090186_ENFORCEMENT_20171231

NORTH CAROLINA
Department of Environmental QuA

O�QF 1N a r�9pG Michael F. Easley, Governor
o William G. Ross Jr., Secretary
r North Carolina Department of Environment and Natural Resources
Q Y Alan W. Klimek, P.E. Director
Division of Water Quality
July l 1, 2007
CERTIFIED MAIL
RETURN RECEIPT REQUESTED
Ron Davis
100 Barker Rd.
Clinton, NC 28328
Re: Notice of Deficiency
High Freeboard
Ron Davis Farm
NCA209186
Bladen County
Dear Mr. Davis:
On 11/22/2006, you or an employee of your farm notified the Fayetteville Regional
Office Division of Water Quality, as required by the Swine Waste Management General Permit
NCA200000 Section III 1 I (e), that the freeboard level of the lagoon was 17.0 inches, which is
less than the minimum required. The General Permit states "The maximum waste level in
lagoons/storage ponds shall not exceed that specified in the facility's CAWMP. At a minimum,
maximum waste level for lagoons/storage ponds must not exceed the level that provides
adequate storage to contain the 25-year, 24-hour storm event plus an additional one (1) foot of
structural freeboard."
We appreciate your cooperation in self -reporting high freeboards and providing records.
Please bear in mind that high freeboards must be reported by phone, email, fax, or personal
contact within 24 hours. Plans of Action (POAs) must be filed within 24 hours for structural and
48 hours for storm storage high freeboards. They EXPIRE after five (5) days for structural and
thirty (30) days for storage high freeboards. At that time, the situation should be resolved or,
upon request, the Division may grant extensions for adverse conditions.
Required Corrective Action:
At this time, the incident is closed. The Division strongly recommends that you
review your facilities and procedures with the goal of eliminating future high freeboards,
which could lead to mandatory review of your Waste Utilization Plan by a Technical
Specialist, Notices of Violation or civil penalties in the future if freeboard noncompliance
remains an issue.
oy` Carolina
NNaturally
Aquifer Protection Section 1636 Mail Service Center
Internet: www,ncwaterquali(t.org Location: 2728 Capital Boulevard
An Equal Opportunity/Affirmative Action Employer— 50% Recycled110% Post Consumer Paper
Raleigh, NC 27699-1636 Telephone: [phone]
Raleigh, NC 27604 Fax 1: [phone]
Fax 2: [phone]
Customer Service: [phone]

July 11, 2007 ~ -j'
Page 2
Davis
If you are not aware, you now may pump up to eight (8) inches below the "Stop
Pump" mark between June 15 and October 31 provided that the criteria in NRCS
Standard for Waste Treatment Lagoon No. 359 are met.
The Division of Water Quality has the authority to levy a civil penalty of up to $25,000
per day per violation. Please be advised that nothing in this letter should be taken as removing
from you the responsibility or liability for failure to comply with any State Rule, State Statue or
permitting requirement.
If you have any questions regarding this letter, please do not hesitate to call Joan Schneier
at the Fayetteville Regional Office at [phone]. State email addresses typically are in the
format [e-mail]. POAs can be found under "Reporting Forms" on the left
side of the page, at our website http://h2o.cnr.state.nc.uslaps/afou/afou_home.htm
Sincerely, /
~Gf Art Barnhardt
Regional Supervisor
cc: Facility File — 09-186
APS Central Files
Murphy -Brown, LLC

r-�
' State of North Carolina
A'
Department of Environment
1 •
and Natural Resources
Division of Water Quality
ova
Michael F. Easley, Governor
NCDENR
William G. Ross Jr., Secretary
Gregory J. Thorpe, Ph. D., Acting Director
NORTH CARouMA DEPARTMENT OF
EtmRONmENT AND NACrURAL RESWRCES
March 5, 2002
CERTIFIED MA1L
RETURN RECEIPT REQUESTED
i
BARRY FREEDMAN--•_
-• ____�� '
1127 JORDAN RoAD
CLARKTON NC 28433
Subject: Notice of Violation and Revocation for Nonpayment
Ronald Davis Farm
Permit Number: AWS090186
Bladen County
Dear Barry Freedman:
In accordance with North Carolina General Statute 143-215. IOG, all animal operations who receive an animal
waste management system permit will be charged in each year of the term an annual permit fee. Annual permit fees are
billed following the issuance of the permit and then annually thereafter on the anniversary of that date. Your animal waste
management system permit was issued on 12/28/1998.
Your annual permit fee for the period of 12/28/2001 - 12/27/2002 is $150.00. Your payment was due 2/1412002.
Because this fee was not fully paid within 30 days after being billed, this letter initiates action to revoke the subject permit,
pursuant to 15 NCAC 2H .0205 (c) (4). and G.S. 143-215.1 (b) (3).
Effective 60 days from receipt of this notice, the subject permit is hereby revoked unless the required Annual
Animal Waste Management System Permit fee for your animal operation is received within that time. Operation of an
animal waste management system without a valid permit is a violation of North Carolina General Statute 143-215.1 and is
subject to the assessment of a civil penalty of up to $10,000 per day. Your payment should be sent to:
N.C. Department of Environment and Natural Resources
Division of Water Quality
Budget Office
1617 Mail Service Center
Raleigh, North Carolina 27699-1617
If you have any questions, please contact Fran McPherson at [phone] ext. 210.
. �incergly� `�
J. Tho , Ph.D.
cc: Non -Discharge Branch Comphance/Enforcement Unit
Fayetteville-Reg`ian-al:Office.--
Bladen County Health Department
Permit File
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

O�0 W A T F9�G
Michael F. Easley, Governor
William G. Ross Jr., Secretary
North Carolina Department of Enviromnent and Natural Resources
Alan W. Klimek, P. E. Director
Division of Water Quality
Coleen H. Sullins, Deputy Director
Division of Water Quality
CERTIFIED MAIL
RETURN RECEIPT REQUESTED
Mr. Barry Freedman
1282 Jordan Road
Clarkton, NC 28433
October 15, 2003
Subject: NOTICE OF VIOLATION
Administrative Code 15A NCAC 2H .0217
Ronald Davis Farm
Facility No- 09-186
Bladen County
Dear Mr. Freedman:
You are hereby notified that, having been permitted to have a non -discharge permit for the
subject animal waste disposal system pursuant to 15A NCAC 2H .0217 and /or NCGS 143 —
215.1, you have been found to be in violation of your Permit.
On August 5, 2003, staff from the Fayetteville Regional Office of the Division of Soil and
Water conducted an operational review of your permitted, NCA 209186, swine faun located on
Hwy 210 in Bladen County. During that routine inspection, it was noted that freeboard levels are
not being recorded weekly or maintained on approved forms. This has been noted on prior
inspections for the last two years. Recently the inspection conducted by DWQ on March 21, 2002
noted the need to record weekly lagoon levels. Deficient or improper record keeping is a violation
of a permit condition and will result in enforcement action if not corrected.
In addition it appeared to the SWC Inspector that the lagoon liquid marker indicated the
liquid level might have gotten within 14 to 15 inches of the freeboard top. This is well within the
storm storage elevation range and should be reported to your DWQ Regional Office in
Fayetteville. Your NPDES permit requires notification to the Division of Water Quality within 24
hours of any such occurrence. This office has no notification on file from your facility for the year
2003.
The Division of Water Quality requests that the following items be addressed:
Freeboard levels need to be recorded weekly on approved NPDES forms. Failure to do so
will result in enforcement action.
2. Report as required liquid lagoon levels in the storm or structural freeboard to the Division
of Water Quality within 24 hours of discovery. M,
06ENti
N. C. Division of Water Quality 225 Cireen Street Fayetteville, North Carolina 28301-5043 [phone] Fax [phone] Customer Service
1-877-623-6748

l � �
Mr. Freedman
10-15-03
Page 2
3_ Update status of the certified operator designated for this farm site. Contact Raleigh
Training and Certification Office for assistance if needed.
4. Follow the wetted acre layout of your CAWMP_
Please be advised that this notice does not prevent the Division of Water Quality from
taking enforcement actions for this violation or any past or future violation. Furthermore, the
Division of Water Quality has the authority to levy a civil penalty'of not more than $25,000.00
per day per violation.
If you have an explanation for this violation that you wish to present, please respond to this
office by November 5 2003.
If you have any questions concerning this matter, please do not hesitate to contact either
Mr. Larry Baxley, Environmental Specialist, or myself at (910) 4$6-1541.
Sincerely,
Paul E. Rawls
Regional Water Quality Supervisor
cc: Keith Larick - Compliance Group
Chris Bordeaux - Bladen Co. NRCS
Trent Allen — SWC, FRO
Central Files - Raleigh
N. C. Division of Water Quality 225 Green Street Fayetteville, North Carolina 28301-5043 (9l0) 486-1541 Fax [phone]
A,
01 ENR
Customer Service
1-877-623-6748

State of North Carolina
f Department of Environment
and Natural Resources � �r
Fayetteville Regional Office rY`-r�
Acaft
Michael F. Easley, Governor NCDENR
William G. Ross Jr., Secretary NORTH C.AROLINA DEPARTMENT OF
ENVIRONMENT AND NATURAL RESOLIRCES
Division of Soil & Water Conservation
l5
. August 25, 2003
Mr. Barry Freedman
1282 Jordan Road
Clarkton, North Carolina 28433
SUBJECT: Notice for Corrective Action
Ronald Davis Farm, facility number 9-186
Bladen County
Dear Mr. Freedman,
On August 5, 2003, an operation review was conducted of Ronald Davis Farm, facility number
9-186, in Bladen County. This review, undertaken in accordance with G.S. 143-215.1OD, was
one of two routine site visits scheduled for all subject animal operations in 2003. Staff from the
Division of Water Quality will conduct a separate compliance inspection.
During the operation review, the following items were noted for corrective action:
• There needs to be a certified operator designated for this farm site.
• Freeboard levels need to be kept weekly on approved NPDES forms. Keeping weekly
freeboard levels has been noted for the past 2 years and still not being taken.
• Need to place the NPDES Permit in the farm records.
• The irrigator is not following the wetted acre layout. Make sure to advise whoever
is pumping of the wetted acre layout that must be followed.
• Need to start using approved forms for record keeping — Irr-1, lagoon inspection
after a 1-inch rainfall event, freeboard, and rainfall.
A copy of the operation review report is enclosed for your information. Site findings and
recommended corrective actions as discussed are noted in the comment sections.
225 Green Street, Fayetteville, North Carolina 28301-5043 Telephone [phone] FAX [phone]
An Equal Opportunity Affirmative Action Employer

Mr. Barry Freedman
August 25, 2003
Page 2
Please remember that in order for your facility to remain in compliance with environmental
regulations, animal waste cannot be discharged into the waters of the State, and the animal
waste collection, treatment, storage and disposal systems must be properly maintained and
operated under the responsible charge of a certified operator.
On behalf of the Division of Soil and Water Conservation, I appreciate your cooperation with
these operation reviews. Please do not hesitate to contact me at 910-486-1541 if you have any
questions, concerns or need additional information.
Sincerely,
Trent Allen
Environmental Engineer I
CC! Paul! Rawls, Division of Water Quality
Chris Bordeaux, Bladen Soil & Water Conservation District
Dawn Williamson, Murphy Brown, LLC
Carroll Pierce, Division of Soil & Water Conservation
225 Green Street, Fayetteville, North Carolina 28301-5043 Telephone [phone] FAX [phone]
An Equal Opportunity Affirmative Action Employer

N Technical Assistance Site Visit Report
r • Division of Soil and Water Conservation
p Natural Resources Conservation Service
O Soil and Water Conservation District
O Other...
Facility Number I - 1$6 Date: 15103 Time: 1 12:15 Time On Farm: 60 FRO
Farm Namc Ronald Davis Farm County Bladen Phone: [phone]
Mailing Address 1282 Jordan Road Clarkton NC 28433
Onsite
Representative Gino Kennedy Integrator Imurphy Brown
Type Of Visit
Operation Review
Compliance Inspection (pilot only)
Technical Assistance
Confirmation for Removal
❑ No Animals -Date Last Operated:
❑ Operating below threshold
® Swine ❑ Poultry ❑ Cattle ❑ Horse
Design Current
Capacity Population
❑ Wean to Feeder
® Feeder to Finish
❑ Farrow to Wean
❑ Farrow to Feeder
❑ Farrow to Finish
❑ Gilts
❑ Boars
3200
Purpose Of Visit
OO Routine
O Response to DWQIDENR referral
O Response to DSWC/SWCD referral
O Response to complaint/local referral
O Requested by prod ucerli ntegrator
O Fallow -up
O Emergency
O Other...
Design Current
Capacity Population
Layer
❑ Non -Layer
❑ Dairy
❑ Non -Dairy
❑ 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
❑ Dairy
❑ Non -Dairy
❑ 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
❑ 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 ® 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 Ono
Structurel Structure 2 Structure 3 Structure 4
Structure 5
Identifier
Level (inches) 1 22
CROP TYPES oybeans heat
SPRAYFIELD
SOIL TYPES NoA GbA
7. What type of technical assistance does the onsite representative feel is needed? (list in comment section)
1 03/10/03

Facility Number 9 - 186 Date:
8/5/03
PARAMETER
O 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
❑
❑
[110. Level in structural freeboard
Plan Conditional Amendment
❑
❑
❑ 11. Level in storm storage
26. Waste
27. Review or Evaluate Waste Plan wlproducer
❑
❑
❑ 12. Waste structure integrity compromised
28. Forms Need (list in comment section)
❑
❑
El13. Waste structure needs maintenance
29. Missing Components (list in comments)
®
❑
❑ 14. Over application >= 10% & 10 lbs.
❑
❑
❑ 15. Over application < 10% or < 10 lbs.
30. 2H.0200 re -certification
❑ 16. Hydraulic overloading
31. Five 8 Thirty day Plans of Action (PoA)
❑
❑
32. Irrigation record keeping assistance
❑
❑
❑ 17. Deficient irrigation records
❑ 18. Latelmissing waste analysis
33. Organize/computerization of records
❑
❑
N 19. Late/missing lagoon level records
34. Sludge Evaluation
❑
❑
❑ 20_ Late/missing soils analysis
❑ 21. Crop needs improvement
35. Sludge or Closure Plan
❑
❑
❑ 22. Crop inconsistent with waste plan
36. Sludge removal/closure procedures
❑
❑
37. Waste Structure Evaluation
❑
❑
❑ 23. Irrigation maintenance deficiency
[124. Deficient sprayfield conditions
38. Structure Needs Improvement
❑
❑
39. Operation & Maintenance Improvements
❑
❑
40. Marker check/cal ibration
❑
❑
Regulatory Referrals
41. Site evaluation
❑
❑
❑ Referred to DWQ Date:
42. Irrigation Calibration
❑
❑
[:]Referred to NCDA Date:
43. Irrigation
❑
❑
❑ Other...
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 T
52. Buffer improvements
❑
❑
53. Field measurements(GPS, surveying, etc.)
❑
❑
4.
54. Mortality BMPs
❑
❑
55. Waste operator education (NPDES)
N
❑
56. Operation & maintenance education
❑
❑
57. Record keeping education
❑
❑
6.
58. Croplforage management education
❑
❑
59. Soil and/or waste sampling education
❑
❑
03/ 10/03

Facility Number - 18fi Date: 815103
TECHNICAL SPECIALIST rent Allen
SIGNATURE
Date Entered: 818103
Entered By: rent Allen
3
i
03/10/03

1 {C)Y (:(301'E -1 i
17( )I i,NE)' (;I :NI_I UM _
William B. Freedman
Freedman Farms
1282 Jordan Road
Clarkton, North Carolina 28433
Strlte of Norili Carolhm
Dej)artnu•nt of AicI lCc
5Xx)I Nlai1S(�rviue(:emer
I. N(:)I-(TI I CAIi01-INA
? 69(-V x X) I
September 21, 2005
Re: Freerhnan Farms i� DENR, DfVQ; 05 EHR 0905
Dear Mr. Freedman:
SEP 22
* `� �—F�`sCi�F"lE.�P�ii�;:1 �flteplyto
.� hn6 L. Oliver
Assistant Allomey General
Gnvirunmental Division
Telephone: [phone]
Facsimile: [phone]
We are writing to let you know that the deposition of Ronald Davis will not be held on
Monday, September 26, 2005 but will be rescheduled at Mr. Davis' request. Mr. Davis has
requested that the deposition be held at a Iocation that is closer to his home. We will inform you
of the new date for the deposition after we have decided on a new date and location.
Sincerely,
SV,L -C) 6W
Jane L. Oliver
Assistant Attorney General
jlo
cc: Mark Brantley
Telephone: [phone] / Facsinule: [phone] / Email: joli%,[e-mail]

Freedman Farms A4ear1 9
Subject: Freedman Farms Hearing
From: "Jane Oliver" <]OLIVER@ ncdoj.com >
Date: Thu, 03 Nov 2005 17:36:42 -0500
To: < Mark.Brantley@ncmail. net>
Mark, I am preparing exhibits for the hearing that is scheduled for 11/14/05. There appear to be some
things missing from the agency file.
If possible, I would like to get the following:
- a signed copy of the NOV dated 11/17/04
- certified mail receipt signed by Mr. Freedman for the 11/17/04 NOV
- the first page of the 11/22/04 NOV - (my copy is partially covered up by the cert. mail tracking slip)
- pages 1 and 2 of the 12/29/04 follow-up letter (Clean copy of letter, i.e., w/o postage slips)
- signed (By Mr. Freedman) cert. mail receipt for the 12/29/04 letter
If there are copies in the Raleigh office - I might be able to get copies there - If so, who should I
contact?
Also, can you make color copies of the photos? We do not have a colored printer. Just let me know -
we will need 4 sets for the hearing.
Thank you for your assistance. Hope you're doing well.
1 of 1 11/4/2005 8:01 AM

�n��� -
J�' '�
,� 9
i'�J�
a \ /}i
O/ K
� � ��� �%
�n�

! ENVIRONMENTAL Fax:[phone] Oct 4 '05 18:17 R.01
C Q V E R
S H E E T
To: Mark Brantley
Fayetteville Regional Office
Fax #: [phone]
From: Jane L. Oliver
Assistant Attorney General
Subject: Freedman Farms
Notice of Hearing, Request for Response to Motion
Date: October 4, 2005 '
Pages: 3, including this cover sheet.
COMMENTS: FYI
ti
From the Desk of.
Jade L Oliver, A&Osmt Attbmey General
x rs m Carolina DgrOa»Mt of Justice
iinviromGtens�] >]qa =ent
9001 Mail Serrrice Cemtet
Rm CIA No 27699-9001
[phone]
(919).716-6766/Fax
liver cdo.cotn
i

ENVIRONMENTAL Fax:[phone] Oct 4 '05 18:17 r.02
4r
FELFn !
OMCE OR
ADayIiYiS'I'I VIVe MOLRaNGS
Sep ZO 4 00 AM 2005
STATE OF NORTH CAROLINA IN THE OFFICE OF
ADMINISTRATIVE HEARINGS]
COUNTY OF BLADEN 05 EHR 0905
Freedman Farms )
Petitioner }
}
VS. ) NOTICE OF MARING
)
Fayetteville Division of Water Quality )
Office }
Respondent }
Please take notice that the hearing in the above -captioned contested case will be held
Monday, October 10, 2005, at 9:30 am. (or as soon thereafter as may be heard), in the New
Cumberland County Courthouse, 117 Dick Street, Room 119-C, Fayetteville, North Carolina.
A proposed Order on Final Pre -Taal Conference (in form prescribed by the Rules of
Superior and District Court, p_ 28, Annotated Rules of North Carolina, 2004 Edition), sha11 be
filed at the Office of Administrative Hearings on or before October 10, 2005. Stipulation;
final witness lists, and marked exhibits shall be exchanged between the parties on or before
October 10, 2005. T
This the 20th day of September, 2005.
1
zq-r l
J 1" Mann, III
ief Administrative Law Judge
•

ENVIRONMENTAL
Fax : [phone]
r,D
OFFICE or
ADMINB77N71VE HEARINGS
Oc t 4 ' 05 18:17 P. 03
Sep 29 9 00 AM 2M5
STATE OF NORTH CAROIJNA
COUNTY OF BLADEN
IN THE OFFICE OF
ADMINISTRATIVE HEARINGS
05 EHR 0905
Freedman Farms )
Petitioner )
vs. ) REQUEST FOR RESPONSE
TO MOTION
Fayetteville Division of Water Quality } ;
Office }
Respondent )
The Respondent f led a "Motion to Compel Petitioner to Respond to Respondent's
Discovery Requests and Motion to Deem Requested Admissions Admitted" on September i9.
2005. The Petitioner shall have 10 days from the date of this Request to file a written
response setting forth the objections to the Motion.
I
All motions will be decided without oral argument unless a hearing on the motion is'
requested at the time of the filing of the motion or the response and is deemed by the judge to
be necessary to the development of a full and complete record for decision. In the discretion
of the judge or upon motion by a party. the heating on the motion may be accomplished by a
telephone conference. f
It is therefore ORDERED that the Petitioner shall respond to the above -referenced J
Motion on or before October 6, 2005 if the Petitioner desires objections to be considered II
before a ruling is made.
f
This the 28th day of September, 2005.
JM
i
g7 Mann, III
ief Administrative Law Judge
r,
'F
1�

� 1 ,
' Se 19 2
STATE OF NORTH CAROLINA-F'�Y�ilL1EREfOi A�C'tiL IN THE OFFICE OF
ADMINISTRATIVE HEARINGS
COUNTY OF BLADEN 05 EHR 0905
FREEDMAN FARMS, )
Petitioner, )
}
V. } NOTICE OF DEPOSITION
(N.C.R. Civ. P. 30(b)(6))
NORTH CAROLINA DEPARTMENT OF )
ENVIRONMENT AND NATURAL )
RESOURCES, DIVISION OF WATER QUALITY, )
Respondent. )
TO: WILLIAM B. FREEMDAN
FREEDMAN FARMS
1282 JORDAN ROAD
CLARKTON, NORTH CAROLINA 28433
PETITIONER
Please take notice that the Department of Environment and Natural Resources, Division of Water
Quality, the respondent in the above -captioned contested case, will take the deposition of Ronald Davis,
Highway 210W, Garland, N.C., beginning at 10:30 a.m. on Monday, September 26, 2005 in the 7' Floor
Conference Room at the Offices of the Division of Water Quality, 225 Green Street, Suite 714,
Fayetteville, N.C., and continuing thereafter from day-to-day until completed. This deposition will be
conducted under the North Carolina Rules of Civil Procedure and the Rules of the Office of
Administrative Hearings and will be used for the purpose of trial preparation and for any other purposes
allowed under the Rules of Civil Procedure.
This the 0--day of September, 2005.
ROY COOPER
Attorney General
Jane L. Oliver
Assistant Attorney General
N.C. Department of Justice
P.O. Box 629
Raleigh, NC 27602-0629
[phone]
N.C. Bar No. 16771

CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE
1 certify that I have served a copy of the foregoing NOTICE OF DEPOSITION on each
party of record by mailing a copy of the document to each party of record by depositing the
copy in an official depository under the exclusive care and custody of the United States Postal
Service in a properly addressed postage -paid wrapper, unless personal service by hand delivery
is indicated below.
William B. Freedman
Freedman Farms
1282 Jordan Road
Clarkton, North Carolina 28433
PETITIONER
This the >'" day of September, 2005.
':1 'R,wc L a
Jane L. Oliver
Assistant Attorney General

Sn_5-go
ROY COOPER
ATTOkNEY GE\ERAI.
Ronald Davis
6488 Highway 210 West
Garland, North Carolina 28411
State of North Carolina
Department of Justice
P. O. Box 629
Raleigh
27602-0629
September 15, 2005
Reply To:
Environmenlal Division
[phone]
Re: Freedman Fanns v. N.C. Department of Environment and Natural Resources,
Division of Water Quality, 05 EHR 0905
Dear Mr. Davis:
This Office represents the Department of Environment and Natural Resources, Division of
Water Quality ("the Division") in the above -referenced case which involves an appeal by William
B. Freedman of a decision to assess an administrative penalty against the Ronald Davis Farm,
NPDES General Permit NCA 200000 Farm # 9-186. I am the Assistant Attorney General assigned
to handle the case. For you infornnation, the assessment of the penalty resulted from an illegal
discharge of waste on January 28, 2005 and from the failure to maintain and to provide upon request
proper documentation concerning the farm and its operation. You will find enclosed a Notice of
Deposition and a Subpoena for the taking of your deposition testimony. The deposition is scheduled
for 10:30 a.m. in the 7" Floor Conference Room, at the Offices of the Division of Water Quality,
225 Green Street, Suite 714, Fayetteville, N.C.
If you have any questions concerning this matter, you may contact me at 919/716-6600.
If I am unavailable, please leave your telephone number on my voice mail and I will call you back.
Enclosed you will find the subpoena which instructs you to appear and testify at the deposition.
Thank you, in advance, for your assistance and cooperation in this matter.
Sincerely,
Jane L. Oliver
Assistant Attorney General
JLO
cc: Mark Brantley
Enclosure

4.
STATE OF NORTH CAROLINA
• COUNTY OF BLADEN
IN THE OFFICE OF
ADMINISTRATIVE HEARINGS
6714 MAIL SERVICE CENTER
RALEIGH, NC 27699-6714
FILE NO. 05 EHR 0905
SUBPOENA
(N.C. Gen. Stat. $ 15013-27)
FREEDMAN FARMS _ ) ✓ To appear in person _ To produce document or object
Petitioner, )
Party requesting subpoena:
v, ) Petitioner ✓ Respondent
[,NOTE TO PARTIES NOT REPRESENTED BY COUNSEL:
DENR, DIVISION OF WATER QUALITY ) Subpoenas may be produced at your request, but must be signed and
Respondent. _ ) issued by the Office of Administrative Hearingsl
TO:
Ronald Davis
Name of person being served
6488 Highway 210 W
Street address/post office box
Alternate address
Garland, NC 28411
City/State/Ziplfe lephone City/Stateaip/Telephone
YOU ARE COAIAIANDED TO: (check all that apply)
Appear and testify in the above -entitled contested case at the place, date, and time indicated below.
Appear and testify, in the above -entitled contested case, at a deposition at the place, date and time indicated below.
Produce, permit inspection and copying of the following items at the place, date, and time indicated below.
Name and Location of 14mPing:
Division of Water Quality
7th Floor Conference Roan
225 Gtt Street Suite 714
J to tEvil le, W11 )Q,1 n1—n,7n7
Date and Time to Appear/Produce
September 26, 2005 at 10:30 am
Date i. L- C)vv# /. ills
l o�
Signature of person issuing subpoena
Chief Hearings Clerk Administrative Law Judge
Assistant Hearings Clerk ✓ Attorney
Name of Person or Agency Requesting Subpoena:
Jane L. Oliver Assistant Atty General
Name Title
114 W. Edenton St., PO Box 629
Street/Post Office Box
Raleigh, NC 27601
City/State/Zip
919 716-6600
Telephone Number
DELIVER "RETURN OF SERVICE" TO
PARTY NAMED ABOVE
RETURN OF SERVICE
I certify that this subpoena was received and served as follows:
Date received by authorized server
By delivering a copy of this subpoena to
the person named above
This subpoena WAS NOT served for the
following reasons:
Service Fee Paid
S_ .. _ _.. . Due I Date Served
By telephone communication with the person
named above (For use only by the Sheri frs office
for witness subpoenaed to appear and testify)
By registered or certified mail, return receipt
requested, on the party named above
Signature and Title of Authorized Server
NOTE TO PERSON REQUESTING SUBPOENA: A copy of this subpoena must be delivered, mailed or faxed to the attorney for each
party in this case. If a party is not represented by an attorney, the copy must be mailed or delivered to the party.
(Please See Reverse Side)
H-05 (I0/03) Pagel of 2

4
NOTE: Rule 45, North Carolina Rules orcivil Procedure, Parts (c) and (d).
(c) Protection Of Persons Subject To Subpoena
(1) Avoid undue burden or expense - A party or an attorney responsible for
the issuance and service of a subpoena shall take reasonable steps to avoid
imposing an undue burden or expense on a person subject to the subpoena. The
court shall enforce this subdivision and impose upon the party or attorney in
violation of this requirement an appropriate sanction that may include
compensating the person unduly burdened for lost earnings and for reasonable
attorney's fees.
(2) For production of puhlic records or hospital medical records. - Where the
subpoena commands any custodian of public records or any custodian of
hospital medical records, as defined in G.S. 844.1, to appear for the sole
purpose of producing certain records in the custodian's custody, the custodian
subpoenaed may, in lieu ofpersonal appearance, tender to the court in which the
action is pending by registered or certified mail or by personal delivery, on or
before the time specified in the subpoena, certified copies of the records
requested together with a copy of the subpoena and an affidavit by the custodian
testifying that the copies are true and correct copies and that the records were
made and kept in the regular course of business, or if no such records are in the
custodian's custody, an affidavit to that effect. When the copies of records are
personally delivered under this subdivision, a receipt shall be obtained from the
person receiving the records. Any original or certified copy of records or an
affidavit delivered according to the provisions of this subdivision, unless
otherwise objectionable, shall be admissible in any action or proceeding without
further certification or atnheatication. Copies of hospital medical records
tendered under this subdivision shall not be open to inspection or copied by any
person, except to the parties to the case or proceedings and their attorneys in
depositions, until ordered published by the judge at the time of the hearing or
trial. Nothing contained herein shall be construed to waive the physician -patient
privilege or to require any privileged communication under law to be disclosed
(3) Written objection to subpoena - Subject to subsection (d) of this rule, a
person commanded to appear at a deposition or to produce and permit the
inspection and copying of records may, within 10 days after service of the
subpoena or before the time specified for compliance if the time is less than 10
days after service, serve upon the party or the attorney designated in the
subpoena written objection to the subpoena, setting forth the specific grounds
for the objection. The written objection shall comply with the requirements of
Rule 11. Each of the following grounds may be sufficient for objecting to a
subpoena:
a The subpoena fails to allow reasonable time for compliance.
b. The subpoena requires disclosure of privileged or other protected
matter and no exception or waiver applies to the privilege or protection.
C. The subpoena subjects a person to an undue burden.
d. The subpoena is otherwise unreasonable or oppressive.
C. The subpoena is procedurally defective.
(4) Order of court required to override obiection. - If objection is made under
subdivision (3) of this subsection, the party serving the subpoena shall not be
entitled to compel the subpoenaed persons appearance at a deposition or to
inspect and copy materials to which an objection has been made expect pursuant
to an order of the court If objection is made, the parry serving the subpoena
may, upon notice to the subpoenaed person, move at any time for an order to
compel the subpoenaed person's appearance at the deposition or the production
of the materials designated in the subpoena. The motion shall be filed in the
court in the county in which the deposition or production of materials is to
occur.
(5) Motion to quash or modify subpoena. - A person commanded to appear at
a trial, hearing, deposition, or to produce and permit the inspection and copying
of records, books, papers, documents, or other tangible things, within 10 days
after service of the subpoena or before the time specified for compliance if the
time is less than 10 days after service, may file a motion to quash or modify the
subpoena. The court shall quash or modify the subpoena if the subpoenaed
person demonstrates the existence of any of the reasons set forth in subdivision
(3) of this subsection. The motion shall be filed in the court in the county in
which the trial, hearing, deposition, or production of materials is to occur.
6) Order to compel: expenses to comply with subtoeaa - When a court
enters an order compelling a deposition or the production of records, books,
papers, documents, or other tangible things, the order shall protect any person
who is not it parry or an agent of a party from significant expense resulting from
complying with the subpoena. The court may order that the person to whom the
subpoena is addressed will be reasonably compensated for the cost of producing
the records, books, papers, documents, or tangible things specified in the
subpoena.
7) Trade secrets, confidential information. - When a subpoena requires
disclosure of a trade secret or other confidential research, development, or
commercial information, a court may, to protect a person subject to or affected
by the subpoena, quash or modify the subpoena, or %fkcn the party on whose
behalf the subpoena is issued shows a substantial need for the testimony or
material that cannot otherwise be met without undue hardship, the court may
order a person to make an appearance or produce the materials only on specified
conditions stated in the order-
(8) Order to quash: expenses. - When a court enters an order quashing or
modifying the subpoena, the court may order the party on whose behalf the
subpoena is issued to pay all or part of the subpoenaed persons reasonable
expenses including attorney's fees.
(d) Duties In Responding To Subpoena
1) Form of response - A person responding to a subpoena to produce
documents shall produce them as they are kept in the usual course of business or
shall organize and label the documents to correspond with the categories in the
request
(2) Specificity of objection. - When information subject to a subpoena is
withheld on the objection that it is subject to protection as trial preparation
materials, or that it is otherwise privileged the objection shall be made with
specificity and shall be supported by a description of the nature of the
communications, records, books, papers, documents, or other tangible things not
produced, sufficient for the requesting party to contest the objection.
INFORMATION FOR WITNESS
The subpoena is a legal order requiring you to appear on the day and at the time
stated. You have been called (subpoenaed) to be a witness in a contested case,
DUTIES OF A WITNESS
Unless you arc a custodian of medical or public records, you must
attend the hearing on the day and at the time stated in the subpoena.
Unless otherwise directed by the administrative law judge, you must
answer all questions asked when you are on the stand giving
testimony.
Your answers to questions must be truthful.
If you are commanded to produce any items, you must bring them
with you to the hearing.
If you have any questions about being subpoenaed as a witness, you should
contact the person who requested the subpoena.
UNDERSTAND THE QUESTIONS AND SPEAK OUT
When you testify, listen carefully to all questions, and make sure that you
understand the questions before you attempt to answer. If necessary, ask that a
question be repeated before you try to answer. When you answer, speak clearly
and loudly enough to be heard.
BRIBING OR THREATENING A WITNESS
It is a violation of state law for am -one to attempt to bribe, threaten, harass, or
intimidate a witness. If anyone attempts to do any of these things concerning
your involvement as a witness in a contested case, you should promptly report
the incident to the administrative law judge.
WITNESS FEE
A witness is entitled to a small daily fee and travel expense reimbursement (if it
is necessary to travel from outside the county in order to testify). Fees for
"expert witnesses" are set by the administrative law judge. After you have been
discharged as a witness, if you desire to collect the statutory fee, you should
immediately contact the chief hearings clerk and certify your attendance as a
witness so that you coil] be paid any amount due you.
Witness fees shall be vaid by the party rcguuesting the suhmena in accordance
with N.C. Gen. Stat. § 7A-314. However, State officials or employees who are
subpoenaed shall not be entitled to witness fees, but they shall receive their
normal salary and shall not be required to take any annual leave for the days
they serve as a witness. Travel expenses of State officials or employees who are
subpoenaed shall be reimbursed as provided in N.C. Gen. Star. § 138-6
H-05 (10/03) Page 2 of 2

J. , .
SUBPOENA INFORMATION
Subpoenas are issued and served in accordance with N.C. Gen. Stat. §§ 150B-27 and IA -I, Rule 45.
A PARTY OR ATTORNEY RESPONSIBLE FOR ISSUING OR SERVING A SUBPOENA SHALL TAKE
REASONABLE STEPS TO AVOID IMPOSING AN UNDUE BURDEN OR EXPENSE ON THE PERSON
BEING SUBPOENAED.
NOTE: You may not serve this subpoena yourself.
SUBPOENAS MAY BE SERVED BY THE FOLLOWING PEOPLE:
1. The sheriff, deputy sheriff, or other state law enforcement officer.
2. A person 1$ years of age or older who is not a party- (That would be anyone who is neither the Petitioner,
the Respondent, nor an Intervenor)
SUBPOENAS MAY BE SERVED IN THE FOLLOWING MANNER:
1. By telephone, but only by the sheriff, deputy sheriff, or other state law enforcement officer, and only where a
person is being subpoenaed, not documents.
2. By delivery to the person named on the subpoena.
By registered or certified mail, return receipt requested.
PROOF OF SERVICE OF SUBPOENAS MAY BE MADE IN THE FOLLOWING MANNER:
1_ Delivery of a copy to the person being served.
The person serving the subpoena must prove delivery by filling out the return of service on the original
subpoena. (The return of service form must be notarized if the subpoena was served by anyone other than a
sheriff, deputy sheriff, or other state law enforcement officer.)
2. Service by telephone:
Proof of service must be made by the sheriff, deputy sheriff, or other state law enforcement officer by filling
out the return of service on the original subpoena-
3. Mailing of a copy to the person being served by Registered or Certified Mail:
Proof of service is accomplished by filling out the return of service on the original subpoena and attaching to
it the return receipt.
NOTE: The return of service is made to the party requesting the subpoena. Therefore, the party must
bring the proof of service to the hearing in the event that a subpoenaed witness does not appear.
A COPY OF THE SUBPOENA BEING SERVED MUST BE FILED WITH THE OFFICE OF
ADMINISTRATIVE HEARINGS AND A COPY SERVED ON EACH PARTY IN THE CASE.
1-1-05 Subpoena Information (10/03)

M E M O
From the desk o
Janet D. Lesc
Paralegal
Department of Justice
9001 Mail service
Center
Raleigh NC 27699-9001
Tel: [phone]
Fax: [phone]
To: Kenneth Mark Brantley
EMO
Subject: North Carolina Department of Environment and Natural Resources, Division
of Water Quality
DENR-FR®
Date: January 1'1, 2oos JAN 18 2006
®O
COMMENTS:
Enclosed is Petitioner's Petition for Judicial Review Pursuant to N.C. Gen. Stat. § 150B-
45 which was fled in Bladen County Superior Court on or about December 19, 2005.
Respondent's response is also enclosed for your perusal. If you have any questions or
concerns, please contact Jane Oliver at [phone].

- � r
RECEIVED
NOV 0 g 2006
DERR-FAYETiEMLLE REVI AL ORGE
ROY COOPER
ATTORNEY G1 .N0;UkL
MEMORAINDUM
State of North Carolina
Department of Justice
PO Box 629
Raleigh, North Carolina
27602
TO: Ted Bush
Chief, Aquifer Protection Section
Central Office, Division of Water Quality
Art Barnhardt
Regional Aquifer Protection Supervisor
Fayetteville Regional Office, Division of Water Quality
FROM: Jane L. Oliver
Assistant Attorney General
DATE: November 7, 2006
RE: Freedman Farms v. Fayetteville Division of Water Quality Office
05 CVS 0879; Bladen County
Reply to:
Jane I.. 01i%cr
I:nvirunmen(al Division
I cl: 1)1 Q1 7 H)-6600
Fav 911J/716-6760
Raleigh, N.C. 27602-0629
Please find enclosed a copy of the Order of the Superior Court reversing the Final Decision of the
Administrative Law Judge in the above -referenced case. The ALJ dismissed the contested case for failure
to prosecute after the Petitioner failed to appear at the hearing. The Superior Court reversed on the ground
that Petitioner had not received proper notice of the hearing from the Office of Administrative Hearings.
N.C.G.S. 150B-23, requires that notice of hearing be given at least fifteen (15) days before the
hearing and that notice be given personally or by certified mail. If notice cannot be accomplished either
personally or by certified mail, notice must be given in a manner prescribed by the N.C. Rules of Civil
Procedure. In this case, OAH sent the Notice of Hearing to Petitioner by certified mail. The notice was
returned to OAH as "unclaimed." OAH attempted to contact Petitioner by telephone (four days before the
hearing) to inform him about the hearing. A message was left with Petitioner's wife, an Assistant District
Attorney -in Bladen County. When Petitioner failed to appear or to contact OAH to say that he would be
unable to appear, the ALJ dismissed the case for failure to prosecute. (The record shows that other attempts
to contact Petitioner by certified mail were unsuccessful and that Petitioner repeatedly failed to respond to
OAH requests in a timely manner.)
1 would like to talk with both of you after you have had a chance to review the Order. Our office also
plans to review the case to determine whether we think the Order should be appealed. The notice of appeal
must be filed by December 1, 2006.
cc: Chris Browning
Kathy Cooper

HE5TER.GRADY
@ NESTER. PLLC
ATTORNEYS AT LAW
115 COURTHOU5E DRIVE
CL IZASLI RI OWN. N.C. 26337
STATE OF NORTH CAROLINA
COUNTY OF BLADEN
IN THE GENERAL COURT OF JUSTICE
SUPERIOR COURT DIVISION
FILE NO: 05 CVS 879
FREEDMAN FARMS, }
Petitioner
v . } ORDER 1 `
i,
IFAYETTEVILLE DIVISION OF WATER) �%
QUALITY OFFICE }
Respondent )
THIS MATTER corning on to be heard before the undersigned
presiding Superior Court Judge at the September 5, 2006 session
of Civil Superior Court in Bladen County upon Plaintiff's motion
for judicial review of a decision in favor of the Respondent
iFayetteville Division of Water Quality Office. The Court after
hearing arguments of the parties makes the following:
FINDINGS OF FACT
1. That the Court has considered the record
transmitted to the Court by the State of North
Carolina Office of Administrative Hearings, the
same being certified by Chief Administrative Law
Judge R. Julian Mann, III.
2. That the Court has considered the Respondent's
Brief in support of its Opposition to Petition
For Judicial Review.

3. That the Court has specifically read and reviewed
the Final Decision and Order Of Dismissal signed
by Judge Conner, Administrative Law Judge, on
November 21, 2005 and the Court has also examined
the attachment thereto.
4. That the Court has further examined copies of
envelopes wherein the notices appearing were
transmitted or attempted to be transmitted to the
Petitioner herein.
5. That the Court has further considered the
chronology of events as stated by Petitioner's
counsel_
BASED ON THE FOREGOING FINDINGS OF FACT, THE COURT
CONCLUDES AS A MATTER OF LAW:
1. That the Petitioner's rights have been
prejudiced because the decision of the
Administrative Law Judge to dismiss the
Petitioner's Petition was made upon unlawful
procedure in that no affirmative showing is
in the record to demonstrate that the
statutory notice required by General Statute
150E-23C was had.
IT IS THEREFORE ORDERED, ADJUDGED AND DECREED that this
matter is remanded for hearing on the merits by the

Administrative Law Judge after due statutory notice to the
Petitioner.
t
This Sth day of September 2006 signed Nunc Pro Tunc this
day of November 2005.
WILLIAM C. GORE, JR.
SUPERIOR jCOURT JUDGE PR ID'ING
F:\SHARE\CIVIL\free-far\ORDER.doc

� � n
g
State of North Carolina
Delmrtment of Justice
ROY COOPER PO BOX f�29
ATFORNEY GEN'FRAL
Raleigh, North Carolina
27602
October 11, 2006
Gary A. Grady
Hester, Grady & Hester, PLLC
Attorneys at Law
PO Drawer 130
Elizabethtown, North Carolina 28337-0130
RE 1!D
OCT 17
LR�1nW�QlG
Jane L. Oliver
Assistant Attorney General
Environmental Division
Telephone: [phone]
Facsimile: [phone]
Re: Freedman Farms v. Fayetteville Division of Water Quality Office;
05 CVS 0879; Bladen County
Dear Gary:
I am writing to follow-up the September 5, 2006 judicial review hearing in the above -
referenced case. We have not yet received an order from the Superior Court and are wondering
whether an order has been signed by Judge Gore. As you know, this case has dragged on for quite
some time and my client is interested in moving it along. We would appreciate your letting us know
where things stand.
I hope you are doing well.
Sincerely,
�cwu
Jane L. Oliver
Assistant _Attorney General
cc: Ted Bush, Chief, Aquifer Protection Section
Art Barnhardt, Regional Aquifer Protection Supervisor, FRO
Telephone: [phone] / Facsimile: [phone] / Email: [e-mail]

t
FILOFFF:
ID OF
STATE OF NORTH CAROLINA IN THE OFFICE OF
p9Y Z � O� ADMINISTRATIVE 0905 ARINGS
COUNTY OF BLADEN
FREEDMAN FARMS, )
Petitioner, )
}
V. )
}
FAYETTEVILLE DIVISION OF WATER )
QUALITY OFFICE, )
Respondent_ )
FINAL DECISION
ORDER OF DISMISSAL
NOW COMES Administrative Law Judge James L. Conner, II, judge presiding,
-upon Respondent's Motion to Dismiss and makes the following:
FINDINGS OF FACT
1. On June 6, 2005, Petitioner filed a Petition for Contested Case Hearing in
the Office of Administrative Hearings. Chief Administrative Law Judge was assigned
initially to preside at the hearing in this contested case.
2. On June 8, 2005 Chief Administrative Law Judge Mann issued a
Scheduling Order in which he ordered that discovery be completed by September 26,
2005 and that the hearing by held during the week of October 10, 2005.
3. On August 23, 2005, Respondent served discovery requests on Petitioner
in the form of Request for Admissions, Request for Interrogatories, and Request for
Production of Documents. Petitioner failed to respond to these discovery requests.
4. On September 19, 2005, Respondent filed a Motion to Compel Petitioner
to Respond to Respondent's Discovery Requests.
5. On September 26, 2005, Respondent filed a motion to amend the
scheduling order and to continue the hearing because Petitioner had not yet responded to
Respondent's discovery requests.
6. On September 28, 2005, Chief Administrative Law Judge Mann ordered
Petitioner to respond on or before October 6, 2005 if he had objections to the motion
which he wanted to be considered.
7. Petitioner failed to respond by October 6, 2005, as ordered by the Chief
Administrative Law Judge, but he telephoned the Office of Administrative Hearings on

