discharge observed from any part of the operation?
Discharge originated at: ❑ Structure ❑ Application Field ❑ Other
a. Was the conveyance man-made?
b. Did the discharge reach waters of the State? (If yes, notify DWQ)
c. What is the estimated volume that reached waters of the State (gallons)?
d. Does discharge bypass the waste management system? (If yes, notify DWQ)
2. Is there evidence of a past discharge from any part of the operation?
3. Were there any adverse impacts or potential adverse impacts to the Waters of the State
other than from a discharge?
❑ Yes �No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes ❑ No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes ❑ No ❑ NA ❑ NE
0
❑ Yes ❑ No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes] No ❑ NA ❑ NE
Yes ❑ No ❑ NA ❑ NE
Page 1 of 12128104 Continued

Facility Number:, - t7 • Date of Inspection
Waste Collection & Treatment
4. Is storage capacity (structural plus storm storage plus heavy rainfall) less than adequate? ❑ Yes Z44o ❑ 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: Q t- Gl ►�.�
Spillway?: Nq&)
Designed Freeboard (in): 1 " + \ 1
Observed Freeboard (in): a T !.q
5. Are there any immediate threats to the integrity of any of the structures observed?
❑ Yes
No
❑ NA
❑ NE
(ie/ large trees, severe erosion, seepage, etc.)
6. Are there structures on -site which are not properly addressed and/or managed
❑ Yes
No
❑ NA
❑ NE
through a waste management or closure plan?
If any of questions 4-6 were answered yes, and the situation poses an immediate public health or environmental threat,
notify DWQ
7. Do any of the structures need maintenance or improvement?
Yes
❑ No
❑ NA
❑ NE
8. Do any of the stuctures lack adequate markers as required by the permit?
C❑' Yes
q 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 XNo ❑ NA ❑ NE
maintenance or improvement?
Waste ADDlication
10. Are there any required buffers, setbacks, or compliance alternatives that need ❑ Yes KNo ❑ 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.) I
❑ PAN ❑ PAN > 10% or 10 Ibs ❑ Total Phosphorus ❑ Failure to Incorporate Manure/Sludge into Bare Soil
❑ Outside of Acceptable Crop Window ❑ Evidence o ' nd 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 ItNo ❑ 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? ❑ Yes 4No ❑ NA ❑ NE
18. Is there a lack of properly operating waste application equipment? ❑ Yes *No ❑ NA ❑ NE
Comments (refer to question #): Explain any YES answers and/or any recommendations or any other comments.
Use drawings of facility to better explain situations. (use additional pages as necessary):
`S Suciioe\ Dose.t plpL 7" red C
AX
s Prg. SSu re e O n i '.
U 0` V
Reviewer/Inspector Name
Reviewer/Inspector Signature:
r
-1
1 Phone: t �SeZg
Date:
aR
Page 2 of 3 12128104 Continued

Facility No ate of Inspection (Q [
Reauired Records & Documents U
19. Did the facility fail to have Certificate of Coverage & Permit readily available?V ❑ Yes No ❑ NA ❑ NE
20. Does the facility fail to have all components of the CAWMP readily available? If yes, check ❑ Yes �1]`No ❑ NA ❑ NE
the appropriate box. ❑ WUP ❑ Checklists ❑ Design ❑Maps El Other
21. Dooee 'record keeping neeVwc
ovement? If yes, chec a appropriate box b ow. �,// El Yes No ❑ NA ❑ NE
pQ W to Applicat n ly Freeboard Waste Analysis oil Analysis I Waste Transfers / -
Rainfall Stocking l( Crop Yield 120 Minute Inspections 19 Monthly 1"
Rain Inspections SKeather
and
Code
22.
Did the facility fail to install and maintain a rain gauge?
❑ Yes
*o
❑ NA
❑ NE
23.
If selected, did the facility fail to install and maintain rainbreOers on irrigation equipment?
❑ Yes
I No
34NA
❑ NE
24.
Did the facility fail to calibrate waste application equipment as required by the permit?
❑ Yes
Vo
[:1 NA
❑ NE
25.
Did the facility fail to conduct a sludge survey as required by the permit?
❑ Yes
❑ No
L]0 NA
❑ NE
26.
Did the facility fail to have an actively certified operator in charge?
El 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
❑ NA
❑ NE
29.
Did the facility fail to properly dispose of dead animals within 24 hours and/or document
❑ Yes
o
❑ 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
El Yes
���,,,///
Iy No
❑ NA
El NE
General Permit? (ie/ discharge, freeboard problems, over application)
/
32.
Did Reviewer/Inspector fail to discuss review/inspection with an on -site representative?
❑ Yes
9No
❑ NA
❑ NE
33.
Does facility require a follow-up visit by same agency?
❑ Yes
i!�No
❑ NA
❑ NE
'Additional Comments and/or Drawings: j�?#) (.,ftA17Po rnA U14U.1-* Sl ZM<' 01.e nr.4. A
LAZ
�,� �S � oco = � • S' t las►J � � o0o c}�Q (,-..I,�p`a, JJ
14100 % 6.49
S A OD& t4q A"LAJ-4
l�
Page 3 of 3 J*P '- f. f r]i'�� n f a „t, -P �"O Q Q x 12128104 1
�J S Q a-r - If t�/� try �-( ^ fvw"P IJI — .

❑ Division of Water Quality
❑ Division of Soil and Water Conservation
❑ Other Agency
Facility Number: 790005 Facility Status: Active Permit: AWC790005 ❑ Denied Access
Inspection Type: Compliance Inspection \Inactive or Closed Date:
Reason for Visit: Routine County: Rockinaham Region: Winston-Salem
r�
Date of Visit: 02/22/2005 Entry Time:08730 AM Exit Time: 10:30 AM
Farm Name: W.C.Bey lie and Son Farm (Beville Dairy Farm)
Owner:
Mailing Address:
Physical Address:
Facility Status: ❑ Compliant ❑ Not Compliant Integrator:
Owner Email:
Phone: [phone]
Location of Farm: Latitude: 36.26 Longitude: -79.71
From WSRO: US Hwy 158 east to Monroelon. Turn right onto Cunningham Mill Rd. Turn left onto Benaja Rd. Farm is on left at
intersection w/ Beville Rd.
Question Areas:
0 Discharges & Stream Impacts
Records and Documents
Certified Operator: Johnny R Beville
Secondary OIC(s):
0 Waste Collection & Treatment Waste Application
Other issues
Operator Certification Number: 21307
On -Site Representative(s): Name Title Phone
On -site representative Johnny Beville Phone: [phone]
24 hour contact name Johnny Beville Phone: [phone]
Primary Inspector: Mary M Rosebrock Phone: [phone]
Ext.383
Secondary Inspector(s):
Phone:
Phone:
Inspection Summary:
9. Need to build up the right side of stock trail at point where it crosses branch to to keep wash of waste and sediment out of surface
waters.
14. Operator had questions regarding different PAN allowances (63 and 125) for the same crop with the same soil type (T-2980 F-5).
Suggested he contact tech specialist for assistance.
15. Crops look great.
18. Operator plans to replace/repair the irrigation suction hose and pipe soon.
18. Need pressure gauge on gun.
21. Don't forget to pull waste sample from #2 for the January'05 applications.
21. Reviewed new permit requirements with operator. He had already begun keeping some new records.
10/4/04 waste analyses: Upper-6.3 and Lower-0.46 lbs. N/1000 gal. 4
Page: 1

•
Permit: AWC790005 Owner- Facility: W C Beville Facility Number: 790005
Inspection Date: 02/22/2005 Inspection Type: Compliance Inspection Reason for Visit: Routine
Page: 2

1
• •
Permit: AWC790005 Owner • Facility: W C Beville Facility Number: 790005
Inspection Date: 02/22/2005 Inspection Type: Compliance Inspection Reason for Visit: Routine
Waste Structures
Num Desc
Close Dt Start Dt Designed Freeboard Observed Freeboard
LOWERST
Waste Pond
32.00
36.00
UPPER STA
Waste Pond
26.00
30.00
Page: 3

Permit: AWC790005 Owner - Facility: W C Beville Facility Number: 790005
Inspection Date: 02/22/2005 Inspection Type: Compliance Inspection Reason for Visit: Routine
Discharp^P.,m, & Stream Impacts
1. Is any discharge observed from any part of the operation?
Ye=_ No NA
❑ ❑
NE
❑
Discharge originated at:
Structure
❑
Application Field
❑
Other
❑
a. Was conveyance man-made?
❑ 0 ❑
❑
b. Did discharge reach Waters of the State? (if yes, notify DWO)
❑ 0 ❑
❑
c. Estimated volume reaching surface waters?
d. Does discharge bypass the waste management system? (if yes, notify DWQ)
❑ 0 ❑
❑
2. Is there evidence of a past discharge from any part of the operation?
❑ M ❑
❑
3. Were there any adverse impacts or potential adverse impacts to Waters of the State other than from a discharge?
❑ M ❑
Yam No NA
❑
NF
Waste Collection_ Storage & Treatment
4. Is storage capacity less than adequate?
❑ 0 ❑
❑
If yes, is waste level into structural freeboard?
❑
5. Are there any immediate threats to the integrity of any of the structures observed (i.e./ large trees, severe erosion,
❑ N ❑
❑
seepage, etc.)?
6. Are there structures on -site that are not property addressed and/or managed through a waste management or
❑ 0 ❑
❑
closure plan?
7. Do any of the structures need maintenance or Improvement?
❑ 0 ❑
❑
6. Do any of the structures lack adequate markers as required by the permit? (Not applicable to roofed pits, dry stacks
❑ M ❑
❑
and/or wet stacks)
9. Does any part of the waste management system other than the waste structures require maintenance or
❑ ❑
❑
improvement?
Yam No NA
NE
Waste Application
10. Are there any required buffers, setbacks, or compliance alternatives that need maintenance or Improvement?
❑ 0 ❑
❑
11. Is there evidence of incorrect application?
❑ 0 ❑
❑
If yes, check the appropriate box below.
Excessive Pending?
❑
Hydraulic Overload?
❑
Frozen Ground?
❑
Heavy metals (Cu, Zn, etc)?
❑
PAN?
❑
Is PAN > 10%/10 lbs.?
❑
Total P2O5?
❑
Failure to incorporate manure/sludge into bare soil?
❑
Outside of acceptable crop window?
❑
Evidence of wind drift?
❑
Application outside of application area?
❑
Crop Type 1
Core (Grain)
Crop Type 2
Core (Silage)
Crop Type 3
Small Grain (Wheat,
Barley, Oats)
Crop Typo 4
Crop Type 5
Page: 4

Permit: AWC790005 Owner - Facility: W C Seville
Facility Number: 790005
Inspection Dale: 02/22/2005 Inspection Type: Compliance Inspection
Reason for Visit: Routine
Warta Appli .cation
Crop Type 6
Vas
No NA
NF
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)? on
❑
❑
15. Does the receiving crop and/or land application site need improvement?
❑
N ❑
❑
16. Did the facility fail to secure and/or operate per the Irrigation design or wettable acre determination?
❑
0 ❑
❑
17. Does the facility lack adequate acreage for land application?
❑
0 ❑
❑
18. Is there a lack of properly operating waste application equipment?
❑
Vas
N ❑
No NA
❑
NE
R - ords and Dnc um nts
19. Did the facility fail to have Certificate of Coverage and Permit readily avallable?
❑
0 ❑
❑
20. Does the facility fail to have all components of the CAWMP readily available?
❑
0 ❑
❑
If yes, check the appropriate box below.
WUP?
❑
Checklists?
❑
Design?
❑
Maps?
❑
Other?
❑
21. Does record keeping need improvement?
0
❑ ❑
❑
If yes, check the appropriate box below.
Waste Application?
❑
120 Minute inspections?
0
Weather code?
0
Weekly Freeboard?
❑
Transfers?
❑
Rainfall?
Inspections after> 1 inch rainfall & monthly?
Waste Analysis?
❑
Annual soil analysis?
❑
Crop yields?
0
Stocking?
❑
Annual Certification Form (NPDES only)?
❑
22. Did the facility fail to install and maintain a rain gauge?
❑
N ❑ ❑
23. If selected, did the facility fall to Install and maintain a rainbreaker on Irrigation equipment (NPDES only)?
❑
❑ E ❑
24. Did the facility fail to calibrate waste application equipment as required by the permit?
❑
0 ❑ ❑
25. Did the facility fail to conduct a sludge survey as required by the permit?
❑
❑ 0 ❑
26. Did the facility fail to have an actively certified operator In charge?
❑
0 ❑ ❑
27. Did the facility fail to secure a phosphorous loss assessment (PLAT) certification?
❑
❑ E ❑
Page: 5

Permit: AWC790005 Owner- Facility: W C Beville
Inspection Date: 02/22/2005 Inspection Type: Compliance Inspection
Other lssuea
Facility Number: 790005
Reason for Visit: Routine
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 wricem? If yes, contact a regional Air Quality
representative immediately.
31. Did the facility fall 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?
Yee No NA NF
❑■❑❑
00011
0000
❑ M ❑ ❑
❑ M ❑ ❑
❑ M ❑ ❑
Page: 6

1 ype of vast U Compliance Inspection U Operation Review U Structure Evaluation U Technical Assistance I
Reason for Visit O Routine 0 Complaint O Follow up O Referral o Emergency 0 Other ❑ Denied Access
Date of Visit: I otJ dd-/I.Ch Arrival Time: �.3o Departure Time: County: uU h am Region: •
Farm Name: WC, B W t lte + Sbn Owner Email: I /
Owner Name: (tJC 1 Soh)nn�q t 0_ lO le,5 IJ�Vdlf— Phone: 3'/q VQ 3
Mailing Address: a 5�0 f3P�1/I Me Rd - peJS ifj I I e I iV L a 7 3 z
Physical Address:
Facility Contact: Soh n Y\ Vt BPx1 t I I e e Title: Phone No:
Onsite Representative: ' Integrator:
Certified Operator: O YI 1—' I I `� Operator Certification Number:
Back-up Operator:
Back-up Certification Number:
Location of Farm: Latitude: M o ©. Om Longitude: 1`7 a, ° RM'
US l y -°oLS+ -h r► mnx n . ono nn(
n�e.v�
ILO Lei o�f'n1{5. Ka. Fatsm Cn le-C+ 0- -iV� �erSecA nr\,
Swine
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
Ip"Z(p
Dairy Calf
❑ Dairy Fleifea
❑ Dry Cow
❑ Non -Dairy
❑ Beef Stocket
❑ Beef Feeder
❑ Beef Brood Cow
Number of Structures: FE,
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 ONo ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes
[--]No ❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Yes
❑ No ❑ NA
❑ NE
0
❑ No ❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Yes
❑ Yes
No ❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Yes �No ❑ NA ❑ NE
12128104 Continued