October 7, 2005. Petitioner was instructed by the Chief Administrative Law Judge Mann
to respond to Respondent's discovery requests on or before October 10, 2005:
8. Petitioner failed to respond to Respondent's discovery requests on or
before October 10, 2005, as ordered by Chief Administrative Law Judge Mann. On
October I0, 2005 Chief Administrative Law Judge Mann reassigned the contested case to
the undersigned Administrative Law Judge and scheduled the hearing for the week of
November 14, 2005. A copy of the Order of Continuance and Order of Reassignment
was mailed to both Petitioner and counsel for Respondent on October 12, 2005.
9. On October 11, 2005, Petitioner faxed his responses to Respondent's
discovery requests.
10. On October 20, 2005, the undersigned Administrative Law Judge issued a
Notice of Hearing informing the parties that the hearing in this contested case had been
scheduled for November 14, 2005 in Fayetteville, North Carolina. On the same date, the
Office of Administrative Hearings mailed the Notice of Hearing by certified mail to both
Petitioner and Respondent.
11. The Notice of Hearing was mailed to Petitioner at the address listed by
Petitioner in his Petition for Contested Case Hearing: William B. Freedman, Freedman
Farms, 1282 Jordan Road, Clarkton, NC 28433_ The envelop containing the notice was
returned to the Office of Administrative Hearings and marked "unclaimed" by the U.S.
Postal Service.
12. A second Notice of Hearing was mailed by certified mail to Petitioner at
the address listed in Petitioner's Petition. The second notice was also returned to the
Office of Administrative Hearings marked "unclaimed_"
13. On November 10, 2005, the Office of Administrative Hearings called
Petitioner at the telephone number listed by Petitioner in the Petition and left a message
informing Petitioner that the hearing was scheduled in Fayetteville at 9:30 a-m. on
November 14, ,2005.
14. On the morning of November 14, 2005, Petitioner contacted an employee
of the Division of Water Quality's Fayetteville Regional Office by telephone. Petitioner
indicated that he was aware that the hearing had been scheduled for November 14, 2005
as a result of the telephone message left for him on November 10, 2005.
15. This case was called for hearing at approximately 9:35 a.m. on November
14, 2005 in the Old Cumberland County Courthouse in Fayetteville_ Respondent was
present and ready to go forward with evidence. However, Petitioner failed to appear.
The case was left open to allow additional time for Petitioner to appear. Neither
Petitioner nor anyone on Petitioner's behalf appeared. Petitioner also failed to contact the
Office of Administrative Hearings regarding this matter.
2

16. Counsel for Respondent made a Motion to Dismiss in open court and on
the record on the ground that Petitioner had failed to prosecute his case by failing to
appear.
CONCLUSIONS OF LAW
1. N.C. Gen. Stat. § 150B-33(b) authorizes the presiding Administrative Law
Judge in a contested case to rule on all pre -hearing motions that are authorized by N.C.
Gen. Stat. Ch. IA-1, the Rules of Civil Procedure, and to impose sanctions provided for
in N.C. Gen_ Stat. Ch. 1A-1 and in 26 NCAC'Ch_ 3.
2. N.C_ Gen. Stat. § 15OB-36 authorizes the presiding administrative law
judge to enter a final decision and order dismissing a contested case for failure of the
petitioner to prosecute.
3. Under the Rules of Civil Procedure, an administrative lave judge may
impose sanctions for failure to prosecute when a petitioner "manifests an intention to
thwart progress of an action to its conclusion" or "fails to progress the action towards its
conclusion" by engaging in some delaying tactic. N.C_ Gen. Stat. § lA-1, Rule 41(b).
4. Under the .rules governing administrative hearings, "if a party fails to
appear at a hearing or fails to comply with an interlocutory order of an administrative law
judge, the administrative law judge may dismiss or grant a motion to dismiss. 26 NCAC
3.0114(a).
5. By failing to accept delivery of the Notice of Hearing for the November
14, 2005 hearing when the Office of Administrative Hearings attempted notice by proper
service, and by failing to appear at the hearing or to contact the Office of Administrative
Hearings to cancel or reschedule the hearing, Petitioner has manifested an intention to
thwart to progress of this contested case to its conclusion."
6. The undersigned has considered actions less drastic for disposing of this
contested case and has determined that less drastic actions would not suffice. Petitioner's
failure, after receiving notice of the hearing, to appear or to try to reschedule is
inexcusable.
7. Imposition of sanctions and disposition of this case by dismissal of the
Petition because of Petitioner's failure to prosecute in accord with Chapter 3 of Title 26
of the North Carolina Administrative Code is proper pursuant to N.C. Gen. Stat. § 150B-
33(b)(10) and N.C. Gen. Stat. § IA-1, Rule 41(b).
3

FINAL DECISION
NOW, THEREFORE, based upon the foregoing, the Undersigned hereby grants
Respondent's Motion to Dismiss and ORDERS that this contested case be dismissed with
prejudice.
This is a Final Decision under the authority of G.S. 150B-36(c).
NOTICE
Pursuant to G.S. 150B-45, any party wishing to appeal the final decision of the
Administrative Law Judge may commence such appeal by filing a Petition for Judicial
Review in the Superior Court of Wake County or in the Superior Court of the county in
which the party resides. The party seeking review must file the petition within 30 days
after being served with a written copy of the Administrative Law Judge's Decision and
Order. Pursuant to G.S. 150B-47, the Office of Administrative Hearings is required to
file the official record in the contested case with the Clerk of Superior Court within 30
days of receipt of the Petition for Judicial Review. Consequently, a copy of the Petition
for Judicial Review must be sent to the Office of Administrative Hearings at the time the
appeal is initiated in order to ensure the timely filing of the record.
IT IS SO ORDERED.
This the day of November 2005.
James L. Conner, II
,Administrative Law J
4

A copy of the foregoing was mailed to:
William B Freedman
Freedman Farms
1282 Jordan Road
Clarkton, NC 28433
PETITIONER
Jane L. Oliver
Assistant Attorney General
NC Department of Justice
9001 Mail Service Center
Raleigh, NC 27699-9001
ATTORNEY FOR RESPONDENT
This the 21 st day of November, 2005.
Offiq of Administrative Hearings
6714 Mail Service Center
Raleigh, NC 27699-6714
[phone]
Fax_ [phone]

WArF9Q
Michael F. Easley, Governor
G
William G. Ross Jr., Secretary
`l�
UJ�DF
!n
North Carolina Department of Environment and Natural Resources
0
Alan W. Klimek, P.E. Director
Division of Water Quality
May 5, 2005
CERTIFIED MAIL, — 7002 2410 0003 0273 1415
RETURN RECEIPT REQUESTED
Mr. Barry Freedman
1282 Jordan Road
Clarkton, NC 28433
SUBJECT: Assessment of Civil Penalties
for Making an Outlet to Waters of the State
Without a Permit and Violation of
NPDES General Permit NCA200000
Farm # 9-186
Bladen County
File No. DV 05-006
Dear Mr, Freedman:
RECEIVED
MAY 9 - 2005
4EIR-FAYEMILLE REGIONALOFFICE
This letter transmits notice of a civil penalty assessed against the Ronald Davis Farm in the
amount of $6,989.50 which includes $989.50 in investigative costs. Attached is a copy of the
assessment document explaining this penalty.
This action was taken under the authority vested in me by delegation provided by the Secretary
of the Department of Environment and Natural Resources and the Director of the Division of
Water Quality. Any continuing violation(s) may be the subject of a new enforcement action,
including an additional penalty.
Within thirty days of receipt of this notice, you must do one of the following three items:
1. Submit payment of the penalty:
Payment should be made to the order of the Department of Environment
and Natural Resources. Payment of the penalty will not foreclose further
enforcement action for any continuing or new violation(s). Do not include
the attached waiver force if making payment.
Please send payment to the attention of:
Mr. Steve Lewis
DWQ
1636 Mail Service Center
Raleigh, North Carolina 27699-1636
tatucriar
Aquifer Protection section 1636 Mail service Center Raleigh, NC 27699-1636 Phone [phone] Customer Servicc
Internet: http:a2o.enr.state.nc.us 2728 Capital Boulevard Raleigh, NC 27604 Fax [phone]
Fax [phone]
An Equal Opportunity/Affirmative Action Employer — 50% Recycled/ 10% Post Consumer Paper

W
2. Submit a written request for remission or mitigation including a
detailed justification for such request:
A request for remission or mitigation is limited to consideration of the reasonableness
of the amount of the penalty and is not the proper procedure for contesting the
accuracy of any of the statements contained in the assessment letter. Because a
remission request forecloses the option of an administrative hearing, such a request
must be accompanied by a waiver of your right to an administrative hearing and a
stipulation that there are no factual or legal issues in dispute. You must execute and
return to this office the attached waiver form and the attached "Justification for
Remission Request" which should describe why you believe:
(a) one or more of the civil penalty assessment factors in G.S. 143B-282.1(b)
were wrongfully applied to the detriment of the petitioner;
(b) the violator promptly abated continuing environmental damage resulting from
the violation;
(c) the violation was inadvertent or a result of an accident;
(d) the violator had been assessed civil penalties for any previous violations;
(e) payment of the civil penalty will prevent payment for the remaining necessary
remedial actions.
Please submit this information to the attention of:
Mr. Steve Lewis
DWQ
1636 Mail Service Center
Raleigh, North Carolina 27699-1636
N'
3. Submit a written request for an administrative hearing:
If you wish to contest any portion of the civil penalty assessment, you must request an
administrative hearing. This request must be in the form of a written petition to the
Office of Administrative Hearings and must conform to Chapter 150B of the North
Carolina General Statutes. You must file your original petition with the:
Office of Administrative Hearings
6714 Mail Service Center
Raleigh, North Carolina 27699-6714

AND
Mail or hand -deliver a copy of the petition to:
And to:
Mr. Dan Oakley
NCDENR
Office of General Counsel
1601 Mail Service Center
Raleigh, NC 27699-1601
Mr. Steve Lewis
DWQ
1636 Mail Service Center
Raleigh, North Carolina 27699-1636
Failure to exercise one of the options above within thirty days, as evidenced by a date stamp (not
a postmark) indicating when we received your response, will result in this matter being referred
to the Attorney General's Office with a request to initiate a civil action to collect the penalty.
Please be advised that additional assessments may be levied for future violations which occur
after the review period of this assessment.
If you have any questions, please contact Mr. Steve Lewis at [phone] or Mr. Keith Larick
at [phone].
Sincerely,
Theodore L. Bush, Jr., Chief
Aquifer Protection Section
TLB/scl
ATTACHMENTS
cc: udL Fayetteville APS Regional Supervisor w/ attachments
Mark Brantley, FRO w/ attachments
File # DV 05-006 w/ attachments
APS Central Files w/ attachments
Susan Massengale, PIO w/ attachments

STATE OF NORTH CAROLINA
COUNTY OF BLADEN
IN THE MATTER OF ASSESSMENT
OF CIVIL PENALTIES AGAINST
BARRY FREEDMAN
ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT
COMMISSION
WAIVER OF RIGHT TO AN
ADMINISTRATIVE HEARING AND
STIPULATION OF FACTS
FILE NO. DV 05-006
Having been assessed civil penalties totaling _ $6,989.50 for
violation(s) as set forth in the assessment document of the Director of the Division of Water Quality
dated May 5, 2005 , the undersigned, desiring to seek remission of the civil
penalties, does hereby waive the right to an administrative hearing in the above -stated matter and
does stipulate that the facts are as alleged in the assessment document.
The undersigned further understands that all evidence presented in support of remission of
this civil penalty must be submitted to the Director of the Division of Water Quality within thirty (30)
days of receipt of the civil penalty assessment. No new evidence in support of a remission request
will be allowed after thirty (30) days from the receipt of the civil penalty assessment.
This the day of �20
SIGNATURE
ADDRESS
TELEPHONE

JUSTIFICATION FOR REMISSION REQUEST
DWQ Case Number: DV 05-006 County: Bladen
Assessed Party: Barry Freedman
Permit No. (if applicable): NCA209186 Amount Assessed: $6,989.50
Please use this form when requesting remission of this civil penalty. You must also complete the
"Request For Remission Waiver of ftht to an Administrative Hearinz and Stipulation
Facts" form to request remission of this civil penalty. You should attach any documents that
you believe support your request and are necessary for the Director to consider in evaluating
your request for remission. Please be aware that a request for remission is limited to
consideration of the five factors listed below as they may relate to the reasonableness of the
amount of the civil penalty assessed. Requesting remission is not the proper procedure for
contesting whether the violation(s) occurred or the accuracy of any of the factual statements
contained in the civil penalty assessment document. Pursuant to N.C.G.S. § 143B-282.1(c),
remission of a civil penalty may be granted only when one or more of the following five factors
applies. Please check each factor that you believe applies to your case and provide a detailed
explanation, including copies of supporting documents, as to why the factor applies (attach
additional pages as needed).
(a) one or more of the civil penalty assessment factors in N.C.G.S. 143B-282.1 bO
were wrongfully applied to the detriment of the petitioner (the assessment factors are listed in
the civil penalty assessment document);
(b) the violator promptly abated continuing environmental damage resulting from the
violation (i.e., explain the steps that you took to correct the violation and prevent future
occurrences);
(c) the violation was inadvertent or a result of an accident (i.e., explain why the
violation was unavoidable or something you could not prevent or prepare for);
(d) the violator had not been assessed civil penalties for any previous violations;
(e) payment of the civil penalty will_preventpayment for the remaining necessary
remedial actions (i.e., explain how payment of the civil penalty will prevent you from performing
the activities necessary to achieve compliance).
EXPLANATION (attach additional pages as necessary):

STATE OF NORTH CAROLINA
COUNTY OF BLADEN
IN THE MATTER OF
BARRY FREEDMAN
FOR MAKING AN OUTLET TO THE )
WATERS OF THE STATE OF )
NORTH CAROLINA WITHOUT A PERMIT)
AND VIOLATION OF CONDITIONS OF )
NPDES GENERAL PERMIT NCA200000 )
NORTH CAROLINA
DEPARTMENT OF ENVIRONMENT AND
NATURAL RESOURCES
FILE NO. DV 05-006
FINDINGS AND DECISION
AND ASSESSMENT OF
CIVIL PENALTIES
Acting pursuant to delegation provided by the Secretary of the Department of
Environment and Natural Resources and the Director of the Division of Water Quality, I,
Theodore L. Bush, Jr., Chief of the Aquifer Protection Section of the Division of Water Quality
(DWQ), make the following:
I. FINDINGS OF FACT:
A. Barry Freedman owns and operates the Ronald Davis Farm, a swine operation
located along Highway 210 in Bladen County.
B. Barry Freedman was issued Certificate of Coverage NCA209186 under NPDES
General Permit NCA200000 for the Ronald Davis Farm on April 9, 2003,
effective April 9, 2003, with an expiration date of July 1, 2007. This permit does
not allow the discharge of waste to waters of the State.
C. On January 28, 2005, DWQ staff observed a discharge of wastewater at the
Ronald Davis Farm from a sprayfield to wetlands that drain to an unnamed
tributary of the South River, which are Class C Sw waters of the State within the
Cape Fear River Basin.
D. Barry Freedman had no valid permit for the above -described activity.
E. Condition No. 11. 20. of the NPDES General Permit states "Waste shall not be
applied on land that is flooded, saturated with water, frozen or snow covered at
the time of land application."
F. During the inspection on January 28, 2005, staff observed waste being applied to
land that was frozen.

G. Condition No. III. 19. of the NPDES General Permit states in part "Within five (5)
working days of receiving the request from the Division, the Permittee shall
provide to the Division one (1) copy of all requested information and reports
related to the operation of the animal waste management system."
H. On November 3, 2004, DWQ staff inspected the Ronald Davis Farm and observed
wastewater ponded in a sprayfield and evidence of a discharge from a sprayfield.
On or about November 22, 2004, DWQ sent a Notice of Violation (NOV) to
Barry Freedman. The NOV requested that copies of all pumping records, lagoon
levels, rainfall records and waste analyses from January 1, 2004 to the present be
submitted before December 8, 2004. DWQ has the certified mail green card
showing that Barry Freedman received the NOV on November 29, 2004.
I. On or about December 29, 2004, DWQ sent another NOV to Barry Freedman
stating that Mr. Freedman had failed to respond to the request for the records
referenced in Item G. This NOV requested that the records be submitted by
January 14, 2005. DWQ has the certified mail green card showing that Barry
Freedman received the second NOV on January 3, 2005. To date, DWQ has not
received the requested records.
J. The cost to the State of the enforcement procedures in this matter totaled $989.50.
Based upon the above Findings of Fact, I make the following:
H. CONCLUSIONS OF LAW:
A. Barry Freedman is a "person" within the meaning of G.S. 143-215.6A pursuant to
G.S. 143-212(4).
B. The wetlands that drain to an unnamed tributary to the South River constitute
waters of the State within the meaning of G.S. 143-215.1 pursuant to G.S. 143-
212(6).
C. The above -cited discharge constituted making an outlet to waters of the State for
purposes of G.S. 143-215.1(a)(1), for which a permit is required by G.S. 143-
215.1.
D. Barry Freedman may be assessed civil penalties in this matter pursuant to G.S.
143-215.6A(a)(2), which provides that a civil penalty of not more than twenty-
five thousand dollars ($25,000.00) per violation may be assessed against a person
who is required but fails to apply for or to secure a permit required by G.S. 143-
215.1.
E. Barry Freedman violated Condition No. H. 20. of NPDES General Permit
NCA200000 by applying waste to land that was frozen.

F. Barry Freedman violated Condition No. III. 19. of NPDES General Permit
NCA200000 by failing to provide copies of all requested information and reports
related to the operation of the animal waste management system.
G. Barry Freedman may be assessed civil penalties in this matter pursuant to G.S.
143-215.6A(a)(2), which provides that a civil penalty of not more than twenty-
five thousand dollars ($25,000.00) per violation may be assessed against a person
who fails to act in accordance with the terms, conditions, or requirements of a
permit required by G.S. 143-215.1.
H. The State's enforcement costs in this matter may be assessed against Barry
Freedman pursuant to G.S. 143-215.3(a)(9) and G.S. 143B-282.1(b)(8).
I. The Chief of the Aquifer Protection Section, Division of Water Quality, pursuant
to delegation provided by the Secretary of the Department of Environment and
Natural Resources and the Director of the Division of Water Quality, has the
authority to assess civil penalties in this matter.
Based upon the above Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law, I make the following:
III. DECISION:
Accordingly, Barry Freedman is hereby assessed a civil penalty of:
$_ 120 0 O 0 for making an Outlet to the waters of the State without a
permit as required by G.S. 143-215.1.
$ � 0, OQ for violating Condition No. H. 20. of the NPDES General
Permit NCA200000 by applying waste to land that was
frozen
$ I� 0 D 0, lJc: for violating Condition No. III. 19. of the NPDES General
Permit NCA200000 by failing to provide copies of all
requested information and reports related to the operation
of the animal waste management system
TOTAL CIVIL PENALTY
989.50 Enforcement costs
TOTAL AMOUNT DUE

As required by G.S. 143-215.6A(c), in determining the amount of the penalty I have
considered the factors listed in G.S.143B-282.1(b), which are:
(1) The degree and extent of harm to the natural resources of the State, to the public
health, or to private property resulting from the violation;
(2) The duration and gravity of the violation;
(3) The effect on ground or surface water quantity or quality or on air quality;
(4) The cost of rectifying the damage;
(5) The amount of money saved by noncompliance;
(6) Whether the violation was committed willfully or intentionally;
(7) The prior record of the violator in complying or failing to comply with programs
over which the Environmental Management Commission has regulatory authority;
(8) The cost to the State of the enforcement procedures.
Oatef The re L. Bush, Jr., Chief
Aquifer Protection Section
Division of Water Quality

i
W A *
Michael F. Easley, Governor
0�
RPG
Division of Water Quality
Coleen H. Sullins, Deputy Director
_O�
co 7
Division of Water Quality
r
William G. Ross Jr., Secretary
—!
North Carolina Department ofEnvironmetu and Natural Resources
Alan W. Klimek, P. E. Director
February 2, 2005
CERTIFIED MAIL
RETURN RECEIPT REQUESTED
Mr. Barry Freedman
1282 Jordan Road
Clarkton, NC 28433
Subject; NOTICE OF SHOW CAUSE MEETING
Administrative Code 15A NCAC 2H .0217
Barry Freedman -Owner and OIC of Ronald Davis Farm
Facility No. 09-186
Bladen County
Dear Mr- Freedman,
After inter -office discussion regarding the inspection and compliance history of your farm, the
Ronald Davis Farm (Permit #AWS090186) located off highway 2101n Bladen County, several
areas of concerns were raised. We would like to discuss these issues with you. These items
include but are not limited to how you manage your lagoon level, how you do your record
keeping, and how you manage your spray fields.
The Fayetteville Staff of the Division of Water Quality, Aquifer Protection Section, would like to
offer you the opportunity to discuss these issues. This "Show Cause Meeting" would take place
in the seventh floor conference room of the Division of Water Quality Offices located in the
Systel Building at 225 Green Street in Fayetteville, North Carolina. You should bring any
records, CAWMP, diagrams or any other information that you might need to answer any
questions_ The proposed date of the meeting is Thursday February 17, 2005 in the Seventh Floor
Conference Room at 1:00 pm that afternoon.
PIease respond within 5 days of receipt of this letter to acknowledge your desire to discuss this
matter.
N. C. Division of Water Quality 225 Green Street Fayetteville, North Carolina 29301-5043 [phone] Fax [phone]
WMENR
Customer Service
1-877-623-6748

Mr. Freedman
Page 2
February 2, 2005
f
If you have any questions concerning this matter, please do not hesitate to contact either Mr.
Mark Brantley, Environmental Specialist, or myself at [phone].
Sincerely,
Larry Baxley
Environmental Specialist
cc: Keith Larick - Compliance Group
Chris Bordeaux- Biaden Co. N RCS
Trent Allen — SWC, FRO
Central Files - Raleigh
N. C. Division of Water Quality 225 Green Street Fayetteville, North Carolina 28301-5043 [phone] Fax [phone]
•"m
&VA
WDENR
Customer Service
1-877-623-6748

A
.o
wA rR
P
w � -1
�
..rati.. - `C
November 17, 2004 ?
CERTIFIED MAIL
RETURN RECEIPT REQUESTED
Mr. Barry Freedman
1282 Jordan Road
Clarkton, North Carolina 28433
,`O�
i?- z( Ja i
Michael F. Easley, Governor
William G. Ross Jr., Secretary
North Carolina Department of Environment and Natural Resources
Subject: NOTICE OF VIOLATIONMOTICE OF INTENT
NCGS 143-215 et seq. & Section 402 of the Clean Water Act
Ronald Davis Farm
Facility No. 9-186
Bladen County
Permit No. 200000
Dear Mr. Freedman,
Alan W. Klimek, P-E_ Director
Division of Water Quality
You are hereby notified that, having been permitted to have a National Pollutant Discharge Elimination (NPDES)
permit for the subject animal waste disposal system pursuant to N. C. General Statutes 143-215 et seq. and
Section 402 of the Clean Water Act, you have been found to be in violation of your NPDES Permit.
Violation 1: Failure to respond to a request for information. (Permit No. 200000 Section 111 Condition 11)
The Notice Of Violation received by you on November 29, 2004 requested the following information.
The Division of Water Quality requests that you please submit the following items on or before December 8, 2004:
1. Copies of all the pumping records, lagoon levels, rainfall records and waste analyses for this farm from
January 1, 2004 to the present along with a copy of your CAWMP.
2. Please have the OIC for this farm include an explanation as to how this violation occurred. (This is referring
to the violation listed on the NOV you received on November 29, 2004.)
3. Please have the OIC include a list of the steps that will be taken to prevent this violation from occurring in
the future. (This is referring to the violation listed on the NOV you received on November 29, 2004.)
Required Corrective Action for Violation 1:
Please respond to the request for information listed above on or before January 14, 2005 as required by your
NPDES permit_ Consideration for enforcement may be considered if you do not respond to this request.
on
e Carolina
,11�amrallY
North Carolina Division of Water QualityiAquifer Protection Section 225 Green St./ Suite 714 Fayetteville, NC 28301 Phone [phone]
FAX [phone] Internet: h2o.enr.state.nc.us Customer Service 1-877-623-6748
An Equal OpportunitylAtfrmatKe Action Employer - 50% Recycledll0% Post Cor starer Paper

Mr. Freedman
November 17, 2004
Page 2
Please be advised that this notice does not prevent the Division of Water Quality from taking enforcement actions
for this violation or any past or future violation. Furthermore, the Division of Water Quality has the authority to levy
a civil penalty of not more than $25,000.00 per day per violation.
If you do not believe enforcement is appropriate for this violation, please include a detailed, written justification of
why you feel that this office should not proceed with a recommendation for enforcement. Again, this office should
receive our response on or before January 14, 2005. Information submitted to this office will be reviewed and, if
enforcement is still deemed appropriate, will be forwarded to the Director with the enforcement package for his
consideration.
If you have any questions concerning this matter, please do not hesitate to contact either Mr. Mark Brantley,
environmental specialist, or myself at [phone].
Sincerely,
Stephen, Barnhardt
Regional Aquifer Protection Supervisor
SBltab
cc: Keith Larick - Compliance Group
Trent Allen — SWC, FRO
Central Fifes - Raleigh

■ Complete items 1, 2, and 3. Also complete
A. ed by Peas CkarlYl B.
to of every
Rem 4 if Restricted Delivery Is desired.
■ Print Your name and address on the reverse
so that we can return the card to you.
C. ature
■ Attach this card to the back of the mallpiece,
X
❑ Age
or on the front if space permits.
❑ Addressee
D. Is address different from item 1?
❑ Yes
1. Arkle,Addressed to;
i
If YES, enter delivery address below:
❑ No
-
I MR. BARRY FREEDMAN
1282 JORDAN .ROAD
CLARKTON NC 28433
.
s r
. 0 Certified
ertMail ❑Express Mad
•
❑ Registered ❑ Retum Receipt for Madwdise
❑ Insured Mail ❑ C.O.D.
4. Restricted Delivery? (Fxtra Fee)
❑Yes
s. Article Number '- 0 01
2 510 0003 8090 4374
� (&artsfier;ivm service J - = #:7
PS Form 3811, March 2001 Domestic Return Receipt
102s9s01-►t-t424 '
r�'1 _ y .i
Postage $ • 37
Cr C3 Certi[7ed Fee Postrrwk
=0 Return Receipt Fee Re1°
M P mt 12/29/04
O Restricted Davey Fee
o (Endorsement Required)
0
O Total Postage 3 Fees ,$
a
to W.0 BARRY FREEDMAN
ru------------------------------ ---- ----------------------•-----------
st eet. Apt No.: 1282 JORDAN
or Ao Sox Mo.
---------------------------------------------
r,
o tMtdbli, NC 28433

MRR-18705 03:04 PM AGRIMENT SERVICES INC. 12525682750
P-03
C0NTRACT0148 & ENCINEERS kN11110NAIENTAL TESTING LABORATC
CLIENT NAME AGiRIMENT Sl'.,.P.VICI',s W'., WASTE MANGF:WNT CONSULTANTS
ADDRESS PO BOX 1096
CITY,STATE,ZIP BE ULAVILLE, NC 28518
SITE LOCATION BARRY FREEDMAN
SAMPLE TYPE LAGOON & DISCIIARGE
DATE COLLECTED; 01-28-05
DATE REPORTED :02-28-05
LABORATORY -REPORT
TABULATION OF ANALYTICAL RESULTS
PARAMETERS
LAGOON
MATRIX
W CLASS E
FECAL COLIFORM (MIFN)
�8013 (5-DAY).
1110*
SOLIDS. TOTAL SUSPENDED
288
NITROGEN: AMMONIA (as NJ_____
NITROGEN: KJELDAHL (as N)
524
NITRATE+ NITRITE
6.26
NITROGEN: NITRATEas N)
,PHOSPHORUS: ORTHO (as P1
I
53-0
PHOSPHORUS: ISSP-LV-P
53.5
DISCHARGE UNITS
W CLASS
160000 MPW100m1
... . ..... ..
113.0 mg/L
152 mglL
mg/L
1.18
IL
NOTES:
I The gluco5e.glutamic acid standards analysed with this sample yielded rosull
outside of the control limits specified in SM 2510B (167.5-228,5 rng/Q
these standards yielded 136.9 mg/L. 1213,8 mg/L and 154.4 mall.
Individual Reports are enclosed
STRL LAB CERTIFICATION NUMBERS: NC DEHNR DW-37708, NCDWQ-21
GH082697
U10 -v.
I
5i
.}'Wp

­.. -1 1-- -
259214OPP, MILLS ROAD
STATE CI RT ID.
FAYETTFVILLE, NC 28306
NC #I I
[phone] FAX [phone]
NC 937714
R. W. SANDERS, VICE PRFSTDENT
USDA #3787
http://www.n-iicrobac.coin E-Mail:
rsandm@microb�ac.com
CHEMISTRY - MICROBIOLOGY - FOOD SAFETY - CONSUMER PRODUCTS
WATER - AIR - WASTES - FOOD - PHARMACEUTICALS - NUTRACE17TCALS
CERTIFICATE OF -ANALYSIS
NC DSkR - DWQ
Date Reported:
Mr. Paul Rawls
Date Received;
1/28/2U05
225 Grepn Street
Order Number:
0501-00385
Suite #714
Invoice No.:
Fayetteville, NC 28301
Customer #.-
N003
Sample Date:
It-28/2005
Permit No.
Sample Time:
0:00
Sampler; L. Baxley
Subject: EffiStrearn - Barry Freedman
SNIP 'rest
Method
Result
Date
Time Tech
00 1..:
",7
DOD 5-day
EPA 405.1
4SB mg/L
V28/2005
1530 GWJ
COUFORM, FECAL
SM18 9222D
16000 dulloo M1
1128(2005
14:33 H-11
NITROGEN, AMMONIA
EPA 350.2
mg/L
0:00
H..
Ot "_M�
BOD 5-day
EPA 405.1
458 mg/L
1/28/200S
15:30
GWJ
COLIFORM, FECAL
SM18 92220
43000 cfuJI00 ml
1/28/2005
14:33
HI)
NITROGEN, AMMONIA
EPA 353.2
mg/L
0:00
SOD 5-day
EPA 405.1
203 mg/L
1/2812005
1530
GWJ
COLIFDRM, FECAL
SM18 9222D
12000 cfu/100 fnl
1/2812005
14,33
HJJ
NITROGEN, AMMONIA
EPA 350.2
mg/L
0:00
PRELIMINARY
REPORT
RESPECTFULLY SUBMI11ED:
MICROBAC LABORATORIES, INC.
LAB CODES: N/D = None Octcdcd NIP =Nwc Found = Jxss than >--Gwat=dian Est. =Estirnaft;d
The MR aril hromiaVon an thts, and ott*r aax"Vanym d—n—ts, rEP—t 0* thc wrrac(5) analyzed ana Is tendtfed upon andbm MEMBER
that it i$ not to be reproduced wholly or in Met for advertising or outer purposes Md=t approv*1 from the taboratory.
L)58A.EPA-N105F. Tft,6mg FoW sanitnon CwsutdriV Chemkil and Mcmmlagkal Analyses and Resorch
I Hv5i �LL8�98M:XVE AIC AV�-OVEOEOifi P Z�:60 NOfi SO-LO-939

N
•i�
warF�
Q
Michael F. Easley, Governor
William G. Ross Jr., Secretary
North Carolina Department of Environment and Natural Resources
Alan W. Klimek, P.E. Director
Division of Water Quality
November 22, 2004
CERTIFIED MAIL
RETURN RECEIPT REQUESTED
Mr. Barry Freedman
1282 Jordan Road
Clarkton, North Carolina 28433
Subject: NOTICE OF VIOLATION
NCGS 143-215 et seq. & Section 402 of the Clean Water Act
Ronald Davis Farm
Facility No. 9-186
Bladen County
Permit No. 200000
Dear Mr. Freedman,
You are hereby notified that, having been permitted to have a National Pollutant Discharge Elimination (NPDES)
permit for the subject animal waste disposal system pursuant to N. C. General Statutes 143-215 et seq. and
Section 402 of the Clean Water Act, you have been found to be in violation of your NPDES.Permit.
Violation 1: - Failure to apply waste in accordance with the facility's certified animal waste plan. (Permit
No. 200000 Section II Condition 4)
On 11-3-04 ponding and evidence of a discharge was observed in a spray field during a routine inspection.
Required Corrective Action for Violation 1:
Please apply waste in rates set forth in the facility's certified animal waste management plan to avoid ponding and
runoff of waste from the spray field.
The Division of Water Quality requests that, in addition to the specified corrective action above, please submit the
following items on or before December 8. 2004.
1. Copies of all the pumping records, lagoon levels, rainfall records and waste analyses for this farm from
January 1, 2004 to the present along with a copy of your CAWMP.
2. Please have the OIC for this farm include an explanation as to how this violation occurred.
3. Please have the OIC include a list of the steps that will be taken to prevent this violation from occurring in
the future.
N Carolina
�alura!!r�
North Carolina Division of Water Quality/Aquifer Protection Section 225 Green StJ Suite 714 Fayetteville, NC 28301 Phone [phone]
FAX [phone] Internet h2o.enrstate.nc.us Customer Service 1-877-623-6748
An Equal Opportunity/Affirmative Acian Employer— 50% Recycled110% Post Consumer Paper

Mr. Freedman
November 22, 2004
Page 2
Please be advised that this notice does not prevent the Division of Water Quality from taking enforcement actions
for this violation or any past or future violation. Furthermore, the Division of Water Quality has the authority to levy
a civil penalty of not more than $25,000.00 per day per violation.
If you have any questions concerning this matter, please do not hesitate to contact either Mr. Mark Brantley,
environmental specialist, or myself at [phone].
Sincerely,
J�
Stephen A. Barnhardt
Regional Aquifer Protection Supervisor
SBltab
cc: Keith Larick - Compliance Group
Trent Allen — SWC, FRO
Central Files - Raleigh

■ Complete items 1, 2, and 3. Also complete
&A3eceived by FWnt
B. Date of Defiv
4 item 41f Restricted Delivery is desired.
/�'
g
■ Print your name and address on the reverse
C. Signa
so that we can return the card to you.
i ■ Attach this card to the back of the maiipiece,
X
or on the front if space permits.
❑ Addressee
Tess different from item 17
If YES, enter delivery address below:
❑ Yes
❑ No
i 1. Article Addressed to:
I
MR. BARRY FREEDMAN
'E 1282 JORDAN RD.
CLARKTON, NC 28433
3. Service Type
❑ certified Mail ❑ Express Mail
❑ Registered ❑ Return Receipt for Merchandise
I
❑ Insured Mail ❑ C.O.D.
4. Restricted Delfver/? (Extra Fee)
❑ Yes
l 2. Article Number 7O01
2510 ClOQ3 8090 4428
(Transfer f. se►. law
PS Form 3811, March 2001 j Domestic Retum Receipt
10259s-ot-M-1424
'• -
(DomestIc Mail Only;
.-Provided)
•
cc
ru
t ` .q
U E
o
Postage
s .37
CertMed Fee
c33
Postmark
Retum Receipt Fee
Here
M
(Endorsement Requirad}
11/23/04
f3
RMWeted Delivery Fee
O
(Endorsement Required]
O
O
Total Postage 8 Fees
$
.
r-1
Sent To
v
-MR - BARRY FREF,DW
----•-------------------
-----------------------------------
------------------
a
a otaft- 1282 JORDAN RD.
OStare
ZIP.Q ----------------- -••-------------•-----------------------------
d
TON, NC 28433

i
MAR-22--05 10:15 AM AGRIMENT SERVICES INC.
,1 ,•'
` ,
P.O. Box 1096
4ft AGRIMENT SERVICES INC. BEULAVILLE, N.C. 28518
OFFICE [phone]
wASM MANAGHIAIiOIT CO#MLTMTS M0611 E: [phone]A
TO LARRY BAXLEY. OWO • FAYETTEVILLE
FAX. [phone]
PHONE f(252j 568 ?Se9
RE. BARRY FREEMAN
❑ Urgent
12525682750
FROM GENO KENNEOY
DATE. MARCH 22. 2005
TIME: 12:00 PM
PAGES: 1 YAGLS FOLLOW
2 For Review ❑ Please Comment ❑ Please Reply
❑ Please Recycle
Larry,
I thought Barry had signed and sent in this form a long time ago. The discharge letter for Barry was
Faxed on 1/28/05 5:23 pm to the Sladen Journal Daily and to WBLAM/GQR Radio on 126/05
5:25 pm. I also sent an email copy of the pits and discharge letter. to you on that day.
Thanks,
Geno Kennedy
P.01

MAR-22-05 10:16 AM AGRIMENT SERVICES INC. 12525682750 P.02
A
William Freedman
1282 Jordan Road
Clarkton, NC 28433
[phone]
1/31/o5
Mr. Larry Baxley
DiviAiun ofWater Quality
%'achovia Building Suite r 1,1
Fayettevil!c, NC 2.9301
Mr. Baxlc, y,
This momo is to address tli(, complalut inspection that orvirred Oil 1/28/05 and
resulted in -I Noric-t- ni'Violation fbr my farm (FN 09-186). 1 %vanted to docuinrrit the
cormctivt actluns that linve been tag 'vrl a,,; req!.ItNted by DWQ.
-
Upon first knowledge of thc discharge a contractor (SSS Farms and Cleaning
Service) Ivas hirod to Contain the spill and land apply t1w. comainud wastc back
into approved sprayfleld.
1. We iinmidiately permed and contained the tvastewater before it impacted any
more, surfs waters, Tlie waste was pUrnped .vasty hacii- into %vaste strortm-P. or
into Spfayfit:ld with suction truck. As of 1125)105 11-0. Were still pumpi lig 1be
SLIIIIJ) ffl_eaS as needed.
.1. Contrai'tors wnro hived to sampIQ the Lagoon "vaste and discharged waste ful-
specified parameters of the NPDES permit. ContracLur was hired to docullit-lit
with I)Igl Lal Pictures (emailod on i the. Cori-c-r-tivo Actions as they wcre
taking place.
Slierl _11's Dept was notified to Conduct all Officiid I systorn. Report will bc, madr available to f)\,VQ opon comph-tion.
5. Notice of Discharge wa,,; sent to the required media outlets on 1/28/0.r,
I hope this addresses the' violations noted on my farm,
Wilt Kind 14

i
Waitir Quali
Djiv4sioA:of iioW use
atei. C6 er-Ageng-
Type of Visit 0 Compliance Inspection 0 Operation Review 0 Lagoon Evaluation
Reason for Visit SP Routine 0 Complaint 0 Follow up 0 Emergency Notification 0 Other D Denied Access
Facility Number Date or Visit: U� Time: I 11 Printed on: 7/21/2000
I--- - r0­7otOperational 0 Below Threshold
13 Permitted [3 Certified El Conditionally Certified (3 Registered Date Last Operated or Above Threshold: .........................
Farm Name: ........... .. . .... County:....._..... ................. .......................
OwnerName........3Phone No: ........................................................e.......... ...........................................................
Facility Contact: ............... ertic: ................................................................ Phone No: ........................................ . .........
�
4lailing Address: ..........................
Onsite Representative: Integrator:
.......... S . . ................................ .....................
Certified Operator: ........................... ........................ ............................................................. Operator Certification Number:..........._.._...----...................
Location'of Farm:
[3 Swine ❑ Poultry E] Cattle El Horse Latitude 0 Longitude 9
` Design Cur'rent Design Cuhent
-C
'11!oultri 66101 z Qi� Poplili6 Capacity P6puladon -Poli
n Cattle
ty Capsido; Ub
Wean to Feeder JE3 Layer 1 0 Dairy
Feeder to Finish 3,20,0 j Zko() I[] Non -Layer 0 Non -Dairy
I.
Farrow to Wean
10 Other
Farrow to Feeder
Farrow to Finish Ity,
Total Design Ca paci
Gilts
-"-IBoars Total;SSLW7r-
Subsurface Drains Present 0 --JF- Lagnon Area Spray Field Area
Ho PondsSofid Ti Q No Liquid Waste Management System
Discharges & Stream Impacts
1. Is any discharge observed from any part of the operation?❑ Yes JRNo
Discharge originated at: [I Lagoon 0 Spray Field 0 Other
a. If discharge is observed, was the conveyance inan-made? 0 Yes A -No
b. If discharge is observed, did it reach Water of the State? (if yes, notify DWQ) 0 Yes —E No
c. II'discharge is observed. what, is the estimated flow in gal/min'!
cl. Does discharge bypass a lagoon system? (If yes, notify DWQ) 0 Yes ANo
2. Is there evidence of past discharge from any part of the operation? [I Yes J:Q No
3. Were there any adverse impacts or potential adverse impacts to the Waters of the State other than from a discharge? C] Yes 'DkNo
Waste Collection & Treatment
4. Is storage capacity (freeboard plus storm storage) less than adequate?
Structure I Structure 2 Structure 3
Identifier: ............ S/ . ............................
[I Spillway []Yes *'No
Structure 4 structure 5 Structure 6
.. .................................... .................................... ................................
Freeboard (inches):
5100
Continued on back

Water -4 uali
'Water onservati on'.
Type of Visit Compliance Inspection 0 Operation Review 0 Lagoon Evaluation
Reason for Visit 1DRoutine OComplaint OFollow up 0 Emergency Notification 00the"r ❑ Denied Access
Facility Number O Date of Visit:
[3 Permitted [3 Certified 13 Conditionally Certified [] Registered
Farm Name: .......... A;�Av e,11.tmp .,Awey.n:t.2��
_�?_& .. 7--.. -.F , ,
'Owner Name. e.4
Facility Contact:
.......................
Time: 1761 Printed on: 7/21/2000
FO Not Operational 0 Below Threshold
Date Last Operated or Above Threshold: .......................
County: .......... 7
_A. ............... ....................
Phone No:
Phone No:
MailingAddress:.,...,,
Onsite Representative,..... ...... .
.
.....................................................................................
f
Integrator: .......
.....f".....
..........................
CertifieI
d Operator: ...................... ............................ ......................... ...................................
Operator Certification Number:........_.................................
Location of Farm:
P—ni
13 Swine [3 Poultry [3 Canto ❑ Horse Latitude
Longitude
Design- 'Current- Design
Current
bn . Pbultr�
�Capidty Populikti cwcitY
P6 d
pidation Cat. e Catijft,,,_%VWIAtjojj1,
Wein to Feeder ❑1'�Uyer
:15
Dairy
Feeder to Finish �:?240 j 241>6 I[] Non -Layer L
I[] Non -Dairy I
Farrowto Wean
Farrow to Feeder r] Other I
!Am Farrow to Finish
tal Design pa
ToCaol,
Gilts
Boars
T0tW.SSLVy,7
Subsurface Drains Present ❑ Lag-mArea 10
Spray Field Area
a S No Liquid Waste Management System
Discharges A Stream Lnnacts
1, Is any discharge observed from any part of the operation? 0 Yes ERNo
Discharge originated at: Ej Lagoon [] Spray Field El Other
a. If discharge is observed, was the conveyance man-made? 0 Yes ITTo
bl. If discharge is observed. did it reach Water of the State'? (if yes, notify DWQ) D Yes E No
c. II'discharge is observed. what is the estimated flow in gal/inin?
d. Does discharge bypass a lagoon system'? (If yes, notify DWQ) 0 Yes IRNo
2. Is there evidence of past discharge from any part of the operation? []Yes -[R No
3. Were there any adverse impacts or potential adverse impacts to the Waters of the State other than from a discharge? [I Yes �No
Waste Collection & Treatment
4. Is storage capacity (freeboard plus storm storage) less than adequate?
Structure I Structure 2 Structure 3
.Identifier: ............
Freeboard (inches):
5100
❑ Spillway []Yes '�wo
Structure 4 Structure 5 Structure 6
................. .................. ................. ....................................
Continapd on back

[FacilityNamber:09— Date of Inspection
5. Are there any immediate threats to the integrity of any of the structures observed? (ie/ trees, severe erosion, ❑ Yes 1XN0
seepage, etc.)
6. Are there structures on -site which are not properly addressed and/or managed through a waste management or
closure plan? ❑ Yes A, 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 maintenancetimprovement?
❑ Yes
RNo
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 AnPlication
10. Are there any buffers that need maintenance/improvement?
❑ Yes
X&o
11. Is there evidence of over application? ❑ Excessive Ponding ❑ PAN ❑ Hydraulic Overload
❑ Yes
Wo
12. Crop type]
10,
13. Do the receiving crops differ with those designated in the Certified Animal Waste Management Plan (CAWMP)?
❑ Yes
PffNo
14. a) Does the facility lack adequate acreage for land application?
❑ Yes
F$No
b) Does the facility need a wettable acre determination?
❑ Yes
PtNo
c) This facility is pended for a wettable acre determination?
❑ Yes
f ja�No
15. Does the receiving crop need improvement?
❑ Yes
MN� o
16. Is there a lack of adequate waste application equipment?
❑ Yes
Flo
Required Records & Documents
17. Fail to have Certificate of Coverage & General Permit readily available?
"Yes
❑ No
18. Does the facility fail to have all components of the Certified Animal Waste Management Plan readily available?
(ie! WLJP, checklists, den, maps, etc.) �
Yes
No
19. Does record keeping need improvement? (ie/6;�,waste analysts & soil sample reports)
Yes
❑ No
20. Is facility not in compliance with any applicable setback criteria in effect at the time of design?
❑ Yes
1KNo
21. Did the facility fail to have a actively certified operator in charge?
❑ Yes
Mlo
22. Fail to notify regional DWQ of emergency situations as required by General Permit?
(ie/ discharge, freeboard problems, over application)
❑ Yes
Mo
23. Did Reviewer/Inspector fail to discuss review/inspection with on -site representative?
❑ Yes
,kNo
24. Does facility require a follow-up visit by same agency?
❑ Yes
Ovo
25. Were any additional problems noted which cause noncompliance of the Certified AWMP?
❑ Yes )UNo
i4•*i0tpL gris'et-dgfcxepc�es wire � :e�1 d rr>f�g #bis;v�sitt Yo> fPIt
• comes- deQce abvuti this visit:
�-,�! d.w,r,€� cL/�i✓�fl'r.¢� ��-" rP�cacc�.l c>�k�,,,�lk,c-�,c.��o�,l
Ae
Gu Qie- X A � ",oe,0C jN / fi►.� (7 yip✓ /h.a�.✓ ir'i�q �c',� r /
Reviewer/Inspector Name f '� - -• ,_
Reviewer/Inspector Signature: Date: 5100