Facility Number: 21 — OS 1 • Date of Inspection •
Waste Collection & Treatment
4. Is storage capacity (structural plus storm storage plus heavy rainfall) less than adequate? ❑ Yes )No ❑ NA ❑ NE
a. If yes, is waste level into the structural freeboard? ❑ Yes X No ❑ NA ❑ NE
Structure I Structure 2 Structure 3 Structure 4 Structure 5 Structure 6
Identifier: L-OWAX-
Spillway?: Flo
Designed Freeboard (in): a(0 3 2
Observed Freeboard (in): 30 3(0
5. Are there any immediate threats to the integrity of any of the structures observed? ❑ Yes KNo ❑ NA ❑ NE
(ie/ large trees, severe erosion, seepage, etc.)
6. Are there structures on -site which are not properly addressed and/or managed ❑ Yes !31 No El NA ❑ NE
through a waste management or closure plan? '�`
If any of questions 4-6 were answered yes, and the situation poses an immediate public health or environmental threat, notify DWQ
7. Do any of the structures need maintenance or improvement'?
❑ Yes
No
❑ NA
❑ NE
8. Do any of the stuctures lack adequate markers as required by the permit?
❑ Yes
No
❑ NA
❑ NE
(Not applicable to roofed pits, dry stacks and/or wet stacks)
9. Does any part of the waste management system other than the waste structures require
WYes
❑ No
❑ NA
❑ NE
maintenance or improvement?
Waste Application
10. Are there any required buffers, setbacks, or compliance alternatives that need
❑ Yes
),,.,(
LEI No
❑ NA
❑ NE
maintenance/improvement?
/
11. Is there evidence of incorrect application? If yes, check the appropriate box below.
❑ Yes
*o
ElNA
❑ NE
ElExcessive Ponding ElHydraulic 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 Drifi ❑ Application Outside of Area
12. Crop type(s)
13. Soil type(s)
14. Do the receiving crops differ from those designated in the CAWMP?
❑ Yes
No
❑ NA
❑ NE
15. Does the receiving crop and/or land application site need improvement?
❑ Yes
No
❑ NA
❑ 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
No
❑ NA
El NE
18. Is there a lack of properly operating waste application equipment?
❑ Yes
No
El
El NE
3d0J►
Reviewer/Inspector Name
Reviewer/Inspector Signal
io/q/pif uppQ,r= (Q-3 0•4-4
Phone: I
Date:
12128104
Continued

Facility Number: I — Da f Inspection fie' •
Required Records & Documents
19. Did the facility fail to have Certificate of Coverage & Permit readily available? ❑ Yes [�No ❑ NA ❑ NE
20. Does the facility fail to have all components of the CAWMP readily available? If yes, check ❑ Yes No ElNA [INE
❑ Design ❑Maps ❑Other
the appropirate box. ❑ WUP ❑ Checklists // ,,
21. Doe record keeping need it `rovement? If yes, check the appropriate,bboxx Clow. Yes ❑ No ❑ NA ❑ NE
ste Application eekly Freeboard L1d'Waste AnalysisL7 SOiI Analysis �aste Tra���nsfers
Rainfall ❑ Stocking Crop Yield 120 Minute Inspections Monthly and I" Rain Inspections Weather Code
22. Did the facility fail to install and maintain a rain gauge? ❑Yes VNo ❑ NA ❑ NE
23. If selected, did the facility fail to install and maintain rainbreakers on irrigation equipment?
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
XNA
❑ NE
❑ Yes
No
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Yes
❑ No
0 NA
❑ NE
❑ Yes
No
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Yes
❑ No
O(NA
❑ NE
❑ Yes L]9iNo
❑ Yes glNo
El Yes /VNo
❑ Yes 1ANo
❑ Yes ) No
❑ Yes �(No
El NA ❑NE
❑NA ONE
❑NA ❑NE
El NA El NE
❑ NA ❑ NE
El NA ❑NE
Drawings:Additional Comments and/or
• LI �r G
j •/ ��) / l I,,i� �,� �Iri
KA
12128104

i -- ,Shnical Assistance Site Visit
lab r) nn of Cnil onrl \A/=}or r:nneoi
Natural Resources Conservation Service
Soil and Water Conservation District
Other...
Facility Number 79 - Date: /3I04 Time: 10:25 Time On Farm: F 60 WSRO
Farm Name W.C. Beville and Son Farm (Beville Dairy Farm) County Rockingham Phone: [phone]
Mailing Address 240 Beville Rd Reidsville, NC 27320
Onsite
Representative Johnny Beville Integrator
Type Of Visit Purpose Of Visit
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
Routine
Response to DWQ/DENR referral
Response to DSWC/SWCD referral
Response to complaint/local referral
Requested by producer/integrator
Follow-up
Emergency
Other...
Design Current
Capacity Population
❑ Layer
❑Non -Layer
H Dairy
❑ Non -Dairy
Routine
Response to DWQ/DENR referral
Response to DSWC/SWCD referral
Response to complaint/local referral
Requested by producer/integrator
Follow-up
Emergency
Other...
Design Current
Capacity Population
❑ Layer
❑Non -Layer
H Dairy
❑ Non -Dairy
H Dairy
❑ Non -Dairy
264
240
❑ Other
GENERAL QUESTIONS:
1. Is waste discharging from any part of the operation and reaching surface waters or wetlands? ❑ yes ® no
2. Is there evidence of a past waste discharge from any part of the operation that waste reached
❑ yes ®no
surface waters or wetlands?
3. Does any problem pose an immediate threat to the integrity of the waste structure (large trees,
❑ yes OR no
seepage, severe erosion, etc.)?
4. Is there evidence of nitrogen over application, hydraulic overloading or excessive ponding
❑ yes ®no
requiring DWQ notification?
5. Is there evidence of improper dead animal disposal that poses a threat to the environment
❑ yes ® no
and/or public health?
6. Is the waste level within the structural freeboard elevation range for any waste structure?
❑ yes ®no
Structure1 Structure 2 Structure 3 Structure 4
Structure 5
Identifier Upper WSP Lower WSP
Level (Inches) 56 60
CROP TYPES lCorn, Silage ISmall grain silage
SPRAYFIELD
SOIL TYPES ApB CdB2 IrB PcD2
SeB
7. What type of technical assistance does the onsite representative feel is needed? (list in comment section)
03/10/03

•
Facility Number 79 5 Date:
6/3/04
PARAMETER
QQ 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
El
❑ 10. Level in structural freeboard
26. Waste Plan Conditional Amendment
❑
❑
❑ 11. Level in storm storage
27. Review or Evaluate Waste Plan w/producer
❑
❑
❑ 12. Waste structure integrity compromised
in
❑
❑
❑ 13. Waste structure.needs maintenance
28. Forms Need (list comment section)
29. Missing Components (list in comments)
❑
❑
❑ 14. Over application >= 10% & 10 lbs.
❑
❑
❑ 15. Over application < 10% or < 10 lbs.
30. 21-1.0200 re -certification
❑ 16. Hydraulic overloading
31. Five & Thirty day Plans of Action (PoA)
❑
❑
❑ 17. Deficient irrigation records
32. Irrigation record keeping assistance
❑
❑
❑ 18. Late/missing waste analysis
33. Organize/computerization of records
❑
❑
❑ 19. Late/missing lagoon level records
34. Sludge Evaluation
❑
❑
❑ 20. Latelmissing soils analysis
❑ 21. Crop needs improvement
35. Sludge or Closure Plan
❑
. ❑
❑ 22. Crop inconsistent with waste plan
36. Sludge removal/closure procedures
❑
❑
37. Waste Structure Evaluation
❑
❑
❑ 23. Irrigation maintenance deficiency
[124. Deficient sprayfield conditions
38. Structure Needs Improvement
❑
❑
39. Operation & Maintenance Improvements
❑
❑
40. Marker checkicalibration
❑
❑
Regulatory Referrals
41. Site evaluation
❑
❑
❑ Referred to DWQ Date:
42. Irrigation Calibration
❑
❑
❑ Referred to NCDA Date:
El
El
El Other...
43. Irrigation system design/installation
Date:
44. Secure Irrigation information (maps, etc.)
❑
❑
LIST IMPROVEMENTS
45. Operating Improvements (pull signs, etc.)
❑
❑
MADE BY OPERATION
❑
❑
46. Wettable Acre Determination
1 • The waste plan was revised to include additional
47. Evaluate WAD certification/rechecks
❑
❑
48. Crop evaluation/recommendations
❑
❑
fields and crop rotations.
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.)
El
❑
4.
54. Mortality BMPs
❑
❑
55. Waste operator education (NPDES)
❑
El
5'
56. Operation & maintenance education
❑
❑
57. Record keeping education
❑
❑
6
58. Crop/forage management education
❑
❑
59. Soil and/or waste sampling education
❑
❑
03/10/03

E
Facility Number 79 - 0 Date: 6I3I04 I
Waste analysis: 4-2-04 LSD 6.7 Ibs.N/1000 gals. B, 9.3 Ibs.N/1000 gals. S.I.
Soil samples dated 12-3-03 had two fields calling for one or more tons of lime per acre.
Facility and records look good. Good farm.
Drops in the lower waste pond were noted as transfers to the upper waste pond for dilution mixing.
TECHNICAL SPECIALIST lRocky Durham
SIGNATURE
Date Entered: 6/4/04 Entered By: [Rocky Durham
3 03/10/03

I Facility Number 79 5 Date of Visit: 1/22/2004 Time: 11:30
O Not Operational O Belo+v'I'hreshold
Permitted N Certified l3 Conditionally Certified l7 Registered Date Last Operated or Above "Threshold : .............
Farm Name ................ County: &QjqkjnghAM ........................... WJ&O......
Owner Name: W C.,Job tuy. Charles_ 13eriUe-.---•---•---------------•-- Phone No: 334149r4237----•-------------------------
MailingAddress: 24Q.82y11I..V_Rd....................................................................................... Reiftyllic..NC ....................................................... 27.3.2.0 ..............
Facility Contact: dnhnnY.B.C.AJle....................................Title:............................................... Phone No: ......................................
Onsite Representative: dflhAuxjleYllle..................•_._.-.------------ Integrator.----------------------•-------•-•-•-•-•---..
Certified Operator: doh.nxty..&............................ Rpylllt ............................................... Operator Certification Number: 2U0.7.............................
Location of Farm:
?rom WSRO: US Hwy 158 east to Monroeton. Turn right onto Cunningham Mill Rd. Turn left onto Benaja Rd. Farm Is on
eft at intersection w/ Beville Rd.
[]Swine []Poultry ®Cattle []Horse Latitude 36 • 15 18 Longitude =0 42 • 42
Discharges & Stream Impacts
1. Is any discharge observed from any part of the operation? ❑ Yes ® No
Discharge originated at: ❑ Lagoon ❑ Spray Field ❑ Other
a. If discharge is observed, was the conveyance man-made'? ❑ Yes ❑ No
b. If discharge is observed, did it reach Water of the State? (If yes, notify DWQ) ❑ Yes ❑ No
c. If discharge is observed, what is the estimated flow in gal/min'?
d. Does discharge bypass a lagoon system? (If yes, notify DWQ) ❑ Yes ❑ No
2. Is there evidence of past discharge from any part of the operation? ❑ Yes ® No
3. Were there any adverse impacts or potential adverse impacts to the Waters of the State other than from a discharge? ❑ Yes ® No
Waste Collection & Treatment
4. Is storage capacity (freeboard plus storm storage) less than adequate? ® Spillway ❑ Yes ® No
Structure I Structure 2 Structure 3 Structure 4 Structure 5 Structure
Identifier: ---- llppetstage..... .... Lamerstage ..............................------------------------- -..--------------------------- ...........................
Freeboard (inches): 30 48
12112103 Q3 Continued

Facility Number: 79-5 • Date of Inspection 1/22/2004 •
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 ol'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 ]'ending ❑ PAN []Hydraulic Overload ❑ Frozen Ground ❑ Copper and/or Zinc
12.
Crop type Small Grain (Wheat, Barley, Com (Silage & Grain) Fescue (Graze)
13.
Do the receiving crops differ with those designated in the Certified Animal Waste Management Plan (CAWMP)?
❑ Yes
® No
14.
a) Does the facility lack adequate acreage for land application?
❑ Yes
® 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.
Me t on # : xplain an. S a r and/or any ecommendatlons or an. othe co ment=Notes
o better explain situat on . additional pages as ecessary : ❑ Field Copy ® Fin
7. Continue efforts to control vegetation and groundhogs. Looks better.
23. Recordkeeping looks good.
29. Operator needs chart (suggestion) showing acres for each field in case he decides to broadcast waste with honey wagon on those
fields listed as receiving irrigated waste (pulls). I could not locate the broadcast acres in the new waste plan to match with the operator's
records. Contact Rockingham NRCS/SWCD for assistance.
Reviewer/Inspector Name Melis Ros¢brock -- _ - - - - -
Reviewer/Inspector Signature: I Date:
/L/11/17j (Ionrtnue4

Facility. Number: 79-5 D1*f Inspection 1/22/2004 •
Reuuired Records & Documents
21.
Fail to have Certificate of Coverage & General Permit or other Permit readily available?
❑ Yes
® No
22.
Does the facility fail to have all components of the Certified Animal Waste Management Plan readily available?
(ie/ WUP, checklists, design, maps, etc.)
❑ Yes
® No
23.
Does record keeping need improvement? If yes, check the appropriate box below.
❑ Yes
® No
❑ Waste Application ❑ Freeboard ❑ Waste Analysis ❑ Soil Sampling
24.
Is facility not in compliance with any applicable setback criteria in effect at the time of design?
❑ Yes
®No
25.
Did the facility fail to have a actively certified operator in charge?
❑ Yes
®No
26.
Fail to notify regional DWQ of emergency situations as required by General Permit?
(ie/ discharge, freeboard problems, over application)
❑ Yes
®No
27.
Did Reviewer/Inspector fail to discuss review/inspection with on -site representative?
❑ Yes
® No
28.
Does facility require a follow-up visit by same agency?
❑ Yes
® No
29.
Were any additional problems noted which cause noncompliance of the Certified AW MP?
❑ Yes
® No
NPDES Permitted Facilities
30.
Is the facility covered under a NPDES Permit? (If no, skip questions 31-35)
❑ Yes
® No
31.
If selected, did the facility fail to install and maintain rainbreakers on irrigation equipment?
❑ Yes
❑ No
32.
Did the facility fail to install and maintain a rain gauge?
❑ Yes
❑ No
33.
Did the facility fail to conduct an annual sludge survey?
❑ Yes
❑ No
34.
Did the facility fail to calibrate waste application equipment?
❑ Yes
❑ No
35.
Does record keeping for NPDES required forms need improvement? If yes, check the appropriate box below.
❑ Yes
❑ No
❑ Stocking Form ❑ Crop Yield Form []Rainfall ❑ Inspection After V Rain
❑ 120 Minute Inspections []Annual Certification Form
12112103

r.
Type of Visit
Reason for Visit
mpliance Inspection
Routine O Complaint
Facility Number
Permitted
Farm Name:
Owner Name:
Mailing Address:'
Facility Contact:
Onsite Representative:
Certified Operator:
Location of Farm:
O Operation Review O Lagoon Evaluation
O Follow up Q Emergency Notification
Date of Visit:
0 Other ❑ Denied Access
Time:
Certified [3 CSnditionally Certified 0 Registered Date Last Operated or Above Thr hold: _
-+- Son Farm County: eK+
T_ I. - . .. , D . _ .`. 1 I n
Lily— Title: Phone No: 1J'r1 . Y"f✓ f 1
p G ,,pp c
�PiVII'2 Integrator. 310.,3L%9.0�(70 6r j?Zo
3)U i Ile- Operator Certification Number: a l W 1
Ji IEO Q
on �fwyy IS-8 ii
nroe-�r),
El t onto,Cunn In hani Mill '
Le
onFo Yten0.
e Farm a+
i}#Fersechon t�/g
idle 2dr�.�-�--�-
❑ Swine ❑ Poultry
0 Cattle El Horse Latitude �� ®�
Fa Longitude
Design` Current ' Design
Current -
Design -Current
Swine
Capacity Po ulation Poultry Capacity
Population Cattle
Ca pa Po ulation
❑ Wean to Feeder
JLJ Layer I
I KI Dairy
❑ Feeder to Finish
ILJ Non -Layer I
I JLJ Non -Dairy
❑ Farrow to Wean
❑ Farrow to Feeder
❑Other
❑ Farrow to Finish
Total Design Capacity
;Z
❑ Gilts
❑ Boars
Total SSLW
Discharges & Stream Impacts
1. Is any discharge observed from any part of the operation? ❑ Yes No
Discharge originated at: ElLagoon ElSpray Field ElOther //x
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. II'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? ElYes 9No
Waste Collection & Treatment
4. Is storage capacity (freeboard plus storm storage) less than adequate? Spillway ❑ Yes *ONO
Structure I Structure I r Structure 3 Structure 4 Structure 5 Structure 6
Identifier: P_ " (3 -
Freeboard (inches): TT -7
05103101 Continued
N)

• •
Facility Number: — 5 Date of Inspection `'l F—"
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
111���,,,��w'''
lyrvo
/`
immediate public health or environmental threat, notify DWQ)
7.
Do any of the structures need maintenance/improvement?
Yes
O No
S.
Does any part of the waste management system other than waste structures require maintenance/improvement?
❑ Yes
;y No
9.
Do any stuctures lack adequate, gauged markers with required maximum and minimum liquid level
!�
elevation markings?
❑Yes
XNO
Waste Application
10.
Are there any buffers that need maintenance/improvement?
❑ Yes
X.
. 11.
Is there evidence of over application? ❑ Exx�ce�sesive, Pending ❑2�PAN ❑ Hydr u1ic Overload
❑ Yes
KNo
12.
Crop type A a� / /h ( ',(r'( AQ lf1/ �C� .� .Q./=+ '
13.
Do the receiving crops differ w1sth those designated in the Certinfied A mal Waste ManageVent P (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?
El Yes
c) This facility is pended for a wettable acre determination?
❑Yes
rrreee111No
�p No
15.
Does the receiving crop need improvement?
❑ Yes
�o
16.
Is there a lack of adequate waste application equipment?
❑ Yes
XNo
Required
Records & Documents
17.
Fail to have Certificate of Coverage & General Permit or other Permit readily available?
❑ Yes
KJ No
".: 18.
Does the facility fail to have all components of the Certified An' ' a] Waste Management Plan readily available?
T�
-
(ie/ WUP, checklists, design. maps. etc.) / ✓/ /
El 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?
Eles
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?
El
No
No violations or deficiencies were noted during this visit. You will receive no further correspondence about this visit.
Field Copv ❑ Final Notes
�� �
Ce �A�,4v
I
Reviewer/InspectorName e `'�' +' �v v xasrc,4.-. rl+"`""�i.3 ""?Y f2-#7r "Fi+:l.. {;r'•"`0�`�-if�i•"%'nC I
Reviewer/Inspector Signature. _ Date:
05103101 Condnued

a.7
Facility Number: — Date 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?
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?
19 . ,Zo 3 Soc �5 ? G+
40
as. LO �la
T-I&W
i
/0/1-7/03
= (D. 1-3
jI,JL��lil! � C S m
05103101
❑ Yes tit No
❑ Yes ANo
❑ Yes ® No
nQYca--Q ,o
❑ Yes $No
❑ Yes No
rl�.=a^P�No

Assistance Site Visit
Resources Conservation Service
Soil and Water Conservation District
Other...
Facility Number 79 - �5 Date: 10/6/03 Time: 13:30 Time On Farm: = WSRO
Farm Name W.C. Beville and Son Farm (Beville Dairy Farm) County Rockingham Phone: [phone]
Mailing Address 240 Beville Rd
Reidsville, NC 27320
Onsite
Representative Johnny Beville Integrator
Compliance Inspection (pilot only)
Technical Assistance
Confirmation for Removal
❑ Operating below threshold
❑ Swine ❑ Poultry ® Cattle ❑ Horse
Design Current
Capacitv Population
❑ Wean to Feeder
❑ Feeder to Finish
❑ Farrow to Wean
❑ Farrow to Feeder
❑ Farrow to Finish
❑ Gilts
❑ Boars
Response to DWQ/DENR referral
Response to DSWC/SWCD referral
Response to complaint/local referral
Requested by producer/integrator
Follow-up
Emergency
Other...
Design Current
Capacitv Population
1p Layer
❑ Non -Layer
® Dairy
❑ Non -Dairy
Response to DWQ/DENR referral
Response to DSWC/SWCD referral
Response to complaint/local referral
Requested by producer/integrator
Follow-up
Emergency
Other...
Design Current
Capacitv Population
1p Layer
❑ Non -Layer
® Dairy
❑ Non -Dairy
® Dairy
❑ Non -Dairy
264
250
❑ Other
GENERAL QUESTIONS:
1. Is waste discharging from any part of the operation and reaching surface waters or wetlands? ❑ yes ® no
2. Is there evidence of a past waste discharge from any part of the operation that waste reached
❑ yes ® no
surface waters or wetlands?
I Does any problem pose an immediate threat to the integrity of the waste structure (large trees,
❑ yes ® no
seepage, severe erosion, etc.)?
4. Is there evidence of nitrogen over application, hydraulic overloading or excessive ponding
❑ yes ® no
requiring DWQ notification?
5. Is there evidence of improper dead animal disposal that poses a threat to the environment
❑ yes ® no
and/or public health?
6. Is the waste level within the structural freeboard elevation range for any waste structure?
❑ yes ® no
Structurel Structure 2 Structure 3 Structure 4
Structure 5
Identifier Upper WSP Lower WSP
Level (Inches)-20 32—�
CROP TYPES Com, Silage mall grain silage
SPRAYFIELD
SOIL TYPES ApB CdB2 IrB PcD2
SeB
7. What type of technical assistance does the onsite representative feel is needed? (list in comment section)
03/10/03

Facility Number 79 - 5 Date:
10/8/03
PARAMETER
Q No assistance provided/requested
❑ 8.
Waste spill leaving site
TECHNICAL ASSISTANCE Needed
Provided
❑ 9.
Waste spill contained on site
25. Waste Plan Revision or Amendment
®
❑
❑ 10.
Level in structural freeboard
Amendment
❑
❑
❑ 11.
Level in storm storage
26. Waste Plan Conditional
27. Review or Evaluate Waste Plan w/producer
❑
❑
❑ 12.
Waste structure integrity compromised
28. Forms Need (list in comment section)
❑
❑ 13.
Waste structure needs maintenance
29. Missing Components (list in comments)
❑
❑
❑ 14.
Over application >= 10% & 10 lbs.
❑
El❑
15.
Over application < 10% or < 10 lbs.
30. 2H.0200 re -certification
❑ 16.
Hydraulic overloading
31. Five & Thirty day Plans of Action (PoA)
❑
❑
❑ 17.
Deficient irrigation records
32. Irrigation record keeping assistance
❑
❑
❑ 18.
Late/missing waste analysis
33. Organize/computerization of records
❑
❑
❑ 19.
Late/missing lagoon level records
34. Sludge Evaluation
❑
❑
❑ 20. Late/missing soils analysis
[121.
Crop needs improvement
35. Sludge or Closure Plan
❑
❑
❑ 22.
Crop inconsistent with waste plan
36. Sludge removal/closure procedures
❑
❑
❑ 23.
Irrigation maintenance deficiency
37. Waste Structure Evaluation
❑
❑
❑ 24.
Deficient sprayfield conditions
38. Structure Needs Improvement
❑
❑
39. Operation & Maintenance Improvements
❑
❑
40. Marker check/calibration
❑
❑
Regulatory Referrals
41. Site evaluation
❑
❑
❑ Referred to DWO Date:
42. Irrigation Calibration
❑
❑
❑ Referred to NCDA Date:
El
❑
❑ Other...
43. Irrigation system design/installation
Date:
44. Secure irrigation information (maps, etc.)
❑
❑
LIST IMPROVEMENTS
45.Operating improvements (pull signs, etc.)
❑
❑
MADE BY OPERATION
46. Wettable Acre Determination
❑
❑
1
47. Evaluate WAD certification/rechecks
❑
❑
48. Crop evaluation/recommendations
❑
❑
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. Cropiforage management education
❑
❑
59. Soil and/or waste sampling education
❑
❑
03/10/03

Facility Number 79 - 0 Date: F 10/8/03
4-09-03 ALD 1.7 " " 1
10-03-02 LSD 6.9 " " B, 9.6 Ibs.N/1000 gals. S.I.
Mr. Beville did not get word that I was coming today.
Facility and records looked good overall.
Remember to get your 2003 soil samples in.
T16805 field # 2 needs to be added to the waste plan. The Beville's own this field and thought it was already in the plan.
The waste plan acres need to match the irrigation design acres on fields that are irrigated. The fields can be in the plan
Tice with acres for broadcast and acres for irrigation.
Mr. Beville will be applying waste soon to small grain.
TECHNICAL SPECIALIST IRocky Durham
SIGNATURE
Date Entered: 10/10/03
Entered By: IRocky Durham
03/10/03

Facility Number 79 OS Date of Visit: 5/14/2002 Time: ]000
Not Operational O Below Threshold
® Permitted ® Certified 13 Conditionally Certified D Registered Date Last Operated or Above Threshold: .........................
Farm Name: ...................... County:$g.6klA1gU0.I11...y
................... W$.RQ........
Owner Name: W..,C.,,.JahuOy.. hatles....extlle......................................................... Phone No: da.6_3.49,4.93.7......................
MailingAddress: 240.BgY.ift.Rd...................................................................................... Rvidualv.,AC ....................................................... V.32.0 ..............
Facility Contact: d.¢homy..tivxiflv............................................... Title:................................................................ Phone No: 33.6.39.9.118.Q8..ax..8HQ9......
Onsite Representative:,Jpflptly,$eXAlle,.Jak1At.:AApa11c1aAS......................................... Integrator:
Certified Operator:,JafUAay..R.............................. 8D.Y.Wr ............................................... Operator Certification Number:213Q.7...............................
Location of Farm:
From WSRO: US Hwy 158 east to Monroeton. Turn right onto Cunningham Mill Rd. Turn left onto Benaja Rd. Farm is on A
eft at intersection w/ Beville Rd.
❑ Swine [I Poultry ®Cattle [I Horse Latitude 36 • 15 18 Longitude 79 • 42 42
Design Current
Swine Cnnacity Pnnolatinn
❑
Wean to Feeder
❑
Feeder to Finish
❑
Farrow to Wean
❑
Farrow to Feeder
❑
Farrow to Finish
❑
Gilts
❑
Boars
Design Current Design Current
Poultry Capacity Population "Cattle Ca acit Po ulation
CF❑ Layer ®Dairy 200 250
O] —Non-Layer I I INNon-Dairy 1 34
❑ Other
Total Design Capacity 234
Total SSLW 307,200
Number of Lagoons 1 0 10 Subsurface Drains Present JJU Lagoon Area JIJ Spray Field Area
Holding Ponds / Solid Traps 0 ❑ No Liquid Waste Management System
r'
Discharees & Stream Immaets
1. Is any discharge observed from any part of the operation? ❑ Yes ®No
Discharge originated at: ❑ Lagoon ❑ Spray Field ❑ Other
a. If discharge is observed, was the conveyance man-made? ❑ Yes ❑ No
b. If discharge is observed, did it reach Water of the State? (If yes, notify DWQ) ❑ Yes ❑ No
c. If discharge is observed, what is the estimated flow in gal/min?
d. Does discharge bypass a lagoon system? (If yes, notify DWQ) ❑ Yes ❑ No
2. Is there evidence of past discharge from any part of the operation? ❑ Yes ® No
3. Were there any adverse impacts or potential adverse impacts to the Waters of the State other than from a discharge? ❑ Yes ®No
Waste Collection & Treatment
4. Is storage capacity (freeboard plus storm storage) less than adequate? ® Spillway ❑ Yes ®No
Structure 1 Structure 2 Structure 3 Structure 4 Structure 5 Structure 6
Identifier: ..... Upper..Stage..... ..... Lower.Stage..................................................................................................................................................
Freeboard (inches): 72 60
05103101 / `L f%�/ Continued