> "YTri7,,;,rY+'wC+p�L:�Z'- �, ,.s •7A• _ •r `tr. ..� r.5r' '- r �i.r .�...-.✓•..., . w r ,. r , .�...... �. H. .. r. Y - .w..- ., .
Va'4ty u>}tber• — Date of Inspection l�
5. Are there aay immediate�threats to the integrity of any of the'structures observed? (ie/ trees, severe erosion, ❑ Yes [�No
't. seepage, etc.)
6. Are there structures on -site which are not properly addressed and/or managed through a waste management or
closure plan? ❑ Yes j�kNo
(If any of questions 4-6 was answered yes, and the situation poses an
immediate public health or environmental threat, notify DWQ)
7. Do any of the structures need maintenance/improvement? ❑ Yes ['No
8. Does any part of the waste management system other than waste structures require maintenance/improvement? ❑ Yes ;-No
9. Do any stuctures lack adequate, gauged markers with required maximum and minimum liquid level
elevation markings? ❑ Yes ❑ No
Waste Application
10. Are there any buffers that need maintenancelimprovement? ❑ Yes No
11. Is there evidence of over application? [I Excessive Ponding ❑ PAN ❑ Hydraulic Overload ❑ Yes �No
12. Crop type �-R!^I-Stitt -
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?
(iel V UP. checklists, design, maps, etc.)
19. Does record keeping need improvement? (ie/ Q�rcebowasteanalysis & 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?
❑ Yes
(ffNo ,
❑ Yes
(gNo
1 .
❑ Yes
P&No
❑ Yes
2 No
❑ Yes
brNo
❑ Yes INo
'Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes /@ No
PkYes ❑ No
❑ Yes TKNo
❑ Yes kNo
22. Fail to notify regional DWQ of emergency situations as required by General Permit?
(iel discharge, freeboard problems, over application) ❑ Yes 07No
23. Did Reviewer/Inspector fail to discuss review/inspection with on -site representative? ❑ Yes J�kNo
24. Does facility require a follow-up visit by same agency? ❑ Yes BVo
25. Were any additional problems noted which cause noncompliance of the Certified AWMP? ❑ Yes )•No
Ni-vQFOWo ffce00�9 *4rOW ht.Yot •r. -it ..............................................
itibnsrswu�r ,
:.. corresi)� deike: alxrut: this visit: .::.::...:.:.. .
d!✓.✓�' C� /G� ����%1fri it ^ /�'J�Ca.C�r.( C�kt/ �i� .C.�7/�prsa'f
wf•-� cam, � c�� � � �,�-�,�� C��. �, v��� �s -�
S� C �r .e � /C+� stir r �y� � �N /� /ts�� ���i.J �yr.ai.✓�i�'i� �,�C�f /
f /
Reviewer/Inspector Name
Reviewer/Inspector Signature: Date: 5/00

ihvisron of Water
Ar-
Q Drvrs�oa of Sod! and Water Conservatran x
Q:Other Agency�_ ;
Type of Visit ® Compliance Inspection O Operation Review 0 Lagoon Evaluation 1
for Visit 0 Routine 0 Complaint O Follow up O Emergency Notification 0 Other ❑ Denied Access
Facility Number Date of Visit: s2 d Time: �. printed on: 7/21/2000
Q Not Operational O Below Threshold
■ Permitted 0 Certified ❑ Conditionally Certified ❑ Registered Date Last Operated or Above Threshold: ...................
Farm Name: �Q Cilr`,�"Ji4r�•�- � z ... County: ......... �L.�>.............................................
.......... .................................................. .........
OwnerName:........... fX . ............... � 'n" .......................... Phone 1'0:.................................................. _..................................
Facility Contact: ... " .....K . ..................... .......... �'.:`f''`.'........ Title: ................................................................ Phone No:...........
Mailing Address: .........11Z.7....... Tip dw.±cJiY......
..................
.......
Onsite Representative: ��✓ A
J�l...��7........... fibIntegrator:
, -`. z .y"" ....Ff ^ .... ...... ......... .
Certified Operator:.................................................................................................. .. Operator Certification Number:..........................................
Location of Farm:
IV
❑ Swine ❑ Poultry ❑ Cattle ❑ Horse Latitude �• �° ��� Longitude �• �' °°
Desio Current "
.. : ".snsrlta Poantiittinn.
Wean to Feeder
Feeder to Finish
32.00
x
Farrow to Wean
Farrow to Feeder
:F Farrow to Finish
Gilts
Boars
r;o Lagoons
Design Current Design Current
Poultry Capacity population Cattle °-Po 'tioa
❑ Layer ❑ Dairy
❑ Non -Layer I I Non-Dairy
l I
Other
Total Design Capacity
Total S3Lw
Discharges & Stream Impacts
1. Is any discharge observed from any part of the operation?
10 Subsurface Drains Preseat to L.agnon Area Ig Spray Field Area
No Liquid Waste Management System F
Discharge originated at: ❑ Lagoon ❑ Spray Field ❑ Other
a. If discharge is observed, was the conveyance man-made?
b. If discharge is observed. did it reach Water of the State? (If yes, notify DWQ)
c. If discharge is observed. what is the estimated flow in gal/min?
d. Does discharge bypass a lagoon system? (If yes, notify DWQ)
2. Is there evidence of past discharge from any part of the operation?
3. Were there any adverse impacts or potential adverse impacts to the Waters of the State other than from a discharge?
Waste Collection & Treatment
4. Is storage capacity (freeboard plus storm storage) less than adequate? ❑ Spillway
Structure 1 Structure 2 Structure ; Structure 4 Structure 5
Identifier: ..............S .y............................................... ......... I ..........................
❑ Yes No
❑ Yes ANo
❑ Yes Wo
❑ Yes No
❑ Yes No
❑ Yes �No
❑ Yes No
Structure 6
Freeboard (inches):
5100 Continued an back

• Facility Number: d - / Date of Inspection Printed on: 10/26/2000
5. Are there any immediate threats to the integrity of any of the structures observed? (jet 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 FN0
(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 PNo
8. Does any part of the waste management system other than waste structures require maintenance/improvement? ❑ Yes (11No
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 main tenancelimprovement? ❑ Yes 1KNo
11. Is there evidence of over application? ❑ Excessive Ponding ❑ PAN ❑ Hydraulic Overload ❑ Yes k No
12. Crop type
13.
Do the receiving crops differ with those designated in the Certified Animal Waste Management Plan (CAWMP)?
❑ Yes
'gNo
14,
a) Does the facility lack adequate acreage for land application?
❑ Yes
No
b) Does the facility need a wettable acre determination?
❑ Yes
KNo
c) This facility is pended for a wettable acre determination?
❑ Yes
PfNo
15.
Does the receiving crop need improvement?
Cl Yes
XNo
16.
Is there a lack of adequate waste application equipment?
❑ Yes
XNo
Required Records & Documents
17.
Fail to have Certificate of Coverage & General Permit readily available?
❑ Yes
PtNo
18.
Does the facility fail to have all components of the Certified Animal Waste Management Plan readily available?
(jet WUP, checklists, design, maps, etc.)
❑ Yes
ANo
r I--"
19.
1----
Does record keeping need improvement? (i irriga5freeboard, waste analysis & soil sample reports)
Ayes
❑ No
20.
is facility not in compliance with any applicable setback criteria in effect at the time of design?
❑ Yes
N$No
21.
Did the facility fail to have a actively certified operator in charge?
❑ Yes
&[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 10 No
24. Does facility require a follow-up visit by same agency? ❑ Yes allo
25. Were any additional problems noted which cause noncompliance of the Certified AWMP? ❑ Yes ff No
iq j+ioiaiiot�s. . delieien... mere noted dtrririg his:vis�t� Yoh wiil reegiye trio fui-th r
corirespon�en€e a�otit this
Comments {refer to:queshon #) : Explain any YES answers.and/ornny-recommendations or:any other comments ;
Use &rawiings of_faciility-to:better explain siti ations.`(use additionai'pages as nee - � �•
essary}
�,:..4 ,l�r//!/� ®G✓.✓�>C. —So "yam � _ / tic /,�'ci�"�`�
Reviewer/Inspector Name
Reviewer/Inspector Signature: Date: _r/25/00

Facility Number: d --AV Date of Inspection 2 Q Printed on: 10/26/2000
Odor Issues
26. Does the discharge pipe from the confinement building to the storage pond or lagoon fail to discharge at/or below f9Yes ❑ 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 ,$jNo
28. Is there any evidence of wind drift during land application? (i.e. residue on neighboring vegetation, asphalt, ❑ Yes r,fNo
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 NINo
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 9No
31. Do the animals feed storage bins fail to have appropriate cover? ❑ Yes ErNo
32. Do the flush tanks lack a submerged fill pipe or a permanent/temporary cover? ❑ Yes ONo
JAdditionW'Cornrnents,and/ar•Drawings:---- - -
5100

r�r^v`•"h:"`..r.++.sT.l4r'.b4wTr�v:...-.y"�•/!r�'^-3tiiw^nr?�r 'Sn•w.-r'�.- �n --:f 11'�-•�-•,4•f ,�.�,. .. ..
-. �:x•�§4�s1.+4��''�y�.•�-'•'�+f` . .,�.._."'^�"`r+ti•frai�'�S*h-�rop+v^•.�,.F'r"r i
M
of Visit Q Compliance Inspection O Operation Review O Lagoon Evaluation
for Visit © Routine O Complaint O Follow up O Emergency Notification O Other ❑ Denied Access
DateufVisitTIT-216/ : Time: y%mod Printed on: 7/21/20QU
Facility Number ��
r Q Not Operational Q Below Threshold
13 Permitted 43 Certified [j Conditionally Certified ❑ Registered Date bast Operated or Above Threshold: .........................
Farm Name: .......... ,f'A.Ai`..!'^.¢'✓..r `' County:.........��4.'! ............ ......................
......... ...........
Owner Name: 4e�x4r_7. ..a. /,.� Phone No:...............Facility Contact: ��' ....II_0A" ...... Title: .............................................................. . Phone No: ...................................................
Mailing Address: 7 ..o.� /ir.R.� }CAi.J ........................ ........................ ..........................
............ .................................................
Onsite Representative: �✓ .!� ....6jC Integrator ....
Certified Operator: .................................. 7 ................ ............................................................. Operator Certification Number:..........................................
Location of Farm:
❑ Swine ❑ Poultry ❑ Cattle ❑ Horse Latitude �� �� ��� Longitude
Desngn„ ' Current
Design Current, 1
ci ' Po u6i on
Poultry.
C ci Po ulatioQ Cattle "G
Wean to Feeder
❑ Layer
❑Dairy
= Feeder to Finish :32dio
10 Non -Layer
❑ Non -Dairy
Farrow to Wean
:^w Farrow to Feeder
Other
Farrow to Finish
Total CaPa ty t i C
rvr Gilts
soars
Total SSLW
....,.
Subsurface Drains Present
No Liquid Waste
Discharges & Stream Impacts
l . Js 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?
Area 1LJ Spray Field Area -
❑ Yes A No
b. If discharge is observed. did it reach Water of the State? (If yes, notify DWQ)
c. If discharge is obwrvcd. 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
❑ Yes A No
❑ Yes WO
❑ Yes No
❑ Yes No
❑ Yes /KNo
4. is storage capacity (freeboard plus storm storage) less than adequate? ❑ Spillway ❑ Yes A No
Structure 1 Structure 2 Structure 3 Structure 4 Structure 5 Structure 6
Identifier: .........4....y
Freeboard (inches):
5100 r'nntinued an hack

-- _ r—+----•ild,�,Q?M' -:..zs-*.,.i,.w,��sy,,.Sti�y«�-•.yaa�,�^'v^-+rw—�F....,i,.1 h�1ra.7•�+Y^,r'..u,rv..,.. �...a � .... _. .,. ...
Fac' ity Ndmber: D Date of inspection Printed on 10/26/2000
. 51 Are there any immediate threats to the integrity of any of the structures observed? (ie/ trees, severe erosion, El Yes KNO
seepage, etc.)
6. Are there structures on -site which are not properly addressed and/or managed through a waste management or
closure plan? �r ❑ Yes No
(If any of questions 4-6 was answered yes, and the situation poses an f
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 maintenancelimprovement? ❑ Yes P,No
9. Do any stuctures lack adequate, gauged markers with required maximum and minimum liquid level
elevation markings? ❑ Yes / No
Waste Application
10. Are there any buffers that need maintenance/improvement? ❑ Yes ,KNo
11. is there evidence of over application? ❑ Excessive Ponding ❑ PAN ❑ Hydraulic Overload ❑ Yes k No
12. Crop type ,so, f, ' , c.J�.aA7Z_
13. Do the receiving crops differ with those designated in the Certified Animal Waste
e 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 KNo
c) This facility is pended for a wettable acre determination? ❑ Yes XNo
15. Does the receiving crop need improvement? ❑ Yes OrNo
16. is there a lack of adequate waste application equipment? ❑ Yes XNo
Required Records & Documents
17. Fail to have Certificate of Coverage & General Permit readily available'? ❑ Yes PtNo
18. Does the facility fail to have all components of the Certified Animal Waste Management Plan readily available?
(ie/ WUP, checklists, design, maps, etc.) / I---f El waste
No
itrigatio
19. Does record keeping need improvement? (i , frceboard, waste analysis & soil sample reports) VYes ❑ No
20. is facility not in compliance with any applicable setback criteria in effect at the time of design? ❑ Yes DR"No
21. Did the facility fail to have a actively certified operator in charge? ❑ Yes JRNo
22. Fail to notify regional DWQ of emergency situations as required by General Permit?
(ie/ discharge, freeboard problems, over application) ❑Yes P No
23. Did Reviewer/Inspector fail to discuss reviewlinspection with on -site representative? ❑ Yes Im / ' 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 M No
yi.... ris oi' defeien... were jnQtec7 ditririg �hjs;visit: - Y'op . j-reeeiye i j f'ui-ft ; - ;
correspondence. about this visit
omen (refer to;quesstioti #). Eicplain any YES�answers.and/orany recommendations or_any other comments : -
_.
Use drawtngsof iaciliity to bEtter explain situations. (ust additional pages as:necessary) `s --
AL
/� ,��,�✓��-�>�d R�cv.�s � w.��r.��p �/z �?� —,2 4d / ,sue „�.�.n,�-g
4"4,oe 4/p�
Reviewer/Inspector Name
Reviewer/Inspector Signature: Date: 5/00

_-,../�:�+.vv�',ry7��l�i�'h1�J^4S'�`'�l�:lFY�JFC��tK,.:ry.�;'yy�.•{,jy:,:-Ii.:,.'Y��'*'^s'"` _ -a.�. `,,`'�.rs!' T^..�r "... "•^.}R �=t�,'�,'4.`,t'��"+a��-�.F+G.:.s•�"-r � •-
F�eiliitx Number: —
Date of Inspection Printed on: 10/26/2000
,_� Odor Issues
26. Does the discharge pipe from the confinement building to the storage pond or lagoon fail to discharge at/or below
Yes ❑ No
liquid level of lagoon or storage pond with no agitation?
27. Are there any dead animals not disposed of properly within 24 hours?
❑ Yes No
28. Is there any evidence of wind drift during land application? (i.e. residue on neighboring vegetation; asphalt,
❑ Yes dNo
roads, building structurcfandlor 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
" t
or broken fan blade(s), inoperable shutters, etc.)
❑ Yes qNo- "
31. Do the animals feed storage bins fail to have appropriate cover?
❑ Yes ZWO
32. Do the flush tanks lack a submerged fill pipe or a permanent/temporary cover?
❑ Yes ANo
-Additionaf Comments,an or; rawgngs:._
A
5100
k '

Facility Number Date of Visit: Time: 2/
10 Not O erational Below Threshold
Permitted 0 Certified [3 Conditionally Certified 0 Registered Date Last Operated orAbov Threshold:
Farm Name: 0_Aj_<4_ County: / ,/
+d ,ner Name: � ,�A� Ph/o�ne No: J, j 1i� / � Z 70
Mail�i g Address: lz ems— t� & c lan %y 'L 7-
5�33
Facility Contact: Title: Phone No:
Onsite Representative: ^� DC/ „ , Integrator: r'o 41-kL,1-7
Certified Operator:
Location of Farm:
Operator Certification Number:
❑ Swine ❑ Poultry ❑ Cattle ❑ Horse Latitude ' C Dµ Longitude 0 °
Desl—'.tl CuT ere i Design Current �. Design Current
Swine abaci tvl?o ulattand Poult , Ca actty Po aliiti n Cattle, ry Ca aei Eo ulatiou
❑ Wean to Feeder ❑ Layer [] Da'
Feeder to Finish ❑ Non -Layer ❑ Non-Dairy
Farrow to Wean
❑ Farrow to Feeder ❑Other
3.:
❑ Farrow to Finish = T4061egi n-. pacify Z�
=' ❑ Gilts
T©tallSSI.W
❑ Boars.,
Number of Lagoons ❑ Subsurface Drains Present ❑ La oon Area 1E3 Spray Field Area
Holding Ponds 15olid Traps ❑ No Liquid Waste Management System
D�charges & Stream Impacts
1. Is any discharge observed from any part of the operation?
❑ Yes ///��1 � No
Discharge originated at: ElLagoon [ISpray Field ElOther
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? ElYes No
3. Were there any adverse impacts or potential adverse impacts to the Waters of the State other than from a discharge? ❑ Yes o
Waste Collection 8i Treatment
4. Is storage capacity (freeboard plus storm storage) less than adequate? ❑ Spillway ❑ Yes �N.o
Structure 1 Structure 2 Structure 3 Structure 4 Structure 5 Structure 6
Identifier:
Freeboard (inches):
05103101 Continued

l'acitity Number: -- Date of Inspection 1111 _Q
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 AiDWication
10. Are there any buffers that need maintenance/improvement?
11. is there evidence of over application? / 0 Excessive Ponding ❑ PAN ❑Hydraulic Overload
12. Crop type
❑ Yes �No
❑ Yes TINo
❑ Yes Q�No
❑ Yes\ No
❑ Yes P No
❑ Yes � No
❑ Yes 9 No
13. Do the receiving crops differ with tho� 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
171 No
c) This facility is pended for a wettable acre determination?
❑ Yes
No
lNo
15.
Does the receiving crop need improvement?
❑ Yes
16.
Is there a lack of adequate waste application equipment?
❑ Yes
*o
Required Records & Documents
17.
Fail to have Certificate of Coverage & General Permit or other Permit readily available?
❑ Yes
JVNo
18.
Does the facility fail to have all components of the Certified Animal Waste Management Plan readily available?
❑ Yes
(ie/ WUP, checklists, design, maps, etc.)
RNo
19.
Does record keeping need improvement? (ie/ irrigation, freeboard, waste analysis & soil sample reports)
9Yes
❑ No
20.
Is facility not in compliance with any applicable setback criteria in effect at the time of design?
❑ Yes)P.
No
21.
Did the facility fail to have a actively certified operator in charge?
❑ Yes
LK 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
0No
24.
Does facility require a follow-up visit by same agency?
❑ Yes
R�No
25.
Were any additional problems noted which cause noncompliance of the Certified AV"?
❑ Yes
P[No
113 No violations or deficiencies were noted during this visit. You will receive no further correspondence about this visit.
Comments (refer to question #): ExpMEN n YE5 answers and/or any recommendations or any other comments.
Ilse drawings of facility to better explain situations. (use additiMI pages as necessary,): Field Covv ❑ Final Notes
SfISJ/� zaal is,ss,w�. New /v keep Ajee 74egiClat-al %ael5_
f C�ulct��y.
Reviewer/Inspector Name " p
Reviewer/Inspector Signature: Date:
05103101 Continued

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?
Wes ❑ No
❑ Yes
fi�No
❑ Yes
4�o
❑ Yes
�No
❑ Yes
L
El Yes
❑ Yes
❑ No
05103101

Facility lumber Date of Visit: .2 Time: % 5
ro Not Operational 0 Below Threshold
Permitted ® Certified ©Conditionally Certified ❑ Registered Date Last Operated or Above Threshold:
Farm Name: _ 9 ,, 5y( d Dc'v; s �cu�.Y Count•: 3
Owner Name: L rrec c,3, Phone No: q't l D
Mailing Address: _CA w4J�+. /JCS 2R 4�37
Facility Contact: _ GM� k-'P an, el` _ Title:IC nj2 Phone No: G 4 {,x^.z,f��
Onsite Representative: L" a 1L P....'L i Integrator: ��td-^ !C
Certified Operator: _ _ Aa:Q A CIL'jis Operator Certification Number: 14•.3 I ri
Location of Farm:
tik� � Ito
gr
IRSwine ❑ Poultry ❑ Cattle ❑ Horse Latitude ' �� �" Longitude ' �• ��
Design Current Design Current Design Current
Swine Ca acity Population Poultry Ca acitr Population Cattle Ca acitV Po Motion
❑ Wean to Feeder ❑ Laver ❑ Dairy
® Feeder to Finish❑Non
-Laver ❑ Non -Dairy
❑ Farrow• ro wean
❑ Farrow to Feeder Other
❑ Farrow to Finish Total Design Capacity
❑ Gilts
❑ Boars Total SSLW
Number of Lagoons L_ f _ I JLJ Subsurface Drains Present ILi Lagoon Area JU Spray Field Area
Holding Ponds I Solid Traps ❑ No Liquid Waste Man oemeni 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 obsen ed, 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 gaU'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?
Wa a Collection & Treatment
4. Is storage capacity (freeboard plus storm storage) less than adequate? ❑ Spillway
Structure 1 Structure 2 Structure 3 Structure 4 Structure
Identifier:
Freeboard (inches): - Z
05103101
❑ Yes 5 No
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes M No
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes 5 No
Structure 6
Candnued

t,
Facility Number: cj — 1 f 6 Date of inspection i�) es
5. Are there any immediate threats to the integrity of any of the structures observed? (ic/ trees, severe erosion, ❑ Yes [@ No
seepage, etc.)
6. Are there structures on -site which are not properly addressed and/or managed through a waste management or
closure plan? ❑ Yes R 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 (9 No
8, Does any part of the waste management system other than waste structures require maintenance/improvement? ❑ Yes allo
9. Do any stuctures lack adequate, gauged markers with required maximum and minimum liquid level
elevation markings? ❑ Yes ® No
Waste Application
10. Are there any buffers that need maintenancelimprovement? - ❑ Yes No
11. is there evidence of over application? ❑ Excessive Ponding ❑ PAN ❑ Hydraulic Overload ❑ Yes No
12. Crop type�%-t-
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?
Reouired 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?
❑ Yes [3 No
❑ Yes [�] No
❑ Yes QNo
❑ Yes (� No
❑ Yes No
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes Qa No
❑ Yes r] No
❑ Yes No
❑ Yes [� No
❑ Yes 0 No
(id discharge, freeboard problems, over application) ❑ Yes W 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
© No violations or deficiencies were noted ((,during this dvisit. You will receive no further correspondence about this visit.
_. :..$..:AWF':Jf 3Qu.!'L
Comments (efer to qucsbon 3 Eapiarn any YES answers�and/or any �eronidieadatjons;or�a' >t` other comments.
6-r
Reviewer/inspector Name i
ReviewerAnspector Signature:
Field Copy LJ Final Notes
.�- � +�; !�'SJti V".r� �a e� l�cr -.�
Date:
05103101 t Continued