Facility Number: 79—OS Date of Inspection 1 5/14/2002
r 6
5. Are there any immediate threats to the int ity of any of the structures observed? (ie/ trees, vere erosion, ❑ Yes N No
seepage, etc.)
6. Are there structures on -site which are not properly addressed and/or managed through a waste management or
closure plan? ❑ Yes N No
([f 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? N Yes ❑ No
9. Do any stuctures lack adequate, gauged markers with required maximum and minimum liquid level
elevation markings? ❑ Yes N No
Waste AoDlication
10. Are there any buffers that need maintenance/improvement? ❑ Yes N No
11. Is there evidence of over application? ❑ Excessive Ponding ❑ PAN ❑ Hydraulic Overload ❑ Yes N No
12. Crop type Corn (Silage & Grain) Small Grain Overseed Small Grain (Wheat, Barley,
13. Do the receiving crops differ with those designated in the Certified Animal Waste Management Plan (CAWMP)? ❑ Yes N No
14. a) Does the facility lack adequate acreage for land application?
b) Does the facility need a wettable acre determination?
c) This facility is pended for a wettable acre determination?
15. Does the receiving crop need improvement?
16. Is there a lack of adequate waste application equipment?
Required Records & Documents
17. Fail to have Certificate of Coverage & General Permit or other Permit readily available?
18. Does the facility fail to have all components of the Certified Animal Waste Management Plan readily available?
(ie/ WUP, checklists, design, maps, etc.)
19. Does record keeping need improvement? (ie/ irrigation, freeboard, waste analysis & soil sample reports)
20. Is facility not in compliance with any applicable setback criteria in effect at the time of design?
21. Did the facility fail to have a actively certified operator in charge?
22. Fail to notify regional DWQ of emergency situations as required by General Permit?
(ie/ discharge, freeboard problems, over application)
23. Did Reviewer/Inspector fail to discuss review/inspection with on -site representative?
24. Does facility require a follow-up visit by same agency?
25. Were any additional problems noted which cause noncompliance of the Certified AWMP?
❑ Yes N No
❑ Yes N No
❑ Yes N No
❑ Yes N No
❑ Yes N No
4 ■
■�
❑ Yes N No
❑ Yes N No
❑ Yes N No
❑ Yes N No
❑ Yes N No
0 No violations or deficiencies were noted during this visit. You will receive no further correspondence about this visit.
Comments(refer to question #E'x lam an YES answers and/or any recommendations or any other comments
.
Usedrawingsof facility to betterexpam situations., (use additional pages as necessary): h❑ Field Copy N Final Notes
7. Need to mow/spray vegetation around upper waste pond.
8. Keep an eye on the stock trail for any run-off of manure and/or sediment. Other stock trail repairs look real good.
18. Need to transfer odor, insect, and mortality checklists from old plan to new waste plan.
19. Operator to take 2002 soil samples this Spring.
25. Tract 2979 Field 4 is listed in CAWMP as 16.7 acres, should be 6.7 acres. John Timmons to correct this.
Waste analysis: 4/17/02 11.5 lbs. N/1000 gal. Operator usually pumps out of the upper waste storage pond. Hasn't irrigated in about
two years.
Records look eat!!
Reviewer/Inspector Name Melis Rosebrock
_
Reviewer/Inspector Signature: Date: a__
05103101 Continued

FacilitysNumber: 79-05 l&f Inspection 5/14/2002
Odor Issues
26. Does the discharge pipe from the confinement building to the storage pond or lagoon fail to discharge allor below ❑ Yes ❑ No
liquid level of lagoon or storage pond with no agitation?
27. Are there any dead animals not disposed of properly within 24 hours? ❑ Yes ®No
28. Is there any evidence of wind drift during land application? (i.e. residue on neighboring vegetation, asphalt, []Yes ®No
roads, building structure, and/or public property)
29. Is the land application spray system intake not located near the liquid surface of the lagoon? ❑ Yes ❑ No
30. Were any major maintenance problems with the ventilation fan(s) noted? (i.e. broken fan belts, missing or
or broken fan blade(s), inoperable shutters, etc.) ❑ Yes ® No
31. Do the animals feed storage bins fail to have appropriate cover? ❑ Yes ❑ No
32. Do the flush tanks lack a submerged fill pipe or a permanent/temporary cover? ❑ Yes ❑ No
J
U&MM

I6AM
R
Type of Visit P Compliance Inspection 0 Operation Review 0 Lagoon Evaluation
Reason for Visit 36 Routine O Complaint Q Follow up 0 Emergency Notification 0 Other ❑ Denied Access
Facility Number Date of Visit: Q Time: T=
Not O erational OBelowThreshold
[Permitted Wertified 0 Conditionally Certified 0 Registered Date Last Operated or Above Threshold:
Farm Name:&'Il1FM�4•C' 1 County:
— ocKin
^ — M
Owner Name: hone No:
Mailing Address:
Facility Contact: Sb nQXJ 22-1 l'IQ Title: Rhone No: • $$0g
OnsiteRepresentative: u LN�nulil`� Integrator: 33&o3qq $Cq
Certified Operator: IasDay', 1IO Operator Certification Number: 0�
Location of Farm:
Monroe
11
❑ Swine ❑ Poultry k Cattle ❑ Horse Latitude ®' =, ®•• Longitude M e ®• � ••
Design Current
IL-1 Wean to Feeder I I
ILJ Farrow to Feeder I I I'
Design Current Design Current
Poultry Copedt Po elation Cattle Ca se ty. Population
❑ Layer DairypZ. S
❑ Non -La er Non -Dairy
❑ Other
Total Design Capacity
Total SSLW
-r� Number of Lagoons I 'd"' I ILJ Subsurface Drains Present IILJ Lagoon Area ILJ
`.rI Holdin Ponds / Solid Traps 0 ❑Management'.
g p Z No Li uid Waste S stem
Spray Field Area I' I
,.
'• '
Discharges &Stremn Impacts
1. Is any discharge observed from any part of the operation?
❑ Yes
J0
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? I)(1 Spillway
`
❑ Yes
�,,/
l�l No
`
Structure I Structure 2 Structure 3 ` Structure 4 Structure 5
Structure 6
/
Identifier: J--)DDQAr
Freeboard (inches): �(e_
05103101
Continued
a�

Facility Number: — Date of Inspection •
5. Are there any immediate threats to the integrity of any of the structures observed? (ie/ trees, severe erosion,
seepage, etc.)
6. Are there structures on -site which are not properly addressed and/or managed through a waste management or
closure plan?
(IT 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 Pondiing ❑ PAN ❑ Hydraulic Overload
12. Crop type e ,dQ e2J) I /M'l 1Q a 0
13. Do the receiving crops differ with those designated �e 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?
M. Is there a lack of adequate waste application equipment?
Reunited Records & Documents
17. Fail to have Certificate of Coverage & General Permit or other Permit readily available?
18. Does the facilityfailto have all components of the Certified Animal Waste Management Plan readily available?
��il�rry4fa�rrr�
(ie/ WUP, r eg[s152C=[tiMOr'Wtr�-
19. Does record keeping need improvement? (ie/ ircigation, 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
El Yes /�(No
AYes ❑No
AYes ❑ No
❑ Yes XNo
❑ Yes XNo
0
❑ Yes .cT,No
�p.i ❑ Yes No
0 No violations or deficiencies were noted during this visit. You will receive no further correspondence about this visit.
fKyGYas necessary) ..F
Comment„ss (r'eefer toAquestion #) ExplainY any YES answersand/or any recommendation
Use ds or anyAother comments �
rawingsoT facilittrx tyto'beeeplain sittiatld(es d
ns use additional pagµ ,t
Field Copy ❑ Final Notes
a.;
.,L��,., . Qk��,yyy
Q
Aly-
Reviewer/Inspector Name
Reviewer/Inspector Signatur Date: Z
05103101 V P � Continued

• I
• • / •
Facility Number: — Date 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?
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?
i
1q. � aooa Smz.P
4/1110 ti• s Ids N// 000 �—Po
,A,, ram.
L�lixa r
❑ Yes A No
❑ Yes 1KNo
•T— R7W F- Qu o J w Ivjc,q
7 .
05103101

I Facility Number 79 5 Date of Visit: 3/12/2002 Time: 12:30
O Not O erational O Below Threshold
® Permitted M Certified E3 Conditionally Certified 0 Registered Date Last Operated or Above Threshold: ........................
Farm Name: ...................... County: l3uWitgham................................... W.S.RQ........
Owner Name: Fi,C..,. Jnitnay..Cllarins....exllls......................................................... Phone No: 33.6-3.99.-A..937............................................................
MailingAddress:]S.#.O.l{.e.Dtia.atA.ad.............................................................................. Rqjds.y.il1.q..N.0 ....................................................... 2.7.320 ..............
FacilityContact: .............................................................................. Title:................................................................ Phone No:...................................................
OnsiteRepresentative: JAnny..Bevllle.............................................................................. Integrator:......................................................................:...............
Certified Operator:,Johnny..R.............................. ar.y.111C .............................................. Operator Certification Number:113.Q.7 .............................
Location of Farm:
-orner of SR 2428 and 2427 and 11 miles out of Reidsville NC US 29 at Rockingham and Guilford County line 3 miles on the A
-fight.
❑ Swine ❑ Poultry ® Cattle ❑ Horse Latitude 36 • 15 , 18 Longitude 79 • 42 42
Design Current
Swine Canacitv Ponulation
❑ Wean to Feeder
❑ Feeder to Finish
❑ Farrow to Wean
❑ Farrow to Feeder
❑ Farrow to Finish
❑ Gilts
❑ Boars
Design Current
Design Current
Poultry
Capacity Population Cattle
Ca'taci[ Population
❑ Layer
❑ Non -Layer
❑ Other
Total Design Capacity
234
Total SSLW
307,200
® Dairy
200
220
® Non -Dairy
34
35
'Number of Lagoons 0 ❑LagoonP Y a.
Holding Ponds / Solid Traps 2� ❑ o Liquid Waste Management System Area ❑ S ray Field Are
Discharnes & Stream Impacts
1. Is any discharge observed from any part of the operation? ❑ Yes M 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? (Ifyes, notify DWQ) ❑ Yes ❑ No
2. Is there evidence of past discharge from any part of the operation? ❑ Yes M No
3. Were there any adverse impacts or potential adverse impacts to the Waters of the State other than from a discharge? ❑ Yes M No
Waste Collection & Treatment
4. Is storage capacity (freeboard plus storm storage) less than adequate? ❑ Spillway ❑ Yes M No
Structure 1 Structure 2 Structure 3 Structure 4 Structure 5 Structure 6
Identifier: ...... Upper...SP...... ..... Lawez. WSP...................................................................................................................................................
Freeboard (inches): 31 46
05103101 Continued

Facility Number: 79-5 Date of Inspection 3/12/2002
5. Are there any immediate threats to the invity of any of the structures observed? (ie/ tree*ere 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 N No
(If any of questions 4-6 was answered yes, and the situation poses an
immediate public health or environmental threat, notify DWQ)
7. Do any of the structures need maintenance/improvement? ❑ Yes N No
8. Does any part of the waste management system other than waste structures require maintenance/improvement? ❑ Yes N No
9. Do any strictures lack adequate, gauged markers with required maximum and minimum liquid level
elevation markings? ❑ Yes N No
Waste Application
10. Are there any buffers that need maintenance/improvement? ❑ Yes N No
11. Is there evidence: of over application? ❑ Excessive Pending ❑ PAN ❑ Hydraulic Overload ❑ Yes N No
12. Crop type Corn (Silage & Grain) Small Grain (Wheat, Barley, Fescue (Graze)
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/I ispector 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?
EVZM _rm
❑ Yes N No
❑ Yes N No
❑ Yes N No
❑ Yes N No
❑ Yes N No
❑ Yes N No
❑ Yes N No
Q No violations or deficiencies were noted during this visit. You will receive no further correspondence about this visit.
CommentsVefer to question #): Explamiany 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 N Final Notes
i
i.'! 5.:. ',r i 1111 io ,.. -+nr ,m--„,c- 0r'
Facility and records are in compliance.
Facility is permitted and has WUP for 210 milk cows, 20 dry cows, and 34 heifers. (264 head).
Curbing on the stock trail seems to be working good.
Reviewer/Inspector Name Rocky Durham _
Reviewer/Inspector Signature: Date:
05103101 Continued

FacilityNumber: 79-5 Date f Inspection 3/12/2002
Odor Issues
26. Does the discharge pipe from the confinement building to the storage pond or lagoon fail to discharge at/or below ❑ Yes []No
liquid level of lagoon or storage pond with no agitation?
27. Are there any dead animals not disposed of properly within 24 hours? ❑ Yes ® No
28. Is there any evidence of wind drift during land application? (i.e. residue on neighboring vegetation, asphalt, ❑ Yes ® No
roads, building structure, and/or public property)
29. Is the land application spray system intake not located near the liquid surface of the lagoon? ❑ Yes ® No
30. Were any major maintenance problems with the ventilation fan(s) noted? (i.e. broken fan belts, missing or
or broken fan blade(s), inoperable shutters, etc.) ❑ Yes ® No
31. Do the animals feed storage bins fail to have appropriate cover? ❑ Yes ® No
32. Do the flush tanks lack a submerged fill pipe or a permanent/temporary cover? ❑ Yes ❑ No
',,, gltlonal, omments an or rawmgs �� ..'.��� ., �.. f �' ,.�j� ' �� ., ��:, a�:y++ `+ 14'i�,�'
Waste analysis: 9-14-01 LSD 7.3 lbs.N/1000 gals. S.I.
05103101

Facility Number 79 5 Date °t Visit: 2/22/2001 'time.; 1120
Q Not Operational Q Below Threshold
® Permitted E Certified ❑ Conditionally Certified 0 Registered Dale Last Operated or Above Threshold ..........................
Farm Name: W..C..ReY.iRCYAKM...................................................................................... County: Ifoekinghain................................... .W.SRO.......
Owner Name: W C., luhrulY,_Chatrles.. RuJug......................................................... Phone No: 6'34Ar.B#Qlf..........................................................
Mailing Address: Z40.@.t<YIII.e.li.Rad.................................................................................. IleldSY.ille,..NG........................................................ 7.732.0 ..............
Facility Contact: Jdarmy..&Ylllle............................:..................Title:............................................................... Phone No:....................................................
Onsite Representative:.IO1muY.M.Y.IIIg........................................................................... Integrator:.......................................................................................
Certified Operator:].ohmlty.................................. Rexulp ............................................... Operator Certification Number: 2,1307..............................
Location of Farm:
Corner of SR 2428 and 2427 and 11 miles out of Reidsville NC US 29 at Rockingham and Guilford County line 3 miles on the
right.
[]Swine []Poultry ®Cattle []Horse Latitude 36 • 15 18 « Longitude 79 • 42 , 42 «
^
2 ^.. q
ss
Swme t
❑ Wean to Feeder
rwarw.r ..-+.,+—"..se
Design ' Current
Ca acit Po `ulation
rY P`a .y.—'war, Breen us r..,
+ , r, Design • .Current ha.- Desrgn,` Current`
Poultr.Y �iCa actt f a r atioCa acit "r P,o' tilalion t
11@ Dairy 200 206
❑ Feeder to Finish
❑Non -Layer
10 Non -Dairy
34 5
❑ Farrow to Wean
❑ Farrow to Feeder
.T
» ❑Other . ° r .i y^'j1 c1 i °'�
°
,� a Total D,estgngCapacity 234'
x .
T �'3�g"� 'otal SSLW 307�200
$
^'
❑ Farrow to Finish
❑ Gilts
❑Boars
Number of Lagoons 0 ❑ Subsurface Drains Present ❑ Lagoon Area ❑ Spray Field Area
Holding Ponds / Solid Traps 0 ❑ No Liquid Waste Management System
Discharges 8& ' r m Impacts
1. Is any discharge observed from any part of the operation? ❑ Yes ® No
Discharge originated at: ❑ Lagoon ❑ Spray Field ❑ Other
a. If discharge is observed, was the conveyance man-made'? ❑ Yes ❑ No
b. If discharge is observed, did it reach Water of the State? (If yes, notify DWQ) ❑ Yes ❑ No
c. If discharge is observed, what is the estimated flow in gal/min?
d. Does discharge bypass a lagoon system? (If yes. notify DWQ) ❑ Yes ❑ No
2. Is there evidence of past discharge from any part of the operation? ❑ Yes ® No
3. Were there any adverse impacts or potential adverse impacts to the Waters of the State other than from a discharge? ® Yes ❑ No
0I/01/01 Continued
Y3,1"4 �,