Facility Number: (1 — 4 (, Date of Inspection at Q
Odor lssu�
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 2A hours?
28. Is there am• 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. N ere 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 permanenvtemporary cover?
Additional Comments and/or
❑ Yes Ey No
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes ]S� No
❑ Yes E� No
❑ Yes No
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes ❑ No
05103101

Type of Visit 40 Compliance Inspection 0 Operation Review Q Structure Evaluation O Technical Assistance
Reason for Visit tine O Complaint 9 Follow up O Referral Q Emergency O Other ❑ Denied Access
Date of Visit: Q Q Arrival Time: Bp Departure Time: County: Region:
Farm Name: ko vta l d Ida. l i s Td r r u _ _ _ Owner Email:
Owner Name: 1aa.rt'�l T�CPe�wLA�n- + Phone: 910 — 6 yB — z 70
Mailing Address: I Z82, �Bra�,.� C�a��-�rrn 113 C-1 Z0Its
Physical Address:
Facility Contact: &M21 ere4 vy*.iiv%_ Title:
Onsite Representative: f!;g!6* ye "Ju
Certified Operator: r _ _ rP WA-0—
Back-up Operator:
Phone No: pis — 6 W _- 7 33
Integrator —
Operator Certification Number:
Back-up Certification Number:
Location of Farm: Latitude: 0 0 0 ' 0 u Longitude: 0 ° 0 ' =
Design Current
Swine Capacity Population
{
Wet 1?oultry
y' Desrgn Current
:: Capacity Population
Design Current
Cattle Capacity Population
❑ Wean to Finish
❑ La er
❑ Da' Cow
❑ Wean to Feeder
❑Non -La er
❑ Da' Calf
Fe der to Finish 1 3 Zoo
a
❑ Dairy Heifer
❑ Farrow to Wean
Dry Poiil#rye f
❑ Dry Cow
❑ Farrow to Feeder
{
❑ Non -Dairy
❑ Farrow to Finish
❑ La ers
❑ Beef Stocker
❑ Gilts
❑ N ers
❑ Beef Feeder
❑ Boars
El Pullets Nets
❑ Beef Brood Co
3�
❑ Turkeys
d
Other
❑ Other
❑ Turkey Poults
❑ Other
Numtter 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
El Yes
El No
❑NA
El NE
❑ Yes
❑ No
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Yes
❑ No
❑ Yes
❑ No
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Yes
❑ No
❑ NA
❑ NE
12,128104 Continued

Facifiry 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
Stwcture I Structure 2 Structure 3 Structure 4 Structure 5 Structure 6
Identifier: Spillway?: N 0
Designed Freeboard (in): _'--r 7 --
Observed Freeboard (in): -;.&/
5. Are there any immediate threats to the integrity of any of the structures observed?
❑ Yes
&No
❑ NA ❑ NE
(ie/ large trees, severe erosion, seepage, etc.)
6. Are there structures on -site which are not properly addressed and/or managed
❑ Yes
�o
❑ 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?
ElYes
SNo
❑ 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
E3,No
❑ NA ❑ NE
maintenance or improvement?
Waste Application
10. Are there any required buffers, setbacks, or compliance alternatives that need
❑ Yes
6No
❑ NA ❑ NE
maintenance/improvement?
11. Is there evidence of incorrect application? if yes, check the appropriate box below.
❑ Yes
K10
❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Excessive Ponding ❑ Hydraulic Overload ❑ Frozen Ground ❑ Heavy Metals (Cu, Zn, etc.)
❑ PAN ❑ PAN > 10% or 10 Ibs ❑ Total Phosphorus ❑ Failure to Incorporate Manure/Sludge into Bare Soil
❑ Outside of Acce tabl- Crop Widow ❑ idence of Wind Drift ❑ Application Outside of Area
�L �3Z, 1Ko
12. Crop type(s) WjeA� S0 �egiV1.
13. Soil type(s) No 9 L A
14. Do the receiving crops differ from those designated in the CAWMP?
❑ Yes
KNo
❑ NA ❑ NE
15. Does the receiving crop and/or land application site need improvement?
❑ Yes
❑ No
❑ NA RNE
16. Did the facility fail to secure and/or operate per the irrigation design or wettable acre determination%❑ Yes
RNo
❑ NA ❑ NE
17. Does the facility lack adequate acreage for land application?
❑ Yes
C3.1;fo
❑ NA ❑ NE
18. Is there a lack of properly operating waste application equipment?
❑ Yes
2$ No
❑ NA ❑ NE
SVA5 o-v%(r�e_ r&_.�e, l rv+e awl: cca -i C'
Reviewer/Inspector Name I - ® K .." "" Phone: 7/0-Y86nI V
Reviewer/Inspector Signature: Date: 0 0
12128104 Continued

Facility Number: -- Date of Inspection S IO 0
Required Records & Documents
l9. Did the facility fail to have Certificate of Coverage & Permit readily available? ❑ Yes *o ❑ NA ❑ NE
20. Does the facility fail to have all components of the CAW MP readily available? If yes, check ❑ Yes VNo [INA ❑ NE
the appropirate box. ElWUP ✓❑ Checklists Design/ ❑ Ma m/❑ Other
21. Does record keeping need improvement? If yes, check the appropriate box below. ❑ Yes ❑ No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Waste Application ❑ Weekly Freeboard ❑ Waste Analyso, ❑ Soil Analystal" ❑ Waste Transfers ❑ Annual Certificatiop/
❑ Rainfall ❑ Stocking ❑ 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?
❑ Yes
KNo
❑ NA
❑ NE
25.
Did the facility fail to conduct a sludge survey as required by the permit?
❑ Yes
XNo
❑ NA
❑ 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
KNo
❑ 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
❑ No
❑ NA
❑ NE
and report the mortality rates that were higher than normal?
30_
At the time of the inspection did the facility pose an odor or air quality concern?
❑ Yes
❑ No
❑ NA
❑ NE
If yes, contact a regional Air Quality representative immediately
3 1 .
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'Commeiats4ind/or Drawings: k., V
�/t1�Sle a��S.S : �l•a.c� iS ur�o`�'Ca.t` Gw,�tt6`sg e +e wa,y
10/19/oq At . CMG 6 tv-_�_O"'
-+
yl�/aK l•z.
ti /z3loY Z-`t
� 2Do'( Ptir,�" i rex-C'4 s a� Nt� - irr e.� wti -{a
be Mov:.-t i s1 `itt
ad el'JaA-e— skai�-e , R.
4o asp-+
it k-S ` te_ C&r r&_C+ ipa r
-rL4L lea-Z -ems P b y
Nj,,-e� 40 a-4e_r. . �T it(( also C" 0y-
�- a Ar . a5 a-41C/6ox, ;-> -
12129104

WASTE =IZATTON PLAN AGREEMENt
Nary_ e of Farm:6. , 1D7,.J' k -:3
Ownerll,fanager A,-reemenl
I (we) understand and wM follow and implement the sme^i w=rL and the operation acid
mamte3ance procedures erablished in the approved animal waste =Iization plan far the
fa zm named above. I (we) know that any expansion to the existing desip capacity of the
ware treatment and storage system or construction ofnew fames WM retire anew
cen ncation to be submitted to the Division of Environment N[auagemeat (DBl before
the new animals are Stocked. I (sve) also a nderszand that there =.st be no discharge of
. ariuzai waste from this ysrem to surkace wasters of the sate from a storm crept less
save:e than the 25-year, 24-liour storm. The approved plan wry. be fried on-&e at the
farm office and at the ozace of the local Soil and Wat�: Conservation. Dis-ait: and wM be
a-,•aH oIe for review by DEM upon request.
Kane of Facay dwme:
Si^2ri:e: Date: Ze
N; awe of Manager(lf different from owner):
S i --., a r=e:
Date:
i,+ame of Technical SneCiI&LL:(Pleaseprinr)
A "�Z3 rioia: Fr , J,--C
Add—ess (AgeIlcy): A,3 J
�a r� a 62)
Si;'13iLr�:
%I)aI r-C F r , J CI [_ it
Daze: /4���

F. f f f 1 - -_ •r- 1-
,yl,�s 1[t� - s� y__ � ` rJr����,s��`�� Iyrly� N4- •' -3 � �:
xl - - �'��- 1 1l- ♦ •mod„ '_ ' i_. �*`�_ r. :rttS',� " .7_-` �.
:`-;!cr .. rat'.' t..�_� ,.rr'� � ,�(o.!•--•.t.ly�' '�:�, -•_-�.
:f�;'- .'C Y._.. --�'.L�• ��,. �- �Y 'J{.. •.: •;� -.ate •• �..}.��.
ALa
Yi
WK
ww
' ..y- ...�. ✓ `r �-r.J ..��. �- .. f•'•':. it 4,.�. � \ .F �. ' Z, YF -
_yy lt. M�" _ --�� �i:; i''ia ��. y'�fK �*�•`� •'_���., ,. J, .,�zj;:��•�, �r��4r�
+r- ie_ !� _ _ °spa �'y •�'� w ws_! Si :t
�tj;: -. ice. 'r 'L \ � /J! _ .� •

�• ' ... �ti,+� .� J,�"; r .°.'y�. ""' 'U '�. .:+• 3' i i � � • � ',jam ,;�'; ' c"!
7 .
J h r•
ca
S' t {q
iw=
��, .i .;1�iC4 ¢YTyi f• � r. ,.• r\ n r�
�5 'I`t�r. i�`�'l •, .r.':' ry'n' .: rr'� _ `rt f `3
�' .a �� ��� t��}, �'''*i�.i ,'� .r � ,�, *.� .i„ Yi.••' .P ++.t �_ } tN �i�•� ►ty �,I<i E
.1w�� .1 �:�. �� �'�rt,i �' � •r• �'►ts"�'- "'.tom. ,t.x .'i� ��', �I° r` ..�y,1.sMt �.,�''✓ "i`�Y.
^.,�„ �' � �'� - •y; - ! 'F�' / .�:. rr � .��: ���. , 4 •'S I ••ri •��,ti f •• '_c i � yr�y,x r� �
�'�-e. /1, .:, p'','•Sti'•.•. _ �,, r 1 ..:'.:' fy .r SIG*' �.
�./ si
I.ak�•.4� }r stF� !Ott
�'' � �� ,�• �� l� �� ,
atatf•„� .J:'
+Illti" , yn�'• �6 r `;
- f ! r ti tr• f,l.t �, [t� �t ,'} �'Rt al '�' ""' y1�.a.'•,: f +.��"��• * /}fJ. I t' f. �. �•,t s.
t)�r fi• `�.��"'- . ',.., '.;,k"h .t; '"J �I, }. . • t '-a•n"... s,'•'�r�+ig��,'L3X� +� �'! � � c y?. ••
1. �r :;.:,:,� r}.: sla' _ ''s.' ?c:�-''• '��/"' ?P104
r .+ . ie',.' +° t �, JV.. _ ;.r7� T}`+a..: -,1 0
iL .i rr ,+t' a yr .. f5 - , _ L. r.9'r- 4�1M�
��t ]ry�=. ��';t .' .� . r�r tij� f � :T Z. � .t• {:W:'w t` �'►•h, �. , � F:.`• -
.r:� Y, .Lti�f', ��� �_ �+ !'� tr . R.• ' �'.�1.►�� ..
.4JiKJ13Tr'y.,�.y'-s e'i 'rL'}' ';Y (.,, . r ]�►},t' �. �•• i� i' r •� -17
�gyy ��'1 � a , { Mj , • � �: "' )�rr mot' .r -:Yh ��`�• •.� ' , ,•"i ��'.�-�h�"� �j'��'� r � �'.� �^ � `L � � . d J ' -
r.Y: iy �f,'r <, i,. r r/. h '"'.•yet y• !l t±•w t ��-• t: ��•. ••',1� ~,'•� r j 1.. t
{, ;pTt` !I!•-` �' 1r, ` . , i,� j' �� ;a.�'• •�� Ir. Ir.., yr� ����k�A -rn .
,�` ';��i5 -` r_-��, _ � "'^, �; ft•}..a .i',.:: � t . �i,,k�.p ���� ,�'�1+•�RL��'.:�� . � / .J' I� r � �. r ; .• i �r� � }mil �,^tii�..
• ' • .l 7-; l `i v �•+FQ�r•�� • % `` ��_A: �Y w4tr t,w.F �'��•S.r�Ah ` _ -�!, �' Skt!• f .ti'. _ _
,.���'} .�'�•' �t` '' r,{a ~d '��: •� _.. M sy art"'.`�: �.: i
Yl� � 1 -; ,i. ' fS ' 'r*• .• � � .;q'_ .+.i �.. sJ. `7.1••7 ,`, CJ f � � � �:'j. i ,}�,
~ ,�", N' Irk �� `• �+ .: .�i' rl .� ��-� y.S�`,,y�a1•.�71�•�.��i!t};r•��{l r� �- ,f� ws = 1•+�r+i �r� aIr' 1''�-�'
�3 ` ! a .t ... .•k:=•^ �^ 4k., /��': r•pti "ti„
�, ti , / I Sgre �soM �, Q. � +," '�....� � J., Ita�'{ . , t''!,�. • ` yr�t''�t ' ' : � ':.-may{ �Lf :K'�t�'� - w'� � ,` •'�
rr• .:� 5 r r - .'.��1�_ riw Z'Iw . �: ' f „ ,' . i. : � `- S ^ � 'r .
A4a �' ���'�ti .h1'•a': -wi:. � _ •M'i (i'. �5 ' _-l''�L'. � ' �h �..
.s, r.•' � [ t1 � . �r� i ,+l.r.' .` ?,.t •• .. , .. ,ti • - ..• ,.• � �.�' ,i�t�. • •'!n } .• Y !'. •.���, V•' '.$'t
''i'u.- +, .♦ �• r y .i {•�7*_. .. _r. ` yr, .' .; tea- •{' • • R ..Ifr -
r• 4� 4 �,� �7 t Ij.' •''•'�•lt.'s ' * . '�• •a y ,r.
I ++: 5 • h' i�'I : 1�riti la:k a} .'` li r.W `., .M ..• f . .e-��. `5' ': yi a,.�'^!(� ,�rr;.,s . �..:,r {• ti' ia., .
'! ..� �^, .'. r, y,h�.l-. e,; �: �� •. i' I .- �.G�', 1' "s K.�� .� iitJ
r.y' - ti , l• �i • '• + r.tr' ^ a 14
" �f."•' SYYI + , li ...2 ��1 hr 7 A. •rR :: • � .�' �• - s' ► ; ` {. ?
r- + .}• r r! i' it - .FR.;. -,.,, hL r•�a:
'.r. 7 •+r s �, • +": l' ` ,
f ','��G ���':4[. �.��'. 1hT► :Y4f�" �ryrP♦♦♦'r.~i'-l��tm7'a�r':i ��rl� .t'.4iAM�Y'�.• i- T'•

FRCS WASTE UTILIZATION
PLAN SPECIFICATIONS
I. Animal waste shall not reach surface waters of the state by ttmo$ drill; MUMMA C caaveyamces, direct applicaiiw; or
direct discharge during operation or land application. Any discharge of waste which reaches surface water is
prohibited
2. There must be documentation iu the design folder that the producer either o%%ms or has a notarized agreement for use
of adequate land on which to properly apply the waste. If the producer does not own adequate Land to properly
dispose of waste, belsbe small provide a copy of a notarized agreement with a Iandowner who is within a reasaaablc
proximity, allowing him/her the use of the land for waste application. It is the responszbiliry of the owner of the
facility to secure an update of the Waste Utilization Plan when there is a change in the operaiion, increase in the
number of animals, method of unlization, or available land
3. Animal waste shall be applied to meet, but not exceed, the Nitrogen needs for realistic crop yields based on soil type,
available rmoisnue, historical data, climate conditions, and level of management, unless there are regulations that
restrict the rate of application for other nutrients. Actual yields may be used ul lieu of realistic yield tables at the
discretion of the planner.
4. Animal waste shall be applied on land eroding less than 5 torts per acre per year. Waste may be applied to land that
is eroding at more than 5 tons but less than I0 tons per acrea per year providin _ grani filter strips are installed where
runoff leaves the field. (See FOTG Standard 393•Filter Strips)
S. Odors can be reducedby injecting the waste or disking after waste applicatiuu. Waste should not be applied when
there is danger- of drift from the irrigation field
6. Vvh= animal waste is to be applied on acres subject to flooding, it will be soil incorporated on conventionally tilled
cropland. When applied to conservation tilled crops or grassland the waste may be broadcast provided the
application does not occure during a season prone to flooding. (Sce 'Wltcailicr and Climate in Notch Carolina' for
guidance)
7. Liquid waste shall be applied at rates not to exceed the soil infiltration rate such that runoff does not occure off site
or to surface waters and in a method which does not cause drift from the -site during application. No ponding should
occur in order to control odor and flies.
8. Animal waste shall not be applied to saturated soils, during rainfall events, or when the surface is frozen.
9. Animal waste should be applied on actively growing crops in such a manner that the crop is not covered with waste
to depth that would prohibit growth. The potential for salt damage fi-otm animal wa.,re should also be considered.
10. Waste nutrients shall not be applied in fall or winter for spring planted crops on soils with a highpotcatial for
leaching. Waste nutrient loading rates an these sons should be held to a minimum and a s0t5Tc- venter coves crop
planted to take up released nutrients. Waste shall not be applied more than 30 days prior to planting of a crap or -
forages brcalang dormancy. -
11. Any new swine f=:Iiry sited on or after October 1, 1995 shall comply with the following: ibe outer perimeter of
the land area onto which waste is applied fivm a lagoon that is a componet of a swine farm shall be at least 50 feel
from any residential property boundary and from any perranial stream or river other than an irrigation ditch or
canal Animal waste other than swine waste from facilities sited on or after October 1, 1995. shall not be applied
closer than 25 feet to surface water. This distance may be reduced fur waters that are not perennial provided
adequate vegetative filter strips are present (Sze Standard 393 - Filter Strips).
B00101330361

NRCS WASTE UTILIZATION
PLAN SPECIFICATIONS
(COVI'ri rLMD)
12. Animal waste shall not be applied closer than 100 feet from wells.
13, Animal waste shall not be applied closer than 200 feat of dwelling., other than thuse owned by Iandowner.
14. Waste shall be applied in a manner not to reach othcrpropety and public ri_int-of-ways.
15. Animal waste shall not be discharged into surface waters, drainageways or wetlands by a discharge or by ovcr-
sprayin& Animal waste may be applied to prior converted cropland provided it has been approved as a land
applications site by a'tccbnical speriaiist". Animal waste applied on grassed w•atetlrays shall be at agronomic rates
and in a manner that causes no runoff or drill from the site.
16. Domestic and industrial waste from washdown facilities, shakers, toilets. sinks, etc., shall not be discharged into the
animal waste management system.
17. A protective cover of appropriate vegetation will be established on all disturbed areas (lagoon embanlanmts,
bczus, pipe runs. etc.). Areas shall be fenced, as necessary. to protect the vegetation. Vegetation such as trees,
shrubs, aad other woody species, etc, are limited to areas where considered appropriate. Lagoon areas should be
kept mowed and accessible. Lagoon berms and structures shouId be in pecw�J regularly for evidence of erosion,
leakage, or discharge.
I8, If animal production at the facility is terminated, the owner is responsible for obtaining and implementing a'closure
plan" which will eliminate the possrbiliry of an illegal discharge, pollution and erasion.
19. Waste handling structures, piping, pumps, reels, etc., should be inspected on a regular basis to prevent breakdowns,
leaks, and spills. A regular maintenance checklist should be kept on site.
20. Animal waste can be used in a rotation that includes vegetalbles and other crops for direct human consumption.
However, if animal waste is used on crops for direct human consumption it should only be applied prcplant with no
fiuzher applications of animal waste during the crop season.
2I. Highly visible permanenet markers shall be installed to mark the top and bottom elevations of the temporary storage
(pumping volume) of all waste treatraeat lagoons. Pumping shall be managed to maintain the liquid level between
the markers. A marker will be required to mark the maximum storage volume for waste storage ponds.
22- Soil tests shall be made every year, and a liquid waste analysis wraf be taken within 60 days of application
consistent with waste utilization plan Poultry litter shall be tested prior to application. Soil and waste analysis
records shall be kept for five years.
Dead animals will be disposed of in a manner that nuts NC regulations.
B00101330362

Afo
4. ro i
dpo
41
a -
j4 4
�4
7rL
INN 3
WA -9 a
JF
P A�
4kv
L—Mir
4�
o0A
f1p
W
all
trbd
OOLY.: 1111t 6". 1 A �.j P
PIP .9.
rM
IA
, Jqr
ItA A
A
6c.
OL
01r
.
7: Y, A
IL
03
6
Ir oil
0 ru, -
1L . . . . I Nic + r
•. be,
f .1% 47
4
to
co a
o
tA
N
# '
J
JI
A
I

r
TABLE 2 - Traveling Irrigation Gun Settings
EXHIBIT D-2
Make, Alodel and Type of Equipment:
Field Not
and
li drant Nod
Travel
Speed
fllmin
Appiicalion
Rate
inthr
TRAVELLANE
EtiecdVe Effective
Width ((t) Ltnyh fi
Welled
Diameter
feet
EQUIPMENT SET Ilq
Noule Operating Operating
Diameter Pressure Pressure Arc
inches oun (psi) Reel i Fallem3
Comments
{0
23g
��
�zaV
i,a�so
f b
0�
3.1.9 �lerc S
),*A
,Lj
y-7 L
33v
�G
.�
I os
o Ye s
1- ti
d `iC
a
S-D
le,
a C)
G a C�
! �"
s:,C�
IDS
^`
3 c r e s -
3. + I Ac.
a -a,
r .-i
��f.�
3 z
5�
-=
f:
trolaic,
rt
I DE
Ciri o
#,V AGrC
I C?�°
IS cc attached map.
2Sltow separate entries for each hydrant location in each Geld.
3Use the following abbreviations for various arc patterns: r (full circle), TQ (three qunrters),1T (two thirds), li (half circle), T (one Wird), Q (one quartcr).
May also use degrees of arc.
MRCS, NC
1UNE, 1996

1 �
l
IRRIGATION SYSTEM DESIGN PARAMETERS
Landowner/operalor Name: U-1 d
Address: S2 U 01t
Telephone: IUD r�%�' ' `i Ci
TABLE I - Field Specifications
County: &A-n
Date: ID/I� G/mot
EX11If3IT D-1
Field'
Number
Approximate
Maximum
Useable Size
ofFleld2
(acres)
Soil Type
Slope
(%)
Crop(a)(
Maximum
Application
Rate3
trdhr
Maximum
Application
perlydCallon
Cycle3
Inches)
Comments
9 c1
O
< S
C5 Nt be 0
.-7
.'1•: Y'u ti l j
l See attached map.
2Total field acreage minus required buffer areas.
3Refcr to N. C. Irrigation Guide, Field Office Technical Guide, Section H G. Annual application must not exceed the agronomic rates for the soil and crop used.
NRCS, NC
JUNE, 1996

EXIHBIT D-3
TABLE 3 - Solid Set Irrigation Gun Settings
Make, Model and Type of Equiprnent:
Field Nol
and
Line Not
Number of
Hydrants
Welled
Diameter
feet
Hydrant Spacing (ft)
Along Between
Pipeline Pipelines
Application
Rate
In/h!
OPERATING PARAMETERS
Nozzle Operating Operating
Diameter Pressure Time
Inches a Gun(psi) H Brant r
Comments
I Sec attached map.
2Show separate entries for each pipeline with hydrants in each field.
MRCS, NC
JUNE, 1996

C
TABLE 4 - irrigation System Specifications
Traveling
Irrl atlon Gun
Solid Set
Irrl ation
Flow Rate of Sprinkler (gpm)
a s 5
perating Pressure at Pump (psi)
Design Precipitation Rate (Inlhr)
3 g
Hose Length (rect)
-700
XXXXXXXX
Type or Speed Compensation
c
XXXXXXXX
Pump Type (PTO, Engine, Electric)
r.Q
Pump Power Requirement (hp)
I
TABLE 5 - Thrust Block Specifications
Designer may rovide thrust block details on se arate sheet.
LOCATION
THRUST ]BLOCK
AREA (sq. ft.)
901 Bend
a .9 b
Dead End
.1 p
Tee
i.y1
See USDA-NRCS field Office Technical Guide, Section IV, Practice Code 430-DD.
EXHO>TD4
NRCS, NC
NNE, 1996

00-0�W SJ- • i3xilmrr o-s
14-e
IRRIGATION SYSTEM DESIGNER
Name: a c5i e. r" ee • 002�5 `
Company: r'� c I QFSIGN��
Address: � ' S l.-) •spf���
Phone: t C> `� 3 - � "7 Q, `7
REQUIRED DOCUMENTATION
The following details of design and materials must accompany all irrigation designs:
I, A scale drawing of the proposed irrigation system which includes hydrant locations, travel lanes, pipeline routes, thrust block locations and buffer areas where applicable.
2. Assumptions and computations for delennining total dynamic head and horsepower requirements.
3. Computations used to determine all mainline and lateral pipe sizes.
4. Sources and/or calculations used for determining application rates,
S. Computations used to determine the size of thrust blocks and illustrations of all thrust block configurations required in the system.
6. Manufacturer's specifications for the irrigation pump, traveler and sprinkler(s).
7. Manufacturer's specifications for the irrigation pipe and/or USDA -MRCS standard for Irrigation Water Conveyance,
N.C. Field Office Teclutical Guide, Section IV, Practice Code 430-DD.
8. The information required by this form are lite minimum requirements, It is the responsibility of the designer to consider all relevant factors at a particular site and address them as
appropriate.
9. Irrigation pipes should not be installed in lagoon or storage pond embankments without the approval of the designer.
NOTE: A buffer strip 67 feel wide or wider must be maintained between the limits of the irrigation system and all pereiuuai
streams and surface waters per NC Statutes.
NRCS, NC
NNE, 1996

1 y'i' T, .f :...''r: r �.1 r'; .', rf' 1 � a I �+1L. S• \ I 1 1'.� x N
.?h,r .t�`y� r,Y ��-y y,j ,b •,r ,.I. ,j� �} . ir: :i v� ' 4' �"•"• c L �; 4�"�.�' :�::r;t'`:,jt S..�a,
F: ! 4 i • •� 1 k;'( I - ii :. `�. ! t^+ �,r1:� , 'i�.',il. , 'y\i'''-' yj. i' li 1.
��1.� ,`ll� 'a• .! '.�r ,••. �.: ' •• IR;.f �. It .i 't S ;M., '- 1 "ai 1{1�fr,
' •'i r. \ .1 rr.•r I r �l � 5i!1L•, r I.
11.4 t�}•,�L�, .,.. 'fi. 11aa�;/:I; a- 1
•! ,. .:',. y.S[ v. +' '� 1-,z•r45 ;'.'!'• 'a1Ls {''% J r Yy%L�';'•''.'+w' a':. ' .: :,',.
•• 1 • �+'', ' , %%% "' r- , y .;�{,:. �,' , 4,i 'n-, . ?S'r whKy 'i1•�,, , ai
s.h' a M• 1_+:. •n ,a' .�'I! l,';(.,r,' r•, �_ •�t. '+r,w�1�• �+���,��I:i 1'�+,' ;+.. ij '}I :'a .'r: J
:a. 'fir '..*• 11, �, ► {i�' l.' •I. :IL';' 4 r•,,,',
t: .7:'y1, 15 Oct
r 4 / O
', ''„}�'• r•' ;11'Lir�'r' •.f '' �r A'1 t � '+�•-,�IaC��.!{'•+'Li%+'•i'• .�' �•%.;•, r' r
:,.n''• •.Y' , ' i �'i a ! .♦ � rr:'Lt G 1
,, :aa l;.l'r •'�. „t.C'-J '+r�'�`,`+. � r' �,, r q •t � fir...
,i" '1'�!?. �•.1 r'� .1r: :y• ,i.`,•. I;. •r.n:.f�r,J�") 1 `•1 i I-•''`1,:1. ''r'.1',�. rv>r: l•.% ..5 �1t:�.. ;k,.
.T4:'f: rrr 4, - =Y a•.- •.,,/•. +
I• .:�:' ♦. :i. �, .' s ,(.2t•' f..,:�n."- w:•. ;n. 'c! 'c14,.'i b.T', 'I � ,,�,� S.
Lj% iI' `..�%'� �•�v';!.�.a Yrt '''✓;{^�,It',''.'�:'h;�:+,•.�.i.-+.,�.5. 'k.. 'r.✓ =•1 a:'.' •'it.
";;1 ..�; ;�•, •:� .il't. .r ;'S,'" •�"•-; S,'. 'i'1•�ti ,�r!, ," 'T .f,: "��i 1Ar''''R,:::•�' r•'� • '•�tkl�'. w" 5, ::.- ,1'' �
C : r'�-::'r' . 1/-�.��.�1� is •.:J•; ; r. r., k 1•i; .,.-r }L. �k.;.;..>„•• , ' f1Y�.P.rit,f�. r';..7,
aa:':
.G.,+Aa•�y, •'� s s r ;r=: �r•.h k. JtiI+rJ�:';e� �•:' � •�'..,ii; rl�w
Cr t"!;rt n.Rnq,��, •� 4.T + t lti ' • :.li _ �,a,. J{� f• ,>, r r. f +
rr� �I ., i' ,�r, r,^,�••'ti , r•' > � ° �. �•V.
A`rr ,t} r:•i �! 1 IY¢ �� ,"�,..ti. +�r 1 L'•:,} f .1
�'j11r1.. !wr uS'ki.':' 4
7�, f" �' •�r ..'� !��y ', ,"� r i If��_f, ,��llr' �; t:'�i; '• •.y'h5�i.,. i;'.l�;ti ~'` �
i:t' � i �r�{{LL�� .r�l' :� •y�i1. t',. 14•i'•rl' �h��:,j3�:;. •�1'�3'.,M�: ,r. .• :±'
��'� �' a.j[�: I.''r,'l.ti� ". �':•- •':1 J; , :pry',... •:�Y
r r. 'r!t'T::,�y�'' :1�:�'•''rl. t�. ,� <.,. 'V7"'r�%i"-i'•L' rlr�3•f. -Ir.
'l {�" �'7��L:�F�, 'r ,�'., 'i.rt .�: 1 rll , 'y�i1'tii'�r,}r ___ � f•�; •!_.:':., :, .tL it•%,�i,
,.... 1, �R'� i (r';"' 1 r �.j;i„',,' R's,► „'
'�'�''' 1C! �'-I'o7w`A I r..' _.? ,.j�1; ;;i��,ft nor:.?.,,�_ 5,,� G�r; :.c?�{ �. %,}y �.?sSf fi• '?�l:,r I ^.
'�y;:f�' v•;' ,.N ��TF i`..)J: yC}`.r% r..:a,+' �i.� w ' F�f - it
iiry` :`itrttrttu p 1`�. ,)7„',;a,:. '++Y,r.•,'r �_,, r` :'.j' rf t:;.
a�s.f�•y, •►,-�:;�:'. :�4f= ', j, ''i,;`�' }��,. '•,a..l� 1;i :::r1� [j7!�If .i��`•',iy.; f.�:
I�(.).J 1 , •, t , ,irnr i .: . �r.f': 1, 57, /5•.i !,7'T•,, .:I:h +'r� _:.
i: yl r y 1 ;S , r �., FFyyt ,s 5 'f''• t. i.`� Y�t�T){�1,,• f -' ri.'� r ' I�y�'.R}) },f1 � � 4 ,••
:•1'i; 7!•?isT,{f r �,:
w,5 iti • „ ',�'),; • fp '1{�;" `i , c',i ....! +' Ii�fr''�'S r•,' 1
rl
.:Vv�. 3�•atii '�; � �•, v' ' 1 ,,� �• r ,,, u: i� ,F.' 1
!'i�Ei•r
, •'• • 1 � � �� I, Kt .' �• j,ri;; ` {r,,.r . � r i .: y �. V, 1f. k.F,ihM1 ''�' �
r'•,+' ;1 �r; j�St' I .•i�,. �:. •, ' :R�~A• :off
l�+, � r w• } ;+� f�' i•I`• � , • •;5 , .• i � :: I�tirl t��`�,j11 �.: -, 'i'""'�' r ?'r � � ' .. •, '.�• �'r
• t,{ ,ii + 1 h., 1L.+� A t 1� ,,3 w t..• , �` .tf
-� '� �r;� -: r� �' ��•,: 'SI t� > '�1'r t,�t''�) ;1C i ,i 1 r t „11 eft e /'•r # �k
+ i�': ;}''• it t1 ,,• �,t+� r.,!' , ' ,, �5, i,'+j, t�� i•- Sr .�;,1' + , U a�; 1•.4« r'r.
S, r r,' � �� ,... rl �'f, (, t �.+)S juti,,, 1♦ Al�,ra.,yx t\1i 1i 't}�Ir ,'q,, ti :1.•., ..
.:.5:., .i •�s ..\ .r,;'• :}�.- 1 . 1�"+1+. �+'''.j,`+j�,t �d'.rfa�a'` `� 11}1'r'•.rf ��'{� !:
�iG r wl F •:,, -1 i,q �p..,•f;�A +�--1 }••.i by t 1 it t a�. , iiY v
�iti`,}5 i'� t� �" rf �+a � 11-+,• •�i ,Ii �+5.)�;,.ir41'.�!' ;r4 ��r la- }T:; r „�{, T,.r�•�l l �,}r � � �, if , .,+
.!. ,.�. ♦ �L . �;�/ �';Ss y i 1r� } r J..•, ,- , �Lt r{'l Y% ,'i�d• ,�* i r!;. t Yk;t {., - •`
y tl�. M .c `+ir!,IF:' 'J �P: r�j1VY # 5.:,,i,; � ;7 +� � Yi:' T.. ,., .1 y 1" ;:rr '•'=t"i.-,:
'"�tt �, �' , � r i 4' �1• ��"'• �l �.j;,y {J�i� .. +% }� �1 }a,r 1 �', ,.•,•, r; ,
11`S� ll ( a•,�3•'J ,I �;^• , ,�,I;�,:, RJ•; �,,, �VI„ .Y '•N�„ ,�y, ,a+/.. ,...-:
. 3■�' � -,� 'M5.'i! '�+-r, :r•„ij �,'.�4. '1 ,. Jt .J r`k' , r r,•.• ( 5}.;�,•,- fi �,.� •};}x,
'i. !tSs:G%�j; {a'S,.r: 'i; rt1'ts ''1•; .,5�'� 't ;�lll nf���` r+,�l T., Ii .}! �ti!'�_•:; .� Vk•. i31.��'.'': t,-4i f, �^"-'••
r � r' J, �1, �;.�y'.?4;:, J'l:, �� f, .•�;1;'�1 ' S� rY1 !' ('. �' i ti � �. }a::
t. r ' , i:� �,.1, �' f r .�y •� i r` ' ,
NW,,.ffir', '.•r�. , S },j , �,�' f'�e�:�~,�,1. .,y,.,"; j,'.'.i j' �:�i, i4 _ 4'�;} l�`f'.IT•'l.li`1.:,L}',;?.+

10
AZ-ci
n o r
I

BIG GUN& PERFORMAiNCE TABLES
III N
PS-L PM II
Nozzle
CIA]
Nozzle
61
GPM - C�A.
Nozzle
.65,
GPW CIA.
Nozzle
7-
lo.
[G CIA
NCZZIC
75'
GPM CIA
GP.k.Ko --r*
A"
I CIA
N11-111 j "=:"
851 9_
G M "A I G". CIA.
P
DZzI*
GPtD. OIA.
2373-1AU72
-
so I so '! 1
621S,
74 225
87
23�.9-"
1
�?
so 273' 1.165
,
204 300'
M'500�j=
&TDW=Z -
0
0 60 2-1- 1
75 238,
as 250-
1 103
0
26319�
120
92L%Z628.l
136 263'
MMIS1105ABO
155 295,
177 302' 1 IS-7
W-01MUM
310'
2.43 338'
100
117
tr2t2�9
2133'
135 295,
155
171 324' 1
175 315'
ISS
201 326' 1 223
222 3-W 1 247
335-
355'
274
304 380,
1110; 0 71 2e-'9' 92 278' 111 290' 1
303'
150
Ring
.768-
W GPM GPM CIA.
Aing
812,
GPM DIA.
Ring
OS7,
GPM CIA.
Ring
8951
GP!.,, CIA.
;;Ms
S71 1
GJ3,A CIA.
Ring
.965,
GPM CIA.
60 81 2: 96 240'
--245
11 0 245'
12
129
1-i 270*
50
15, 275'
163 2801
�
i�104
so 9�; Z! - 265'
1 27 275'
135
145 285'
t65 300,
177 29
195 336,
",--3w.
219 315,
73
20 1
100 1 105 270. 124 280'
Z1
142 295,
162 .30$1
16: 320'
212
236
17! 1,11, 11:l I'll
505N�JAPE R-M-26,7R4' E'M��
NOZZLESUX
Nozzle I N=e
7- -a" -91
P-S J. ��Pm , Z;;" CIA. GPM 0
GPM
Nozzle
1 (;2.-
GP I CIA
Gplil CIA,
d
GFM
Nn.:Ie
GP%4 DIA.
S:il - I
-
60-
2551 1 143 285' 1 182 3306051
275 345,
330 365'
80 1 12e Y-01 165 310, 1 210 335'
am
185
1 100 1 143 0' 330' ns 35S'
3 -, 3 375'
S. 400'
35
0 _Zj! j
f ri
120,
610,
Soo 440
260 355,
S.
120 1 157 2201 204 3511 1 258 375'
320 395,
3ES 4920'
65
545 450'
MvP.
P.S.2.
I GPm -
Ring
1 GP.%4 CIA, j
Ring
GPM1.08"
DIA.
Ring
GP.
CIA.
OP
Pmq
25"
DIA
GPM.
r
:IA
GPM
A-9
DIA.___
45
'14.150
Kl� 691
110 2=01
143 280' 182 300'
225
315,
275
335,
3W
365
365'
ASMWVX-.�
ix2flls 3
3dz�,-" -
80 1
11 21EV 1
1641 300, 210 320,
260
3401
3,5
360,
35P.
�Scl
445
395,
100 1
143 - -W'
185 320, 235 340'
290
160*
35-S
380'
42S
�Jcl
w
$00
At S.
410,
120
"0
157 5 1
204 335' 1 258 360,
320
380,
385
4W_
465
ZZIGI ir
as
435.
435'
PS.1.
NoLr,,.e
1 05
GP
Nozzle
11'
GPM CIA.
Nozzle
r .11 2-
J;:� "A
Nozzle
13-
PM CIA
--to
GPM M" CIA
Nozzle
5-
Gpml
No'-i@
GPM CIA
I G CIA
GP%l CIA
A45 �-"41 0'
5 -5
�s
445'
695
470'
025 495'
70 [
270
Sic 3801�'
3-95
5-
415 &to,
480 4
C,.
465-
---
95-
990
I
515,
.380
515 ;--A;�'
90
[-.625
473'
675
4a5'
WS
SW
9S3
535,
w
SSG 410'
405
-25'
475 4c5l
5.5 465
715
505,
:55
535,
I -63
555'
, % , -
i425
575
66-0
.7s5
520
QW
550,
105-
575,
110
54.-. 41- :
�w 430,
445
450,
525 470,
605 495
9
6 5
790
535
345
565,
1110
590'
2w
--,.465
-
630 "Ll
. ��jd
*,�--7215Z
$30'.
--:' Im
ms
580r
1111
6051--
t30
370 42c 1
425 4451-
4,515
465'
565 41115,
655 515
755
5-c'
111
560
1025
590,
1210
620'
I I '/.- = - � j I �j,, p n(;I, 14- Ring I '-I' R,AQ .I Ring I ';- P -l; 2' R,ng
0 29- 17 - 6' ac�'a - actual) all 1-,174- ac.-Valf)
GPM 1114 ('56 11 #j� ac: 0 U- ac:-JI) 11 93' aclual)
A - A GAM CIA
PI'A DIA GPM CIA DIA GP CIA 'I'm
355' l 350.1:, -'.-'370, 410 470 405, 535 410, w 435'
60 25C 330 170 385 390, c 4., 410' t: I _ 4."Y :,Et - I 695 4!,5,
70.;:_ -270 155' 415"' 405, 4W 425' 555 440' 630 455, 755 475-
:1 - - 519.7 f, I I sot. 80 38f) -145 C.O. 1!. 4�0' 4 -,j 490y
90 415, I 475.. ' 435' 545 -:55' 625 470, 795 485, 855 505'
-,42S7 500 445 !.;" 465, 66" 480, ItI5 !31�' tiN 5.10'
,j ;MrW� : 125 ` 455' 605 475' 695 4 90' j 790 945 535'
20 355 41iS I 5411 465' ...m 4135, 500, I ,Wt! !OV
:I 3011!5=370- -.655 4490'-_•755 505- aw 525- . I-',IoZS &SO*

improved Design Provides Greater Operator Control
Greater control... more accurate application of both clean and
wastewater. Simpler to operate ... the smooth operation of the six
soeed gearbox eliminates
Me need for multipie belts
and pulleys while providing
a full range of operating
speeds. Within a high and
low range there are three
speeds for increased preci-
sion and accuracy in con -
*.ruling application rates.
:mowing and controlling
your application rates have
become crucial wastewater
Six speed gearbox
management tools when
trying to adhere to ever increasing regulations. Each model is
available with the standard 5.5 HP Honda engine or the efficient
Pelton Wheel slurry
turbine. The Pelton
Wheel turbine is the
ideal drive system for
applying wastewater
or slurry from holding
areas such as tanks
and/or lagoons. The
Pelton Wheel turbine
can be mechanically
compensated for
accurate applications
or equipped with the
optional Irrigation
Pelton 'Wheel slurry turbine Computer.
This improved design
or.!, starts with the drive system. Other enhancements include:
• A constant pro sure automatic braking system which
Increases tension when the hose is being pulled out but reverts to
lighter tension as the hose is being retrieved.
- A positive action lock down. When engaged, this simple
brake will lock :he reel in place when shifting the gearbox to neutral,
as well as secure the reel for transport when desired.
• A miswind sensor. Should a miswind irregularity ever occur,
this sensor will automatically disengage the drive, protecting the
Reel Rain from damage.
- Lange selection of. models. In an effort to offer customers
the proper system for their irrigation needs, Reel Rain models are
available in 29 different hose size / drive platform configurations.
• Increased
speed range.
From .5 feet per =
minute to 12.5
feet per minute,
you have the abil-
ity to control the
application rate.
With Reel Rain
Irrigation equip-
ment from
AMADAS
INDUSTRIES,
you and your
Dealer receive
Reel Rain Model 7375
special attention from our fully equipped Service Department. -
Each Service Technician is trained by the AMADAS staff engineer
who designed your Reel Rai6."'The 1000 Series offers only 5 of
STANDARD ..
FEATURES
tRES
• 6 Speed Gearbox
- P.T.O. Rewind
• Automatic Hose Retrieve
stop
• Rugged Frame Design
• Turntable
- Reel Speed Compensator
- Safety Shielding'
- Galvanized Fittings
• Galvanized Gun Cart
- Mechanical Hose Guide,
- Three Year Warranty;.,.
• Miswind Sensor
many aependab a mo a
of Reel Rain Travelers. Aso:
your Dealer to show you
other models that might
meet your needs. Reel
Rain Travelers 6re'av3il-
able in models which will
efficiently irrigate from 35.to.
400 acres per week.
A� P� HOBBS -
0�IN a el Rai
No: of Acres_
Flow Rate. - .
One Pull, -Applying 1"
Model
hose LengtK
Hose I.D.
Lane Spacing
Covered. in:--
(G.P.M.)
otWater (Hrs.)
Nelson Gun
Number
Feet
Inches
Feet
One Pull
and Pressure
Turbine : Gas
Turbine : Gas
1025
850
2.5
180
3.80
167 181 •
10.33"'110.65
SR100180 PSI
1030
965
3.0
240
5.84
260 .280
10:2 ---- 9.4
SR150180 PSI
1033
850
3.3
260
5.68
360 400
7.1 _ 6..4
SR150/80 PSI
1325
1250
3.2
240
7.41
266 290
12.6 11.6
SR150/80 PSI
i' 1375
1100 1
3.6
1 280
7.78
382 418
9.2 8.4
1 SR150/80 PSI
r
iGD ncilana Rc O Sc, *32 Sulfoik. VA 23439-1833 • USA + ! ' � �r '"'�- 1701 South Slappey Blvd. • P.O. Box 3687 • Albany. GA 31706
cr? ai757)934.326(. 39-:22Phone {912}4392217 • Fax {912j43993a3
AMA r''S INDUSTRIES' policy is one of continuous improvement. and we reserve the right to change specifications. design or prices withcur incurring oofigarion.