Facility Number: 79-5 • Date of Inspection 2/22/2001 I•
Waste Collection & Treatment
4. Is storage capacity (freeboard plus storm storage) less than adequate? ® Spillway
Structure I Structure 2 Structure 3 Structure 4 Structure 5
Identifier: ............Qppct........... ........... LA..W.=........... .................................... ................................... ............................,
Freeboard (inches): ................ 12 ............... ............... 5.1 ................
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?
Waste ADDlication
a.
[]Yes ® No
Structure 6
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes ® No
® Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes ® No
10. Are there any buffers that need maintenance/improvement? ❑ Yes ® No
11. Is there evidence of over application? ❑ Excessive Ponding ❑ PAN ❑ Hydraulic Overload ❑ Yes ® No
12. Crop type Corn (Silage & Grain) Fescue (Graze) 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
17. Are rock outcrops present? ❑ Yes ❑ No
18. Is there a water supply well within 250 feet of the sprayfield boundary? ❑ Unknown ❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ On -site ❑ Off -site
Rcuuired Records & Documents
19. Fail to have Certificate of Coverage & General Permit or other Permit readily available? ❑ Yes ® No
20. 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
21. Does record keeping need improvement? (ie/ irrigation, freeboard, waste analysis & soil 'sample reports)
22. Is facility not in compliance with any applicable setback criteria in effect at the time of design?
23. Did the facility fail to have a actively certified operator in charge?
24. Fail to notify regional DWQ of emergency situations as required by General Permit?
(ie/ discharge, freeboard problems, over application)
25. Did Reviewer/Inspector fail to discuss review/inspection with on -site representative?
26. Does facility require a follow-up visit by same agency?
27. Were any additional problems noted which cause noncompliance of the Certified AWMP?
dor Issues
28. 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'?
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes ® No
® Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes ® No
4
29. Are there any dead animals not disposed of properly within 24 hours?
❑ Yes ® No
01/01/01 Continued

Facility Number: 79_5 IJ@d' Inspection 2/22/2001 •
30. Is there any evidence of wind drift during land application? (i.e. residue on neighboring vegetation, asphalt
roads, building structure, and/or public property)
31. Is the land application spray system intake not located near the liquid surface of the lagoon?
32. 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.)
33. Do the animals feed storage bins fail to have appropriate cover?
34. Do the Flush tanks lack a submerged fill pipe or a permanent/temporary.cover?
Printed on: 2/26/2001
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes ❑ No
Q No violations or deficiencies were noted during this visit. You will receive no further correspondence about this visit.
•omments refer to question - : Ex lain an. ESlanswergrand/o any recommendations or any other ommen .
t s drawings of facili6 t belle ex lain . se a ituation udditional pages as ecissa y : El Field Copy ®Final Notes
3. and #S. Stock trails need to be scraped and built up along parts of the berm. Getting some waste, feed, and soil run-off into small
branch. Recommend moving water box and gate panels to aid in the repair of the trail.
27. Owner says they are running over 200 (205-220) about half of the year. Suggest contacting SWCD/NRCS to see if WUP can be
ammended to 230 for milkers.
27. Need to contact SWCD/NRCS: operator's records and maps for waste applied on fields 3,5&6 (66acres) of tract 2923 don't match
those in the charts in the WUP (?).
Reviewer/inspector Name Melissa Rosebrock
Reviewer/Inspector Signature: Date:
01/01/01

Type of Visit O Compliance Inspection O Operation Review O Lagoon Evaluation
Reason for Visit O Routine O Complaint O Follow up O Emergency Notification O Other ❑ Denied Access
Facility Number Dale of Visit: 02 o�{p2 O Time:
10 Not Operational O Below Threshold
IR Permitted ''IICeertiif�ied E3 Conditionally Certified E3Registered Date Last Operat/A or Above Threshold: .........................
Farm Name:/...-10.�/`.t�........:G.�1..1�t.�Ie...... /Farm...............�....,.,..•.................. County:.....f2'��-Je-IAJ6HA.np1...Q..�.......................
Owner Name: .... Qi1.(nn 1..i .. .� .....� JCrY.IL ... Pho e No:.. �J6 ;. ..{..../......9.64?.I......................
T L ... 33�• 309• `6.�s(j� ... • ?�Q �[937
FacilityContact: JS/...f% .'.Q.. I.I...:�r................... Title: ..........................................,..f...................1 Phone No:......_✓....../...!............................
Mailing Address: . `C ........ :GigI vl..de....�•..............................................���:.I[ .u..t..�.!.Q./.... ........a 73.aQ
Onsite Representative:.-JD..�.i1 . ..I.I �Q........................................... Integrator:.......................................................................................
p �Qhli �......PA.....� ... ' 1 � � 1307.
Certified Operator: :............ � ,,,,, „ ® Qom(%„(, ............................... Operator Certification Number................... .,.. ,,,,,,,,,,
Location of Farm:
❑ Swine ❑ Poultry A Cattle ❑ Horse
Design Current
Swine Ca acit Population
❑ Wean to Feeder
❑ Feeder to Finish
❑ Farrow to Wean
❑ Farrow to Feeder
❑ Farrow to Finish
❑ Gilts
❑ Boars
Design Current Design Current
Poultry Capacity Population Cattle Capacity Population
❑ Layer I IM Dairy oZ 0
❑ Non -Layer I x
Non-Dairy
❑ Other
Total Design Capacity �?-j
Total SSLW '; 07, 02.00
Number of Lagoons ❑Subsurface Drains Present ❑ Lagoon Area JEJSpray Field Area
Holding Pon& / Solid Traps r� ❑ 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?
I Were there any adverse impacts or potential adverse impacts to the Waters of the State other than from a discharge?
❑ Yes ANo
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes No
�) Yes ❑ No
01/01/01 Continued

Facility,Number: — � Date of Inspection /a[,;{/dn •
S TI'T
Waste Collection & Treatment
4.
Is storage capacity (freeboard plus storm storage) less than adequate? Spillway
❑ Yes o
XK
Structure 1 Structure 2 Structure 3 Structure 4 Structure 5
Structure 6
Identifier: b..........
�.........
...............................................................................................................................................
r
Freeboard(inches): t, _............................................................................................................................................................
........................................................
5.
Are there any immediate threats to the integrity of any of the structures observed? (ie/ trees, severe erosion,
❑ Yes XNo
seepage, etc.)
-
6.
Are there structures on -site which are not properly addressed and/or managed through a waste management or
closure plan?
❑ Yes Io
(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 _I No
Waste Application
\
10.
Are there any buffers that need maintenance/improvement?
❑ Yes ))4*N o
11.
Is there evidence of over application? ❑ Excessive Ponding ❑ PAN ❑ Hydraulic Overload
❑ Yes XNo
12.
Crop type Om 51
SC Ue Q Ira z� LLI
ra 1 h , �I
13.
Do the receiving crops differ Ah those designated Uthe Certified Animal Wast anagement Ian (CAW4)?
❑ 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?
❑ X Yes No
16.
Is there a lack of adequate waste application equipment?
[]Yes XNo
17.
Are rock outcrops present?
—�—Q'ftr—ET W'
18.
Is there a water supply well within 250 feet of the sprayfield boundary? o fg lkl o
^ kc08
^ Pie
❑ On -site ❑ Off -site
Required
Records & Documents
19.
Fail to have Certificate of Coverage & General Permit or other Permit readily available?
❑ Yes
No
20.
Does the facility fail to have all components of the Certified Animal Waste Management Plan readily available?
Yes
No
(ie/ WUP, checklists, design, maps, etc.)
❑
X
21.
Does record keeping need improvement? (ie/ irrigation, freeboard, waste analysis & soil sample reports)
❑ Yes
No
22.
`Is facility not in compliance with any applicable setback criteria in effect at the time of design?
❑ Yes
No
23.
Did the facility fail to have a actively certified operator in charge?
❑ Yes
I0
24. Fail to notify regional DWQ of emergency situations as required by General Permit?
(ie/ discharge, freeboard problems, over application) ❑ Yes XNo
25. Did Reviewer/Inspector fail to discuss review/inspection with on -site representative? ❑ Yes *0
26. Does facility require a follow-up visit by same agency? ❑ Yes XNo
27. Were any additional problems noted which cause noncompliance of the Certified AWMP? Yes o
Odor Issues
28. 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?
29. Are there any dead animals not disposed of properly within 24 hours? ❑ Yes �] No
01/01/01 Continued

Fa�ilily Number: _ of Inspection
30. Is there any evidence of wind drift during land application? (i.e. residue on neighboring vegetation, asphalt,
roads, building structure, and/or public property)
31. Is the land application spray system intake not located near the liquid surface of the lagoon?
32. 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.)
33. Do the animals feed storage bins fail to have appropriate cover?
34. Do the flush tanks lack a submerged fill pipe or a permanent/temporary cover?
printed on: 1/4/2001
❑ Yes 1® No
El Yes 7/777`"®'No
❑ Yes VNO
o
❑Yes
0 No violations or deficiencies were noted during this visit. You will receive no further correspondence about this visit.
Field Copy V1 Final Notes
No +pvs ; `ire es c to � e+ 7
"t nJ -P�board read i eAss week I�� ?
# N vari thole — +echnigi Ve. ? J
��. C4+►A.c&41'on -Vorrvi eoruple+eJ.
tom,
a�. d OZA&J o200
a c cru
Reviewer/Inspector Name
Reviewer/Inspector Signal
W
Date:
01/01/01

Facility Number 79 5 Dane al' Visit: 8/22/2000 ;Time: 11:00 Printed on: 2/15/2001
0 Not O Perational O Below Threshold
it! Permitted N Certified 0 Conditionally Certified ❑ Registered pIf
ate Last Operated or Above Threshold: .........................
,
Farm Name: !l:,C,.Beyillc.Eai m...................................................................................... County:&Kkiptgbaru ................................... Fl
�........ SRO........
Owner Name: 11,G.,..dAbuuX..CllatleS.....t x llc......................................................... Phone No: �3brJ.A9.:8U8......j.—. Z:�.7...................
FacilityContact: .............................................................................. Title:................................................................ Phone No:...................................................
Mailing Address: 2A4...ev111e.aivad................................................................................. Hiej Y.M.C...N.C....................................................... 2.7.3211..............
Onsite Representative: .1011tUtY...f}.f:XAllf;........................................................................... Integrator:......................................................................................
Certified Operator:JR1[ul)y...is ............................... ogy..ille............................................... Operator Certification Number: 213Q..7.............................
Location of Farm:
Corner of SR 2428 and 2427 and 11 miles out of Reidsville NC US 29 at Rockingham and Guilford County line 3 miles on the
right.
[]Swine []Poultry ®Cattle []Horse Latitude 36 • 15 18 Longitude 79 • 42 42
�`' , �"n De Is g i 4 Cur"" eat � ' Design Cur eat +tl f! �,' Deslgng.,' Cu`�rr�`enf
iSwme, ` + t "1'' Ca acit y P,o :ulation Poultry Ca acit Po ulation ,, Cattle Ca )aclapaci
<.t P,o ulationa`;
❑ Wean to Feeder ❑Layer ® Dairy 200
❑ Feeder to Finish IN Non -Dairy 34
"• ❑ Farrow to Wean -
❑Farrow to Feeder
❑ Other �4 4x '.,'.
❑ Farrow to Finish Total Design Capacity 234
❑ Gilts
_ ❑ Boars v tat6SIy1 307,200
!! Number, of Lagoons ❑ Subsurface Drains Present 10 Lagoon Area ❑ Spray Field Area
111
Holding Ponds / Solid Traps [ No Liquid Waste Management System
Discharge; X 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. It'dischurge 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 X Treatment
4. Is storage capacity (freeboard plus storm storage) less than adequate'? ® Spillway
❑ Yes
®No
Structure I Structure 2 Structure 3 Structure 4 Structure 5
Structure 6
Identifier: ............ Upper ............ ........... Lower ............ ................................... .................................... ....................................
....................................
Freeboard (inches): 42 48
5100
Continued
on back

.a
Facility Number: 79-5 Date of Inspection 8/22/2000 Printed on: 2/15/2001
5. Are there any immediate threats to the int my of any of the structures observed? (ie/ trees, are 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 A pplication
10. Are there any buffers that need maintenance/improvement? ❑ Yes ® No
11. Is there evidence of over application? ❑ Excessive Ponding ❑ PAN ❑ Hydraulic Overload ❑ Yes ® No
12. Crop type Com (Silage & Grain) Fescue (Graze) Small Grain (Wheat, Barley,
13. Do the receiving crops differ with those designated in the Certified Animal Waste Management Plan (CAWMP)? ❑ Yes IN No
14. a) Does the facility lack adequate acreage for land application? ❑ Yes ® No
b) Does the facility need a wettable acre determination? ❑ Yes ❑ No
c) This facility is pended for a wettable acre determination? ❑ Yes ❑ No
15. Does the receiving crop need improvement?
16. Is there a lack of adequate waste application equipment?
Required Records & Documents
17. Fail to have Certificate of Coverage & General Permit readily available?
18. Does the facility fail to have all components of the Certified Animal Waste Management Plan readily available?
(ie/ WUP, checklists, design, maps, etc.)
19. Does record keeping need improvement? (ie/ irrigation, freeboard, waste analysis & soil sample reports)
20. Is facility not in compliance with any applicable setback criteria in effect at the time of design?
21. Did the facility fail to have a actively certified operator in charge?
22. Fail to notify regional DWQ of emergency situations as required by General Permit?
(ie/ discharge, freeboard problems, over application)
23. Did Reviewer/inspector fail to discuss review/inspection with on -site representative?
24. Does facility require a follow-up visit by same agency?
25. Were any additional problems noted which cause noncompliance of the Certified AWMP?
0 No giolatiQns.. deticiene�e$ were:noted:durigg this: visif::You:will receive nt. ftirthe.: •:
corresaolidence: Aod this:vlsd. :
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes ® No
[]Yes ® No
[]Yes ® No
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes ® No
[]Yes ® No
Records and facility look good.
� 7. Need to cut some small trees on the WSP embankment before the become a problem.
Y 19. Start keeping levels on the holding ponds per the General Permit requirements.
Waste analysis: 5/24/00 LSD 6.4 Ibs/1000 gals. SI, 3/14/00 LSD 9.6 lbs./1000 gals. SI, 2/28/00 LSD 1.6lbs./ 1000 gals. SI, 1.6
bs./ 1000 gals. I , 9/23/99 LSD 9.5 lbs./1000 gals. SI
Reviewer/Inspector Name ^,Rocky Durham
Reviewer/Inspector Signature: Date: 5100

Facility Number: ol'Inspection 8/22/2000 • Printed ono 2/15/2001
( die 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
rMiditiUR-511C66-m—men an or mwmg
5100
5100

Facility Number 79 OS Date of Inspection 3/10/2000
Time of Inspection 1110 24 hr. (hh:mm)
® Permitted ® Certified 13 Conditionally Certified 1] Registered Not O erational Date Last Operated: ..........................
Farm Name: WX....1{.exilIAXArm...................................................................................... County: Rackinshatilt................................... WSIaQ........
t
Owner Name: W,C,,.dohtaatx..Charlrs... H.exitlle......................................................... Phone No: 33b-3.99..-B8U8.�1 FeL!1¢A ...... 4,,:kj�,DVNP.•
Facility Contact: 3alMY.Her219..............................................Title: OPer.9tiar ........................................... Phone No: 33b34.9..49
MailingAddress: 240.2h:x lkRogad................................................................................. Rj&y.ille..N..C....................................................... 2.7.3211 .............
Onsite Representative: JOhilay..Bexllic........................................................................... Integrator:
Certified Operator:,1o10Ua0:..R.............................. DR.Y.111P .............................................. Operator Certification Number:ZIJ.9.7 .............................
Location of Farm:
Latitude 36 *=I F 18 Longitude F 79 • 42 42
Design Current
Ca acit P,o tulation
Design Current Design Current
Poultry Ce acit B $o ulation Cattle Ca tacit P,o tulation
o Feeder
❑Layer
® Dairy
200
200
to Finish
❑Non -Layer
® Non -Dairy
34
25
to Wean to Feeder
rrOFeeder
Total Design Capacity 234
Total SSI W 307,200
to Finish
❑ Boars
Number of Lagoons 0
Holding Ponds /Solid Traps
❑Subsurface Drains Present ❑ Lagoon Area ❑Spray Field Area
❑ No Liquid Waste Management System
Discharges & Stream Impacts -
1. Is any discharge observed from any part of the operation? - ❑ Yes ® No
Discharge originated at: ❑ Lagoon ❑ Spray Field ❑ Other
a. If discharge is observed, was the conveyance man-made? ❑ Yes ❑ No
b. If discharge is observed, did it reach Water of the State'? (If yes, notify DWQ) ❑ Yes ❑ No
c. If discharge is observed, what is the estimated flow in gal/min?
d. Does discharge bypass a lagoon system? (If yes, notify DWQ) ❑ Yes ❑ No
2. Is there evidence of past discharge from any part of the operation? ❑ Yes ® No
3. Were there any adverse impacts or potential adverse impacts to the Waters of the State other than from a discharge? ❑ Yes ® No
Waste Collection & Treatment
4. Is storage capacity (freeboard plus storm storage) less than adequate? ❑ Spillway ❑ Yes ® No
Structure I Structure 2 Structure 3 Structure 4 Structure 5 Structure 6
Identifier: Secondary Primary
Freeboard(inches): ...............4.8...............................48...............................................................................................................................................................
5. Are there any immediate threats to the integrity of any of the structures observed? (ie/ trees, severe erosion, ❑ Yes ® No
seepage, etc.)
3/23/99 Continued on back
Printed on 3/20/2000
-27510 vft-

Facility Number: 79-05 I
6. Are there structures on -site which are no operly addressed and/or managed through a wvmf Inspection
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 Fescue (Graze) Corn (Silage & Grain) Small Grain (Wheat, Barley,
3/10/2000
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?
®' No viola,titins:or deficiencie$ were:noteil:during•this; vigi'L'Y6u:wi11 iecelve hd f'irth:er,
corresnotidence. abouf this.vlsit........... ............. .
application is still in-house.
sample sent 3/7/00. Application dates were 2/10, 2/24, and 3/8/00.
Reviewer/Inspector Name (Melissa Rosebrock Mike
Reviewer/Inspector Signature: WAWA
Date:
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes ® No
[]Yes ® No
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes ® No
[]Yes ® No
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes ® No
on

Facility Number: 79-05 1 f Inspection 3/10/2000 •
Odor Issues
26.
Does the discharge pipe from the confinement building to the storage pond or lagoon fail to discharge at/or below
❑ Yes
IN 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
Printed on 3/20/2000

.,
Olhvision of atid�Water Conservation Comp.
i `)EfDtvision of Water:Quality - Compliance Inspectir
OOthe;Agency„OperationRgvrew?r'rr .,
l=outme O Complaint O Follow-up of DWQ inspection O Follow-up of DSWC review Q Other 1
Facility Number-- Date of Inspection Q
Time of Inspection Q= 24 hr. (hh:mm)
0 Permitted�Certified 0 Conditionally Certified [3 Registered [3 Not Operational Date Last Operated: __,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
Farm Name: .._1 ' .!. .!......7— U.....l....�......�.11 �-.!^_.m...............�.....................1. County: .... .2.......�/!` �.n�..�mQ..Q...........................
Owner Name: _ .".C....a..�. ro.il.h.t,t�_.[.r.[K1X�Q:.�.......h/^J�...e,.V . ).e-Phone No:.....J... ..k°.'.......... .�... V..!i.® .................
Facility Contact: m4nA ..A...:.......tgeM..J..l ........ Title: l:/pe. ofa.1'........................... Phone No: A....... .. -. -- 33
�.......p� I I nJ _ " I
MailingAddress:........_a..q........ti 7.fwA%I..I.t.Q...... ..1...../C..1Lf.%.I.1..I...J...l.11.L...a.J............ ..........................
Onsite Representative:
-................,....................................................................... Integrator:......................................................................................
Certified Operator:..-T'0 n.n.�.......PIts.VI.ie.................................................. Operator Certification Number:.....,�Z.,.I,��,
Location of Farm:
Latitude
Swine
®` ®.,
Design','; ' Current'
:Caplk: � Population
er
❑ Wean to Feed
❑ Feeder to Finish
❑ Farrow to Wean
❑ Farrow to Feeder
❑ Farrow to Finish
❑ Gilts
❑ Boars
Longitude �' ®' ��,
Design -Current• .1
Poultry Capacity -Population Cattle;
— r r r t
iotai uesigmt apac
Total SSL
❑ Subsurface Drains Present ❑ Lagoon Area
..-..
Discharges & Stream Impacts
1. Is any discharge observed from any part of the operation?
Discharge originated at: []Lagoon ❑ Spray Field ❑ Other
a. If discharge is observed, was the conveyance man-made?
b. If discharge is observed, did it reach Water of the State? (If yes, notify DWQ)
c. If discharge is observed, what is the estimated flow in gal/min'?
d. Does discharge bypass a lagoon system? (II'yes, notify DWQ)
2. Is there evidence of past discharge from any part of the operation?
3. Were there any adverse impacts or potential adverse impacts to the Waters of the State other than from a discharge.
Waste Collection & Treatment
4. Is storage capacity (freeboard plus storm storage) less than adequate? ❑ Spillway
Structure I Structure 2 Structure 3 Structure 4 Structure 5
Identifier: SQL ,111 �! pr,mj�o-N
Freeboard(inches): ............t`...............................................,U......... ................................... .................................... .................................... .......
❑ Yes ONO
❑ Yes ❑ No
[]Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes )4No
❑ Yes QC] No
❑ Yes No
Structure
5. Are there any immediate threats to the integrity of any of the structures observed? (ie/ trees, severe erosion, t ❑ Yes XNo
3/23/99 ) 0 seepage, etc.) Continued on back

' Facility Number: — Q •of Inspection
6. Are there structures on -site which are moroperly 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?
❑ Yes
4 No
❑ Yes
Willa
❑ Yes
XNo
9. Do any stuctures lack adequate, gauged markers with required maximum and minimum liquid level �f
elevation markings? []Yes p(J No
Waste Application / `
10. Are there any buffers that need maintenance/improvement? ////n ❑ Yes No
11. Is there evidence
f of over application? ❑ Excessive Pending
�❑y-PAN G.,Ar�"E,C-Ue- COO(C{W_ yes No
12. Crop type C c 1� j Lc)h �+ (a uk-rI 11..)"` —_U J 1 K -Rmt n .�
13.
Do the receiving crops differ with those designated in the Certified Animal Wlaste Manage' t nt 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 readily available?
❑ Yes
Q�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
o
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?
❑ Yeso
21.
Did the facility fail to have a actively certified operator in charge?
❑ Yeso
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
1
24.
Does facility require afollow-up visit by same agency?
❑Yes
25.
Were any additional problems noted which cause noncompliance of the Certified AWMP?
❑ Yes
������////r
(gNo
/ ``
tVo•Yigla(ititis;oi• il$fjciencies •iv$re ppte$•iluring thjs;visit;• Y�oil Wili•Xecgiye do Furthgr ; •; •
F.corresporidence:aboutahis:visit
::::::..... :::::::::::::::::::::::
se drawtn'gs Hof factbty �to better ezplam situations (use;additimm "pages as�necessary): `� ' `; � � � ;; ,, �' „ aj;' °', •{
Perrvu+ of ppli Cdchon is Skill in- ho��2
Ste+ oK was+e_ k orl 3?�06 — y p� 1 CO&I or)
44�
Reviewer/Inspector Name 2� �sSes_ 4.4.I. i . *
Reviewer/InspectorSignature: ItWA411 1n M Date: /S- minin

' Facility Number: — S l�of Inspection Q 0 QO •
Odor Issues
26. Does the discharge pipe from the confinement building to the storage pond or lagoon fail to discharge at/or below ❑ Yes KNo
liquid level of lagoon or storage pond with no agitation?
27. Are there any dead animals not disposed of properly within 24 hours? ❑ Yes VNo
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 XNo
30. Were any major maintenance problems with the ventilation fan(s) noted? (i.e. broken fan belts, missing or
or broken fan blade(s), inoperable shutters, etc.) ❑ Yes No
31. Do the animals feed storage bins fail to have appropriate cover? El Yes X[N0
32. Do the Flush tanks lack a submerged fill pipe or a permanent/temporary cover? ❑ Yes KI No
ttiona ;,-omments an or° rawmgs: . y ,. z I,� z tip. C ., i„ . ' ;5.: 's F I.w ' ' „I J�,, I ,i , �. y;-'r : .,

Facility Number 79 5 Date of Inspection
6/29/99
Date
Time of Inspection 0900 24 hr. (hh:mm)
13 Permitted ® Certified E3 Conditionally Certified 13 Registered Not O erational Date Last Operated: ..........................
Farm Name: W.C..OevillcIarm........................................................................................ County: Ritckiugham.................................... WS.RQ........
Owner Name: W.C..,lohnnybarles...kyllle......................................................... Phone No: 9,1.0.44MAJO...........................................................
FacilityContact:JOhniny.09Y.1119..............................................Title:................................................................ Phone No:...................................................
Mailing Address: 240..Bcyille.lid...................................................................................... Rej&y.A1c.N.0 ........................................................ 273M .............
OnsiteRepresentative: Ju110.0J.Bexllle........................................................................... Integrator:......................................................................................
Certified Operator:jobjaRy..R.............................. 0R.Y.illc .............................................. Operator Certification Number:ZI3.0,7 .............................
Location of Farm:
Latitude F 36 • IS IS Longitude 79 • 42 42
t
Designs Current;-
r m"
Design, "CurrentDesign
'- ice..
+C'urrent "
*£ .. h ,R�s 41
Swine,t.`
Ca acit ,P.o ulation
Poultr +
Y Ca acit Po ulation
a
Cattle Ca actfiP,oiulationr,
� ❑ Wean to Feeder
❑Layer ®Dairy 200 190
k; ❑ Feeder to Finish
❑Non-Layeri ®Non -Dairy 34
❑ Farrow to Wean
❑ Farrow to Feeder
❑Other } �:� r ��;: .x.i
et
❑ Farrow to Finish
T,ottil Design Capacity. 234:
,
Total SSLW 307.200
❑ Gilts
❑ Boars
Number of Lagoons2 1[] Subsurface Drains Present ❑ Lagoon Area ❑ Spray Field Area
MH61di!-I—g]PU-n-d-s7/IS61iiikTiL—ap:sjI ❑ No Liquid Waste Management System
Dischames&Stream Impacts
Is any discharge observed from any part of the operation?
Discharge originated at: ❑ Lagoon ❑ Spray Field ❑ Other
a. If discharge is observed, was the conveyance man-made?
b. If discharge is observed, did it reach Water of the State? (If yes, notify DWQ)
c. If discharge is observed, what is the estimated Flow in gal/min?
d. Does discharge bypass a lagoon system? (If yes, notify DWQ)
2. Is there evidence of past discharge from any part of the operation?
3. Were there any adverse impacts or potential adverse impacts to the Waters of the State other than from a discharge?
Waste Collection&Treatment
4. Is storage capacity (freeboard plus storm storage) less than adequate? ❑ Spillway
Identifier:
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes ® No
Structure 1 Structure 2 Structure 3 Structure 4 Structure 5 Structure 6
Freeboard (inches): ..............3Q...............................5.4................
5. Are there any immediate threats to the integrity of any of the structures observed? (ie/ trees, severe erosion,
seepage, etc.)
3/23/99
❑ Yes ® No
Continued on back

Facility Number: 79-5 1 0 Da f Inspection 6/29/99
6. Are there structures on -site which are not properly addressed and/or managed through a wanagement 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 I@ No
9. Do any stuctures lack adequate, gauged markers with required maximum and minimum liquid level
elevation markings? ❑ Yes ® No
Waste
10.
Application
Are there any buffers that need maintenance/improvement?
❑ Yes
®No
It.
Is there evidence of over application? ❑ Excessive Ponding ❑ PAN
❑ Yes
®No
12.
Crop type Com (Silage & Grain)
13.
Do the receiving crops differ with those designated in the Certified Animal Waste Management Plan (CAWMP)?
❑ Yes
®No
14.
a) Does the facility lack adequate acreage for land application?
❑ Yes
® No
b) Does the facility need a wettable acre determination?
❑ Yes
®No
c) This facility is pended for a wettable acre determination?
❑ Yes
® No
15.
Does the receiving crop need improvement?
❑ Yes
®No
16.
Is there a lack of adequate waste application equipment?
❑ Yes
® No
Required
17.
Records & Documents
Fail to have Certificate of Coverage & General Permit readily available?
❑ Yes
®No
18.
Does the facility fail to have all components of the Certified Animal Waste Management Plan readily available?
(ie/ WUP, checklists, design, maps, etc.)
❑ Yes
®No
19.
Does record keeping need improvement? (ie/ irrigation, freeboard, waste analysis & soil sample reports)
❑ Yes
®No
20.
Is facility not in compliance with any applicable setback criteria in effect at the time of design?
❑ Yes
® No
21.
Did the facility fail to have a actively certified operator in charge?
❑ Yes
®No
22.
Fail to notify regional DWQ of emergency situations as required by General Permit?
(ie/ discharge, freeboard problems, over application)
❑ Yes
®No
23.
Did Reviewer/Inspector fail to discuss review/inspection with on -site representative?
❑ Yes
®No
24.
Does facility require a follow-up visit by same agency?
❑ Yes
®No
25.
Were any additional problems noted which cause noncompliance of the Certified AWMP?
❑ Yes
® No
3/23/99

, [3 Division of nd Water;Cllnservati6n O ¢ration Revt I.�ri 1 ! ! P i
Division of and WateeSConservatl011y Compliance Iris On GIdDivisi�nof
i tl' Other AgenWatOperahton ltevewhance Inspectionjl
Routine 0 Complaint 0 Follow-up of DWQ inspection 0 Follow -tip of DSWC review 0 Other
Facility Number Date of Inspection
[Time or Inspection ot7 24 hr. (hh:mm)
13 Permitted //.. Certified /Q0 Conditionally Certified [3 Registered Not Operational] Date Last Operated:
Farm Name: W, .... V. 11 .............................................. Co _fir -.4Z., �h+ C, 2U/ Q o L
............... ......................................... ......
Owner Name: W ..� .:...1 i {V_(.�LK...-i SJ/%5..........................)................ Phone No6;30 _9T %� e aog
.........................
Facility Contact:,?.A./l/.+�/.:�..-r.V...�. .........................Title:................................. .................. Phone No:.........................
Mailing Address:.... !:. ... .....5�..%.l.l .........I �: f.RiS.�././!`..L"..0 >73 "L o
-.. %�........................................................ .. r........................I...........
Onsite Representative:
�xl..P...�IU/.!llr.]........ 69.V!/ilt............................................ Integrator:............................................................,
Certified Operator•.[1;,(„ /tJf✓. ././....(],-Q.V)f.( ....... % ,,,,, ,,,,,,, Operator :tor Certification Number;,,, ,,,
Location of Farm: (.3 &kl V., n r{t _�w Z721J I B� V I Air Ra )Ov d St %t% �'7 1 J er
0
Latitude ®•®' I I V I - Longitude ®•®' ®'°
W— 1
g lYesign Current Desi n Current
j_iesi n urrent g
„Swme,�t 1 Capacity Population Poultry" . Ca Sicity Po'iulat on ' . Cattle` CapacityPo mlatioit li
❑ Wean to Feeder ❑Layer ❑Dairy 9
❑ Feeder to Finish ❑Non -Layer ❑ Non Dairy '
❑ Farrow CO Wean Ipl ';01I r
❑ Farrow to Feeder ❑ Other
❑ Farrow to Finish
Total Design Capacity
r! ❑ Gilts
❑ Boars Total SSLW����
I ❑ Subsurface Drains Present ❑ Lagoon Area ❑Spray Field Area ':
iNumber" of Lagoons �,. - 0 i �' ` , t:
HoldmgLPonds / Solid Traps ❑ No Liquid Waste Management System '
Discharges & Stream Impacts
1. Is any discharge observed from any part of the operation?
Discharge originated aC ❑ Lagoon ❑ Spray Field ❑ Other
a. If discharge is observed, was the conveyance man-made?
b. If discharge is observed, did it reach Water of the State? (If yes, notify DWQ)
c. If discharge is observed, what is the estimated flow in gal/min?
d. Does discharge bypass a lagoon system? (If yes, notify DWQ)
2. Is there evidence of past discharge from any part of the operation?
3. Were there any adverse impacts or potential adverse impacts to the Waters of the State other than from a discharge?
Waste Collection & Treatment
4. Is storage capacity (freeboard plus storm storage) less than adequate? ❑ Spillway
Structure I Structure 2 Structure 3 Structure 4 Structure 5
Identifier: tt �11
Freeboard(inches): .... ......................... ..................................................................................................... ...........................
5. Are there any immediate threats to the integrity of any of the structures observed? (ie/ trees, severe erosion,
seepage, etc.)
❑ Yes XNo
[]Yes XNo
[]Yes JVNo
❑ Yes ENO
o
❑ Yes
❑ Yeso
❑Yes 5No
Structure 6
❑ Yes No
ContinuedYnback
3/23/99

Facility Number: — S ofinspection
p
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
)Io
8.
Does any part of the waste management system other than waste structures require maintenance/improvement?
❑ Yes
No
GGGGGG''A
9.
Do any stuctures lack adequate, gauged markers with required maximum and minimum liquid level
elevation markings?
❑ Yes
0 Vo
Waste Application
1
10.
Are there any buffers that need maintenance/improvement?
❑ Yes
No
11.
Is there evidence of over application? ❑ Excessive Ponding ❑ PAN
❑ Yes
o
12.
Crop type C0RN
CCC������//////
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
9No
c) This facility is pended for a wettable acre determination?
❑ Yes
F040
15.
Does the receiving crop need. improvement?
❑ Yes
No
16.
Is there a lack of adequate waste application equipment?
❑ Yes
Jo
Required
Records & Documents
17.
Fail to have Certificate of Coverage & General Permit readily available?
❑ Yes
KNo
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
1
20.
Is facility not in compliance with any applicable setback criteria in effect at the time of design?
❑ Yes
21.
Did the facility fail to have a actively certified operator in charge?
❑ Yes
t�pq]p/'o
fXI No
22.
Fail to notify regional DWQ of emergency situations as required by General Permit?
(ie/ discharge, freeboard problems, over application)
❑ Yes
E;�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
teNo
F7Lr7k7L•

Facility Number: — 1 9 f 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
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
o
28.
Is there any evidence of wind drift during land appJicatiopv (i.e. r/idue pn neighboring vegetation, asphalt,
roads, building structure, and/or public property) L / Sri ! 1 e�L ,o q t q j l
❑ Yes
o
29.
Is the land application spray system intake not located near the liquid surface of the lagoon?
❑ Yes
yd ryo
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
N "o
32.
Do the flush tanks lack a submerged fill pipe or a permanent/temporary cover?
❑ Yes
1I0
tttona omments and/orDrawings: ' ' "} '., "b
C
3/23/99

of Soilll Water Conservation ❑ Other
of Water Quality
4 M
Date of Inspection
I I Time of Inspection � 24 hr. (hh:mm)
0 Registered Certified E3 Applied for Permit E3 Permitted JE3 Not Operational I Date Last Operated:
Farm Name:..................... 2.V[_ /............ ///v((! ............................... County; .... .....�L. !t1%�r/!/A ...............................
'- l , . Z.QV(./&.......Bl�!..G(... U.. �!%5.................. Phone No:. to�
OwnerName:..3!�.:. .........p /-`..I...L.. .._gd......................
Facility Contact);I v y....!s wlle................................... Title:...........................................q..................... Phone No:....................
aYo &V.I./he RV 2%tllsl/e �t% C,
MailingAddress: .....................�..................................Q................................................................................................................................
Onsite Representative:....." �...� N?!U.......4C.V..t/.!//.�................................... Integrator:......................................................................................
LJ .. fie V / Ac. _.......... Operator Certification Nnmber:.......... Certified Operator:....nn...11.....!!.......`........................................................./....../...............................
Location of Farm: C o 2�ve2 -)rP SV XV-2-9 t An,,? //a
i,
i
Latitude ®' ©'" Longitude ©' �'
Design Pap
"; Design Current ; , Design," Current`
;$wine Capactty�-Population Pouhry L,Capacity`Population -,Cattle , , Capacity Population
❑ Wean to Feeder ❑Layer ID Dairy
- ❑ Feeder to Finish 10 Non -Layer I I JLJ Non -Dairy
❑ Farrow to Wean
, ❑Farrow to Feeder ❑ Other ,-9;-
❑ Farrow to Finish
Total Desilpf Capacityl
❑ Boars Total SSLW'
Q-. ,.,
Number.,oPLagains.lHoldmg Ponds 0 ❑ Subsurface Drains Present ❑ Lagoon Area ❑ Spray Field Area
Al
❑ No Liquid Waste Management System p
General
1. Are there any buffers that need maintenance/improvement?
❑ Yes
No
2. Is any discharge observed from any part of the operation?
❑ Yes
gNo
Discharge originated at: ❑ Lagoon ❑ Spray Field ❑ Other
a. If discharge is observed, was the conveyance man-made?
❑ Yes
❑ No
b. If discharge is observed, did it reach Surface Water? (If yes, notify DWQ)
❑ Yes
❑ No
c. if discharge is observed, what is the estimated Flow in gaUmin?
d. Does discharge bypass a lagoon system? (If yes, notify DWQ)
❑ Yes
No
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
No
mai menance/improvement?
6. Is facility not in compliance with any applicable setback criteria in effect at the time of design?
❑ Yes
[ o
7. Did the facility fail to have a certified operator in responsible charge?
❑ Yes
( jN0
�
7/25/97 9� //- a - 7
J

Faciliit,Number — 5 1.
•Are
there lagoons or storage ponds on site which need to be properly closed?
❑ Yes 1! rLNo
Structures (Lagoons,Holdine Ponds. Flush Pits, etc.)
9.
Is storage capacity (freeboard plus storm storage) less than adequate?
❑ Yes XNo
1 Structure 2 Structure 3 Structure 4 Structure 5
Structure 6
�^ ,St,r,u,c,,ture
Identifier: �"""'7'-"K / 'PL,
....................................... .....�..................... .................................... ................................... ...............................................................
Freeboard(ft)
I......
:.............U.......................................................................................................................................................................................................
10.
Is seepage observed from any of the structures?
❑ Yes *0
11.
Is erosion, or any other threats to the integrity of any of the structures observed?
❑ Yes P No
12.
Do any of the structures need maintenance/improvement?
❑ Yes ONO
(If any of questions 9-12 was answered yes, and the situation poses
an immediate public health or environmental threat, notify DWQ)
13.
Do any of the structures lack adequate minimum or maximum liquid level markers?
❑ Yes kNo
Waste Application
14.
Is there physical evidence of over application?
❑ Yes �Io
(If in excess of WNW, or runoff entering waters of the State, notify DWQ)
15.
Crop type B...............................................................................................................................................................................................................
16.
Do the receiving crops diff8r with those designated in the Animal Waste Management Plan (AWMP)?
❑ Yes � 'No
17.
Does the facility have a lack of adequate acreage for land application?
❑ Yes /k3 No
18.
Does the receiving crop need improvement?
❑ Yes b No
19.
Is there a lack of available waste application equipment?
❑ Yes o
20.
Does facility require a follow-up visit by same agency?
❑ Yes No
21.
Did Reviewer/inspector fail to discuss review/inspection with on -site representative?
❑ Yes )6 No
22.
Does record keeping need improvement?
❑ YesI No
For Certified or Permitted Facilities Only
23.
Does the facility fail to have a copy of the Animal Waste Management Plan readily available?
❑ Yes No
24.
Were any additional problems noted which cause noncompliance of the Certified AWMP?
❑ Yes( No
25.
Were any additional problems noted which cause noncompliance of the Permit?
❑ Yes ;dNO
F
No.violationi,or deficiencies,wen h6teddudng this.visit. You.will receivenafurtlier.
correspondettce about this:visit: ;
l0 fR-,4k(P-MS 062L)ek
7/25/97

Routine O Com taint 0 Follow-ug of DWQ inspection V Follow-up of US W C review V Other
Facility Number Dale of Inspection 21 d.fl�
[Time of Inspection Gj' c o
0 Registered E3 Certified E3 Applied for Permit 13 Permitted 0 Not Operational Date Last Operated:
FarmName: .............................................................................................................................. County: ..%. a<e.I!kff....t &&,....
OwnerName: ................................................... ........................................................................ Phone No:...........................................................
FacilityContact: .............................................................................. Title:................................................................ Phone No:........................
NH
OffMce
MailingAddress: ..................�....—............................./...............................................................................................................,.............................................................
OnsiteRepresentative: .... : lC�..i.A/....... ... L............................. Integrator: ......................................................................................
Certified Operator:............................................................................................................... Operator Certification Number .........................................
Location of Farm:
Latitude =*==" Longitude =• 0' 01'
Design � Current, i.. z esign Currents ?po Design :.Current
z.
Swore S�Capacity,.Population. 4 Capacity Poophition'," Cattle,, Capacity Population';I
. ,,.
,-Poultry
❑ Wean to Feeder , ❑Layer airy
❑ Feeder to Finish ILI Non -Layer 1 11, ❑ Non -Dairy
'
�Y :,.1p. -ate R.�w-.;•rq. '. is fa x'Y. Fa}-�*rr < 1 a', •^'µE
❑ Farrow to Wean
❑Other,
❑ Farrow to Feeder a
❑ Farrow to Finish §Total DeSIgnCapaCi yM
❑ Gilt$ i s�'�E .. F ✓}3A•?I'
❑Boars tt° Total SSLW.
Number of Lagoons / Holding Pontls ❑ Subsurface Drains Present ❑ Lagoon Area ❑ Spray Field Area
s ❑ No Liquid Waste Management System
e./
General
I. Are there any buffers that need maintenance/improvement?
❑ Yes
No
2. Is any discharge observed from any part of the operation?
❑ Yes]
No
Discharge originated at: ❑ Lagoon ❑ Spray Field ❑ Other
a. If discharge is observed, was the conveyance man-made?
❑ Yes
No
b. If discharge is observed, did it reach Surface Water? (If yes, notify DWQ)
❑ Yes
No
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
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
o
5. Does any part of the waste management system (other than lagoons/holding ponds) require
❑ Yeso
F
main tenancelimprovement?
6. Is facility not in compliance with any applicable setback criteria in effect at the time of design?
❑ Yes
❑'No
7. Did the facility fail to have a certified operator in responsible charge?
❑ Yes
❑,No

Facility Number: / —
8. Are there lagoons or storage ponds on site which need to be properly closed?
❑ Yes EyNo
Structures (Lagoons Holding Ponds, Flush Pits. etc.)
9. Is storage capacity (freeboard plus storm storage) less than adequate?
❑ Yes No
tructure 1 Structure 2 Structure 3 Structure 4 Structure 5
Struc re 6
Identifier:h.............. ..... .......
Freeboard (ft): ............ ................U.............. r................. ................................... .................................... ....................................
.
............................. _.....
10. Is seepage observed from any of the structures?
❑ Yes/d No
11. Is erosion, or any other threats to the integrity of any of the structures observed?
❑ Yes /JNo
12. Do any of the structures need maintenance/improvement?
❑ Yes UNo
(If any of questions 9-12 was answered yes, and the situation poses
an immediate public health or environmental threat, notify DWQ)
13. Do any of the structures lack adequate minimum or maximum liquid level markers?
❑ Yes (YIo
/�
Waste Application
❑ Yes No
14. Is there physical evidence of over application?
(If in excess of WMP, or runoff entering waters
Ao,f,,the State, notify DWQ)
%ct
15. Crop type ..�.��_K ti........ l r .....�L CDs.0.......................................................................................................................................
16. Do the receiving crops differ with those designated in the Animal Waste Management Plan (AWMP)?
❑ Yes Elk<o
ANo
17. Does the facility have a lack of adequate acreage for land application?
❑ Yes
18. Does the receiving crop need improvement?
❑ Yes 0-'No
19. Is there a lack of available waste application equipment?
❑ Yes No
20. Does facility require a follow-up visit by same agency?
❑ Yes
21. Did Reviewer/Inspector fail to discuss review/inspection with on -site representative?
❑ Yes EI'Ko
22. Does record keeping need improvement?
❑ Yes
For Certified or Permitted Facilities Only
23. Does the facility fail to have a copy of the Animal Waste Management Plan readily available? ❑ Yes j�No
24. Were any additional problems noted which cause noncompliance of the -Certified AWMP? ❑ Yes F No
25. Were any additional problems noted which cause noncompliance of the Permit? - ❑ Yes �No
No.violitions or deficiencies.were noted during this:visit. You4il} receive ito further
cbrrOpbndence about this:visit: :
l6• K�c�tie.�nE�
q Pt 4A7, 0tNG- W l'uA,,s d-- WEB
S ",07 -1- (�(/ /
7/25/97
Reviewer/Inspector Name R
/w -Ai...
Date: �1 /2:2_/47 i. I/

Facility Number
Farm Status:Registered ❑ Applied for Permit
Certified ❑ Permitted
❑ Not Operational Date Last( Operated: ...........
Farm Name: ........V L ._ l...... QQ U.. ............Y..... Q ...............
Land Owner Name:.,.,�.2x. ;:..:.....1 .4 V.,'..I�Q .....%lN...v..��.N 5
r�N 1l .
Facility Conctact:.................. Title:.:...�?..�.... .. �................ v..!....... �`
Date of Inspection IT7 u
Time of Inspection DO / 24 hr. (hh:mm)
Total Time (in fraction of hours
(ex:1.25 for I hr 15 min)) Spent on Review 0
or Inspection (includes travel and nrocessinpl
Mailing Address:........ QL�....yf.�.:!..��.Q:....:................................................
Onsite Representative: _. =�..!...A/r"'' II Q
..........................._........_I`....... ...............................
.
Certified Operator:. .�.....................Q V, i � �............. _........_............
Location of Farm: `'o a e2 2 l LA (ri>✓
county: ..... &R. CA t
Phone No:
181
Phone N( 9/ ()).3 y `�.... Y 9 3�.......
s� �._I I ev. c , 173.2-0 .
__... ...._..../...........................................
Integrator:
Operator Certification Number: ..................
mOes Azo.4, &;kc✓ ; IL
Latitude Longitude ®' LLY I. r 111'
General
1. Are there any buffers that need maintenance/improvement? ❑ Yes XNo
2. Is any discharge observed from any part of the operation? ❑ Yes VNo
Discharge originated at: ❑ Lagoon ❑ Spray field ❑ Other
a. If discharge is observed, was the conveyance man-made? ❑ Yes No
b. If discharge is observed, did it reach Surface Water? (If yes, notify DWQ) ❑ Yes o
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
3. Is there evidence of past discharge from any part of the operation? ❑ YesS6No
4. Were there any adverse impacts to the waters of the State other than from a discharge? ❑ Yes' o
5. Does any part of the waste management system (other than lagoons/holding ponds) require ❑ Yes�jNo /
maintenance/improvement? lI✓/
4/30/97 Continu d on back

Facility Number: ......---- —..bS_
6. ,Is facility not in compliance with any a$able setback criteria in effect at the time of *? ❑ Yes b No
• 7. Did the facility fail to have a certified operator in responsible charge? ❑ Yes t6 No
8. Are there lagoons or storage ponds on site which need to be properly closed? ❑ Yes �flsIo
Structures (Lavoons and/or IfoldinE Ponds)
9. Is storage capacity (freeboard plus storm storage) less than adequate? ❑ Yes o
Freeboard (ft): Str .cure I Structure 2 Structure 3 Structure 4 Structure 5 Structure 6
. ............._. ................ _.......... .... _.................... .................. _........
10. Is seepage observed from any of the structures? ❑ Yes No
11. Is erosion, or any other threats to the integrity of any of the structures observed? ❑ Yes E�,No
12. Do any of the structures need maintenance/improvement? ❑ Yes �fNo
(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 sgr 5t�es lackadequateminimum or maximum liquid level markers? El Yes ❑ No
Waste Application iA0N K IV krz s /ti5/t OAA- Mo
14. Is there physical evidennce of over application? / ❑ Yes QJo
(If in excess of WMP, or runoff a tering waters of the State, notify D Q) F
15. Crop type Gd�J�9v� �Goai✓.�o� (ZB/N......................................................
................. f.............................. ...............
16. Do the receiving crops differ with those designated in the Animal Waste Management Plan (AWMP)? ❑ Yes )dNo
17. Does the facility have a lack of adequate acreage for land application? ❑ Yes �40
18. Does the receiving crop need improvement? ❑ Yes PNo
19. Is there a lack of available waste application equipment? ❑ Yes i�ffqo
20. Does facility require a follow-up visit by same agency? ❑ Yes �No
21. Did Reviewer/Inspector fail to discuss review/inspection with on -site representative? ❑ Yes XNo
For Certified Facilities Only
22. Does the facility fail to have a copy of the Animal Waste Management Plan readily available? ❑ Yes ❑ No
23. Were any additional problems noted which cause noncompliance of the Certified AWMP? ❑ Yes ❑ No
24. Does record keeping need improvement? ❑ Yes ❑ No
cc: Division of Water Quality, Water Quality Section, Facility Assessment Unit 4/30/97

State of North Carolina
Department of Environm$
and Natural Resources
Division of Water Quality
James B. Hunt, Jr., Governor
Wayne McDevitt, Secretary
Kerr T. Stevens, Director
CERTIFIED MAIL
RETURN RE EIP RE UQ ESTED
W.C.o n, C ar es evt ee
W.0 Beville Farm
240 Beville Rd.
Reidsville NC 27320
Farm Number: 79 - 5
Dear W.C., John, Charles Beville:
r2ji gilLm-
NCDENR
NORTH CAROLINA DEPARTMENT OF
ENVIRONMENT AND NATURAL RESOURCES
April 6, 1999
RECEIVED
N.C. Dept. of EHNR
APR 12 1999
Winston-ScIem
Regional Office
You are hereby notified that W.0 Beville Farm, in accordance with G.S. 143-215.1 OC, must
apply for coverage under an Animal Waste Operation General Permit. Upon receipt of this letter, your
farm has six 60 days to submit the attached application and all supporting documentation. In
accordance with Chapter 626 of 1995 Session Laws (Regular Session 1996), Section 19(c)(2), any
owner or operator who fails to submit an application by the date specified by the Department
SHALL NOT OPERATE the animal waste system after the specified date. Your application must
be returned within sixty (60) days of receipt of this letter. Failure to submit the application as required
may also subject your facility to a civil penalty and other enforcement actions for each day the facility is
operated following the due date of the application.
The attached application has been partially completed using information listed in your Animal
Waste Management Plan Certification Form. If any of the general or operation information listed is
incorrect please make corrections as noted on the application before returning the application package.
The signed original application, one copy of the signed application, two copies of a general location
map, and two copies of the Certified Animal Waste Management Plan must be returned to complete the
application package. The completed package should be sent to the following address:
North Carolina Division of Water Quality
Water Quality Section
Non -Discharge Permitting Unit
Post Office Box 29535
Raleigh, NC 27626-0535
If you have any questions concerning this letter, please call Dianne Thomas at [phone]
extension 364 or Ron Linville with the Winston-Salem Regional Office at [phone].
Z_S"
ely,
for Kerr T. Stevens
cc: Permit File (w/o encl.)
Winston-Salem Regional Office (w/o encl.)
P.O. Box 29535, Raleigh, North Carolina 27626-0535 Telephone [phone] FAX [phone]
An Equal Opportunity Affirmative Action Employer 50% recycled/ 10% post -consumer paper

State of North Carolina*
Department of Environment
and Natural Resources
Division of Water Quality
James B. Hunt, Jr., Governor
Wayne McDevitt, Secretary
Kerr T. Stevens, Director
CERTIFIED MAIL
RETURN RECEIPT REQUESTED
Hill Top Farm
5403 Hwy 150 East
Brown Summit NC 27214
Attn: Jerry Apple
Dear Jerry Apple:
X-01LIrAj
�
NCDENR
NORTH CAROLINA DEPARTMENT OF
ENVIRONMENT AND NATURAL RESOURCES
May28, 1999 RECEIVED
N.C. DePt. of EHNR
JUN - 3 1999
Regional Office
Subject: Application No. AWS790003
Additional Information Request
Hill Top Farm
Animal Waste Operation
Rockingham County
The Non -Discharge Permitting Unit has completed a preliminary engineering review of the subject application. Additional
information is required before we can continue our review. Please address the following by June 27, 1999:
Your Waste Utilization Plan (WUP) lists the yield for wheat on field 2, tract 4595 as 60 bushels per acre
and the yield for wheat on all other fields as 72 bushels per acres. These yield rates are higher than
currently recommended. Please contact your technical specialist and revise your WUP or provide yield
records as justification for these higher rates. Please put any justification for higher yields into the
narrative section of your WUP.
Please note that all WUP revisions must be signed and dated by both the owner and the technical
specialist. Please reference the subject permit application number when providing the requested information. All
information should be signed, sealed, and submitted in duplicate to my attention at the address below. The information
requested by this letter must be submitted on or before June 27, 1999 or the Division will return your application as
incomplete in accordance with 15A N.C.A.C. 2H .0200 and your facility will be considered to be operating without a permit.
Please be advised that operation of the subject animal waste management system without a valid permit is a violation of
North Carolina General Statute 143-215.1 and will subject you to the enforcement authority of the Environmental
Management Commission.
If you have any questions regarding this request, please call me at [phone], extension 364.
Sincerely,
Dianne Thomas
Soil Scientist
Non -Discharge Permitting Unit
cc: tWinston-Salem. Regional Office,—WaterQuality1
Permit File
P.O. Box 29535, Raleigh, North Carolina 27626-0535 Telephone [phone] FAX [phone]
An Equal Opportunity Affirmative Action Employer 50% recycled/ 10% post -consumer paper

State of North Carolina
Department of Environment
and Natural Resources
Division of Water Quality
James B. Hunt, Jr., Governor
Wayne McDevitt, Secretary
Kerr T. Stevens, Director
W.C., JOHNNY, AND CHARLES BEVILLE
W.0 BEVILLE FARM
240 BEVILLE ROAD
REIDSVILLE, NORTH CAROLINA 27320
ATTN: JOHNNY BEVILLE
Dear Johnny Beville:
NCDENR
NORTH CAROLINA DEPARTMENT OF
ENVIRONMENT AND NATURAL RESOURCES
July 16, 1999 RECEIVED
N.C. Dept. of EHNR
JU L 2 2 1999
Winston-Salem
Regional Office
Subject: Application No. AWC790005
Additional Information Request
W.0 Beville Farm
Animal Waste Operation
Rockingham County
The Non -Discharge Permitting Unit has completed a preliminary engineering review of the subject application. Additional
information is required before we can continue our review. Please address the following by August 15, 1999:
1. Please provide lagoon capacity documentation (design, as -built calculations, etc.). Be sure to include any
site evaluations, wetland determinations, or hazard classifications that may be applicable.
2. The irrigation parameters listed in your Waste Utilization Plan (WUP) exceed current recommendations.
Irrigation events are to be listed in the WUP as the maximum application allowable for that soil type from
the time the pumps are turned on until the time they are shut off. It is currently recommended that total
application amounts not exceed one inch in any application event for any soil type. If your application rates
need to be adjusted for the application of animal waste, please have your Technical Specialist revise your
WUP to reflect the appropriate application amount per event. If the rates exceed the recommended one -
inch, please have your Technical Specialist justify the increased application rate in the narrative of your
WUP.
3. Please provide an Operation and Maintenance Plan.
4. Table 1 of the WUP lists tract 2922, fields 2 and 6 as 26 acres. According to the maps provided these two
fields are 15.53 acres. Please contact your technical specialist in order to revise the WUP or provide an
explanation for the differences in acreage.
5. Please provide start and end months for the application windows rather than seasons as listed in Table 1 of
the WUP.
Please note that all WUP revisions must be signed and dated by both the owner and the technical specialist. Please
reference the subject permit application number when providing the requested information. All information should be signed,
sealed, and submitted in duplicate to my attention at the address below. The information requested by this letter must be
submitted on or before August 15, 1999 or the Division will return your application as incomplete in accordance with 15A
N.C.A.C. 2H .0200 and your facility will be considered to be operating without a permit.
1617 Mail Service Center, Raleigh, North Carolina 27699-1617 Telephone [phone] FAX [phone]
An Equal Opportunity Affirmative Action Employer 50% recycled/ 10% post -consumer paper

Application No. 79-0005
Johnny Belville
Page 2
Please be advised that operation of the subject animal waste management system without a valid permit is a violation of North
Carolina General Statute 143-215.1 and will subject you to the enforcement authority of the Environmental Management
Commission.
If you have any questions regarding this request, please call me at [phone], extension 546.
Sincerely,
usS an Cauley
Environmental Engineer
Non -Discharge Permitting Unit
cc: Winston-Salem Regional Office, Water Quality
Permit .File