Michael F. Easley, Govemor
William G. Ross Jr., Secretary
North Carolina Department of Environment and Natural Resources
• Alan W. Klimek, P. E., Director
Division of Water Quality
April 9, 2003
Barry Freedman
Ronald Davis Farm
1282 Jordan Road
Clarkton NC 28433
Subject: Certificate of Coverage No. NCA209186
Ronald Davis Farm
Swine Waste Collection, Treatment,
Storage and Application System
Bladen County
Dear Barry, Freedman:
On March 14, 2003, the North Carolina Division of Water Quality (Division) issued an NPDES General
Permit for swine facilities. The General Permit was issued to enable swine facilities in North Carolina to
obtain coverage under a single permit that addresses both State and Federal requirements.
In accordance with your application received on February 14, 2003, we are hereby forwarding to you this
Certificate of Coverage (COC) issued to Barry Freedman, authorizing the operation of the subject animal
waste collection, treatment, storage and land application system in accordance with NPDES General
Permit NCA200000. The issuance of this COC supercedes and terminates your COC Number
AWS090186 to operate under State Non -Discharge Permit AWG100000.
This approval shall consist of the operation of this system including, but not limited to, the management
of animal waste from the Ronald Davis Farm, located in BladenCounty, with an animal capacity of no
greater than an annual average of 3200 Feeder to Finish swine and the application to land as specified in
the facility's Certified Animal Waste Management Plan (CAWMP). If this is a Farrow to Wean or
Farrow to Feeder operation, there may also be one boar for each 15 sows. Where boars are unneccessary,
they may be replaced by an equivalent number of sows. Any of the sows may be replaced by gilts at a
rate of 4 gilts for every 3 sows
The COC shall be effective from the date of issuance until July 1, 2007. Pursuant to this COC, you are
authorized and required to operate the system in conformity with the conditions and limitations as
specified in the General Permit, the facility's CAWMP, and this COC. An adequate system for collecting
and maintaining the required monitoring data and operational information must be established for this
facility. Any increase in waste production greater than the certified design capacity or -increase in number
of animals authorized by this COC (as provided above) will require a modification to the CAWMP and
this COC and must be completed prior to actual increase in either wastewater flow or number of animals.
Please carefully read this COC and the enclosed General Permit. Since this is a new joint State and
Federal general permit it contains many new requirements in addition to most of the conditions contained
in the current State general permit. Enclosed for your convenience is a package containing the new and
revised forms used for record keeping and reporting. Please pay careful attention to the record kee in
and monitoring conditions in this permit. The Devices to Automatically Stop Irrigation Events Form
must be returned to the Division of Water Ouality no later than 120 days following receipt of the
Certificate of Covera e. The Animal Facilily Annual Certification Form must be completed and returned
to the Division of Water Oualitv by no later than March 1st of each vear.
Non -Discharge Permiating Unit
1617 Mail Service Center, Raleigh, NC 27699-1617
Customer Service Center
An Equal Opportunity Action Employer
Internet http:Hh2o.enr.state_nc.Wndpu
Telephone [phone] Fax [phone]
Telephone [phone]
50% recycled/10% post -consumer paper

If your Waste Utilization Plan has been developed based on site specific information, careful evaluation
of future samples is necessary. Should your records show that the current Waste Utilization Plan is
inaccurate you will need to have a new Waste Utilization Plan developed.
The issuance of this COC does not excuse the Permittee from the obligation to comply with all applicable
laws, rules, standards, and ordinances (local, state, and federal), nor does issuance of a COC to operate
under this permit convey any property rights in either real or personal property.
Upon abandonment or depopulation for a period of four years or more, the Permittee must submit
documentation to the Division demonstrating that all current NRCS standards are met prior to restocking
of the facility.
Per 15A NCAC 2H .0225(c) a compliance boundary is provided for the facility and no new water supply
wells shall be constructed within the compliance boundary. Per NRCS standards a 100 foot separation
shall be maintained between water supply wells and any lagoon or any wetted area of a spray field.
Please be advised that any violation of the terms and conditions specified in this COC, the General Permit
or the CAWMP may result in the revocation of this COC, or penalties in accordance with NCGS 143-
215.6A through 143-215.6C, the Clean Water Act and 40 CFR 122.41 including civil penalties, criminal
penalties, and injunctive relief.
If you wish to continue the activity permitted under the General Permit after the expiration date of the
General Permit, an application for renewal must be filed at least 180 days prior to expiration.
This COC is not automatically transferable. A namelownership change application must be submitted to
the Division prior to a name change or change in ownership.
If any parts, requirements, or limitations contained in this COC are unacceptable, you have the right to
apply for an individual NPDES Permit by contacting the staff member listed below for information on
this process. Unless such a request is made within 30 days, this COC shall be final and binding.
This facility is located in a county covered by our Fayetteville Regional Office. The Regional Office
Water Quality Staff may be reached at [phone]. If you need additional information concerning
this COC or the General Permit, please contact Sue Homewood at [phone] ext. 502.
Sincerely,
v
for Alan W. Klimek, P.E.
Enclosures (General Permit NCA200000, Record Keeping and Reporting Package)
cc. (Certificate of Coverage only for all cc's)
Bladen County Health Department
Fayetteville Regional Office, Water Quality Section
Bladen County Soil and Water Conservation District
Permit File NCA209186
Permit File AWS090186
NDPU Files

State of North Carolina
Department of Environment
and Natural Resources
Division of Water Quality
Michael F. Easley, Governor
William G. Ross Jr., Secretary
Kerr T. Stevens, Director
Barry Freedman
Ronald Davis Farm
1127 Jordan Road
Clarkton NC 28433
Dear Barry Freedman:
A41
•
NCDENR
NORTH CAROLINA DEPARTMENT OF
ENVIRONMENT AND NATURAL RESOURCES
July 20, 2001 t 3
i 0 2001
D WQ
Subject: Certificate of Coverage No. AWS090186
Ronald Davis Farm
Swine Waste Collection, Treatment,
Storage and Application System
Bladen County
In accordance with your Notification of Change of Ownership received on June 12, 2001, we are
forwarding this Certificate of Coverage (COC) issued to Barry Freedman, authorizing the operation of
the subject animal waste collection, treatment, storage and land application system in accordance with
General Permit AWG100000. This approval shall consist of the operation of this system including, but
not limited to, the management of animal waste from the Ronald Davis Farm, located in Bladen County,
with an animal capacity of no greater than 3200 Feeder to Finish and the application to land as specified
in the Certified Animal Waste Management Plan (CAWMP).
The COC shall be effective from the date of issuance until April 30, 2003, and shall hereby void
Certificate of Coverage Number AWS090186 dated December 28, 1998, and shall be subject to the
conditions and limitations as specified therein. Pursuant to this COC, you are authorized and required to
operate the system in conformity with the conditions and limitations as specified in the General Permit,
the facility's CAWMP, and this COC, with no discharge of wastes to surface waters. An adequate
system for collecting and maintaining the required monitoring data and operational information must be
established for this farm. Any increase in waste production greater than the certified design capacity or
increase in number of stocked animals above the number authorized by this COC will require a
modification to the CAWMP and this COC and shall be completed prior to actual increase in either
wastewater flow or number of animals.
Please be advised that any violation of the terms and conditions specified in this COC, the General
Permit or the CAWMP may result in the revocation of this COC, or penalties in accordance with NCGS
143-215.6A through 143-215.6C including civil penalties, criminal penalties, and injunctive relief.
1617 Mail Service Center, Raleigh, North Carolina 27699-1617 Telephone [phone] FAX [phone]
An Equal Opportunity Affirmative Action Employer 5o% recycled/ 10% post -consumer paper

R�
Certificate of Coverage AWS090186
Ronald Davis Farm
Page 2
Upon notification by the Division of this COC's expiration, you shall apply for its renewal. This
request shall be made within 30 days of notification by the Division.
This COC is not automatically transferable. A name/ownership change application must be
submitted to the DWQ prior to a name change or change in ownership.
If any parts, requirements, or limitations contained in this COC are unacceptable, you have the
right to apply for an individual non -discharge permit by contacting the engineer listed below for
information on this process. Unless such a request is made within 30 days, this COC shall be final and
binding.
The subject farm is located in the Fayetteville Regional Office. The Regional Office Water
Quality Staff may be reached at [phone]. If you need additional information concerning this
COC or the General Permit, please contact JR Joshi at [phone] ext. 363.
Sincerely,
cc: (Certificate of Coverage only for all cc's)
Bladen County Health Department
Lf�ayettevilie Regionalice,—Water Quality Section
Bladen County Soil and Water Conservation District
Permit File
NDPU Files

O�OF W A rFj9QG Michaei F. Easley, Governor
William G. Ross Jr_, Secretary
North Carolina Department of Environment and Natural Resources
Alan W. Klimek, P.E. Director
Division of Water Quality
January 3, 2006
CERTIFIED MAIL
RETURN RECEIPT REQUESTED
Barry Freedman
Ronald Davis Farm
1282 Jordan Road
Clarkton NC 28433
RECEIVED
f AN 2 4 2006
DEW - FAYEI iI VILI.F REGIONAL OFRCE
Subject: Notification for Phosphorus Loss Assessment
Ronald Davis Farm
Permit Number NCA209186
Facility 9-186
Bladen County
Dear Barry Freedman,
There is a condition in your recently issued Animal Waste Management General NPDES Permit
addressing phosphorous loss standards. The permit condition quoted below states that if the state or
federal government establishes phosphorus loss standards your facility must conduct an evaluation within
180 days. The Federal Natural Resources Conservation Service has now established this standard- A
computer -based program was developed to determine how much phosphorus was being lost from
different fields. Instructions on how to comply with this requirement are provided below.
In accordance with your NPDES Permit Number NCA209186 Condition 1.6, your facility must now
conduct a Phosphorus Loss Assessment. Condition I.6 states:
"If prior to the expiration date of this permit either the state or federal government establishes
Phosphorus loss standards that are applicable to land application activities at a facility operating
under this permit, the Permittee must conduct an evaluation of the facility and its CAWMP under
the requirements of the Phosphorus loss standards to determine the facility's ability to comply
with the standards. This evaluation must be documented on forms supplied or approved by the
Division and must be submitted to the Division. This evaluation must be completed by existing
facilities within six (6) months of receiving notification from the Division.
Once Phosphorus loss standards are established by the state or federal government that are
applicable to facilities applying to operate under this permit, no Certificate of Coverage will be
issued to any new or expanding facility to operate under this permit until the applicant
demonstrates that the new or expanding facility can comply with these standards."
The method of evaluation is the Phosphorous Loss Assessment Tool (PLAT) developed by NC State
University and the Natural Resources Conservation Service. PLAT addresses four potential loss
pathways: leaching, erosion, runoff and direct movement of waste over the surface. Each field must be
individually evaluated and rated as either low, medium, high or very high according to its Phosphorus
�. owCarolina
t!lIamA
Aquifer Protection Section 1636 Mail Service Center Raleigh, NC 27699-1636 Phone [phone] Customer service
Internet. httpWh2o.enr.state.nc.us 2728 Capital Boulevard Raleigh, NC 27604 Fax [phone]
Fax [phone]
An Equal OpportunitylAtBrmative Actium Employer — 50% Recycled110% Post Consumer Paper

Barry Freedman
Page 2
January 3, 2006
loss potential. The ratings for your farm must be reported to DWQ using the attached certification form.
The PLAT forms must be kept as records on your farm for future reference.
From the date of receipt of this letter, a period of 180 days is provided to perform PLAT and return the
certification form to DWQ. Only a technical specialist who has received specific training may perform
PLAT. You are encouraged to contact a technical specialist now to run PLAT on your farm. Your local
Soil and Water Conservation District may be able to provide assistance. This information on the attached
form(s) must be submitted within 180 days of receipt of this letter to:
Animal Feeding Operations Unit
Division of Water Quality
1636 Mail Service Center
Raleigh, NC 27699-1636
NPDES permitted farms will need to have implemented a nutrient management plan which addresses
phosphorus loss before the next permit cycle beginning July, 2007_ If you have any fields with a high or
very high rating, then your waste utilization plan will require modifications. The purpose of perfomvng
PLAT this early is to allow adequate time for making waste plan modifications where necessary. With
the next permit, continued application of waste will not be allowed on fields with a very high rating. For
fields rated high, only the amount of phosphorus projected to be removed by the harvested crop. For low
and medium ratings, phosphorus will not be the limiting factor. Once the PLAT evaluation is completed
on your farm, you will know if you have fields that need further work. You are encouraged to begin
developing and implementing a strategy to deal with any issues as soon as possible.
Please be advised that nothing in this letter should be taken as removing from you the responsibility or
liability for failure to comply with any State Rule, State Statue or permitting requirement.
If you have any questions regarding this letter, please do not hesitate to contact me at [phone] or
the Fayetteville Regional Office at [phone].
Sincerely,
Paul Sherman
Animal Feeding Operations Unit
cc: Fayetteville Regional Office
Bladen County Soil and Water Conservation District
Facility File 9-186

oa _ 18c 1
MAC
Tr
State State of North Carolina
Department of Justice
ROY COOPER P.Q. Box 629
Attorney General Raleigh, North Carolina
27602
March 18, 2009
Francis W. Crawley
Phone: [phone]
Fax: [phone]
[e-mail]
Mr. William B. Freedman CERTIFIED MAIL
1282 Jordan Road RETURN RECEIPT REQUESTED
Clarkton, N. C. 28433
RE: William Barry Freedman v. DENR, DV 2005-006, 05 EHR 0905
Dear Mr. Freedman:
You will find enclosed the Final Agency Decision of the Environmental Management
Commission assessing civil penalties and investigative costs as set forth in the decision document.
You will find enclosed the Final Agency Decision of the Environmental Management
Commission assessing a civil penalty and investigative costs as set forth in the decision document.
According to North Carolina General Statutes §143-215.5 and §150B-45, you may seek judicial
review of the Commission's decision in the Superior Court by filing a petition within 30 days of
receipt of a written copy of the final agency decision. Otherwise, payment of the civil penalty
assessment and costs must be submitted to the Department of Environment and Natural Resources
within 30 days of receipt of this final agency decision by mailing a check made payable to the
Department of Environment and Natural Resources in an envelope addressed as follows:
Mr. Kevin Bowden [Phone [phone]
Compliance Oversight Unit
1617 Mail Service Center
Raleigh, North Carolina 27699-1617
If you fail to pay the penalty within 30 days of receipt of the final decision document, the
Department will seek to collect the amount due through a civil action commenced in Superior Court.
Very truly yours,
Francis W. Crawley
Special Deputy Attorney General
Commission Counsel

Page 2
Enclosure
cc: Kevin Bowden
Lois Thomas
Jane Oliver, Esq.
Gary Grady, Esq.

STATE OF NORTH CAROLINA
COUNTY OF BLADEN
WILLIAM BARRY FREEDMAN,
d/b/a FREEDMAN FARMS,
Petitioner,
V.
NORTH CAROLINA
DEPARTMENT OF ENVIRONMENT
AND NATURAL RESOURCES,
DIVISION OF WATER QUALITY,
Respondent.
BEFORE THE
ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT
COMMISSION
05 EHR 0905
DV 2005-006
FINAL AGENCY DECISION
SYNOPSIS: This is a case arising under the Environmental Management Commission's
authority to make the final agency decision in contested cases on civil penalties assessed for making
an outlet of waste to the waters of the State without a permit in violation of N.C.G.S. § 143-215.1
and violating the terms of NPDES General Permit NCA200000 by applying waste to land that was
in a frozen state and failing to provide copies of requested information reports related to the
operation of the animal waste management system. N.C.G.S. § 143-215.6A and §143B-282.1(b).
The issue is whether the 5 May 2005 civil penalty and enforcement costs in the total amount of
$6,989.50 are erroneous, arbitrary, capricious and not supported by competent evidence. This Final
Agency Decision concludes that the Respondent Department acted appropriately and in accordance
with the General Statutes and rules in assessing a civil penalty for each specified violation and the
costs of investigation. Accordingly, the Decision by the Administrative Law Judge is adopted in full
in this Final Agency Decision and incorporated herein by reference.
This matter was heard before Donald W. Overby, Administrative Law Judge (ALJ), on 22

Page 2
August 2007 and 25 July 2008 in Elizabethtown, North Carolina. ALJ Overby recommended on 23
October 2008, that the Commission should uphold the civil penalty in the total amount of $6,989.50
for all violations alleged in the civil penalty assessment. The Environmental Management
Commission, pursuant to N.C.G.S. §§143B-282.1 and 150B-36, has jurisdiction over the subject
matter and the parties herein.
On 26 November 2008, the parties were notified of their opportunity to file written
exceptions to the ALJ's decision and to request oral argument before the Commission. Petitioner
did not file any exceptions to the ALJ's decision or request oral argument before the Commission.
Counsel for the Respondent Department filed a written request that the ALJ's decision be adopted
as the Final Decision in this matter. An Order extending the time for making the final decision was
entered by the Chairman on 9 January 2009.
The Environmental Management Commission considered the contested case at the 12 March
2009, meeting held in Raleigh, North Carolina. On the basis of the whole record and by duly made
motion and unanimous vote, the attached ALJ Decision is hereby adopted in full and, together with
its findings of fact and conclusions of law, incorporated herein as if fully set forth in this Final
Agency Decision.
IT IS THEREFORE ORDERED AND ADJUDGED that:
1. the assessment of the civil penalty against William Barry Freedman in the amount of
$6,000.00 is AFFIRMED;
2. the $989.50 investigation costs are reasonable and appropriate and are AFFIRMED;
3_ WiIliam Barry Freedman shall submit payment of the civil penalty and investigation costs
in the amount of $6,989.50 to the Department of Environment and Natural Resources within thirty

page 3
days of receipt of this final agency decision as required by law; and
4. this final agency decision be served upon William Barry Freedman personally or by certified
mail.
This the I '3 day of March, 2009.
ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT COMMISSION
C `
S&phen T. Smith, Chairman

page 4
CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE
This is to certify that this day I served the foregoing Final Agency Decision upon the
parties by depositing a copy in the United States Mail, Certified Mail -Return Receipt Requested,
Interoffice Mail, or Hand Delivery as indicated below:
Mr. William B. Freedman
1282 Jordan Road
Clarkton, N.C. 28433
Gray A. Grady, Esq.
P. O. Drawer 130
Elizabethtown N.C. 28337
Jane L. Oliver, Esq.
Assistant Attorney General
114 W. Edenton Street
Raleigh, N.C. 27602
Donald W. Overby, Esq.
Administrative Law Judge
6714 Mail Service Center
Raleigh, North Carolina 27699-6714
This the I 'day of March, 2009.
CERTIFIED MAIL
RETURN RECEIPT REQUESTED
US MAIL
HAND DELIVERY
INTEROFFICE MAIL
rancis W. Crawley
Special Deputy Attorney General
P. O. Box 629
Raleigh, North Carolina 27602
[phone]
Commission Counsel

ADAIINISTRATI VE HEARINGS
10-33-2008 10:45:00 AA1
STATE OF NORTH CAROLINA IN THE OFFICE OF
ADMINISTRATIVE HEARINGS
COUNTY OF BLADEN 05 EHR 0905
Freedman Fauns )
Petitioner )
vs. ) DECISION
NC Department of Environment and Natural )
Resources, Division of Water Quality )
Respondent )
This contested case was ,heard before the Honorable Donald W. Overby, Administrative
Law Judge, on August 22, 2007 and July 25, 2008 in the Bladen County Courthouse, 166
Courthouse Drive, Elizabethtown, North Carolina upon the Petition for Contested Case Hearing
filed by William Barry Freedman ("Petitioner"). Petitioner appeared and was represented by
counsel of record Gary A. Grady, Hester, Grady & Hester, PLLC, Elizabethtown, North
Carolina. The North Carolina Department of Environment and Natural Resources, Division of
Water Quality ("Respondent" or "DWQ") appeared and was represented by its counsel of record,
Jane L. Oliver, N.C. Department of Justice, Raleigh, North Carolina.
ISSUE
Whether Respondent acted erroneously in assessing a civil penalty against Petitioner for:
(1) violating N-C. Gen. Stat. § l 43-215.1 by making an outlet to waters of the State without a
permit and (2) violating Condition No. II. 20 of National Pollutant Discharge Elimination
System ("NPDES") Permit No. NCA200000 by applying animal waste to land that was frozen.
Petitioner did not challenge, in either his Petition for Contested Case Hearing or Prehearing
Statement, that portion of the civil penalty which was assessed for Petitioner's violation of
Condition No_ III. 19 of the NPDES General Permit No. NCA200000 by failing to provide
copies of all requested information and reports related to the operation of the animal waste
management system at the Ronald Davis Faun in Bladen County.
WITNESSES
For Petitioner: William Barry Freedman
For Respondent: William Barry Freedman
Mark Brantley
Stephen Arthur Barnhardt
Larry Clayton Baxley

111
EXHIBITS
Respondent:
1, Swine Waste Management System General NPDES Permit No.
NCA200000
2. Certificate of Coverage No. NCA209186 for the Ronald Davis Farm
3. Petitioner's Nutrient Management Plan for the Ronald Davis Farm
4. Petitioner's Responses to Respondent's Request for Admissions
5. DWQ Inspection Report for the 11/3/04 Inspection of the Ronald Davis
Farm
6. Notice of Violation Mailed 1 1/23/04
7. Notice of Violation and Notice of Intent Mailed 12/29/04
8. Petitioner's Letter to Stephen Barnhardt with Cover Sheet, dated 1/12/05
9. DWQ Inspection Report for the 1/28/05 Inspection of the Ronald Davis
Farm
11A-11D Photographs taken by Mark Brantley, 1/28/05
12. Notice of Violation and Notice of Intent dated 2/7/08 with Certificate of
Service by Columbus County Sheriff's Department dated 03/21/05
13.- Petitioner's Letter to Larry Baxley, dated 1/31/05
14. DWQ Inspection Report for the 3/22/05 Inspection of the Ronald Davis
Farm
15. Civil Penalty Assessment against Petitioner with Cover Letter, dated
5/5/05
16. Petitioner's Prehearing Statement
18. Calculations Prepared by Stephen Arthur Barnhardt
19A-190 Photographs taken by Larry Baxley, 1/28/05.
20. Petitioner's Petitioner for Contested Case Hearing
21. Aerial Photograph
22A- 22D Photographs taken by Mark Brantley, 11/3/04.
23. Hand -drawn Diagram
APPLICABLE LAW
The Clean Water Act, 33 USC § 125I et seq., was enacted "to restore and maintain the
chemical, physical and biological integrity of the Nation's waters" 33 USC 1251(a).
The CWA addresses two possible sources of pollution to the Nation's waters: point
sources and nonpoint sources. A "point source" is defined under the CWA to mean "any
discernable, confined and discrete conveyance, including but not limited to, any pipe, ditch,
channel, tunnel [or] conduit ...." 33 USC § 1362(14). The definition specifically includes
concentrated animal feeding operations ( CAFOs). Id.
Point source pollution is regulated through a permitting process known as the National
Pollution Discharge Elimination System (NPDES). 33 USC § 1311. Under the NPDES permit
program, the permittee is p1rohibited from discharging any pollutant unless the pennittee's permit

0
specifically authorizes the- discharges and the permit meets the statutory and regulatory
requirements of the CWA. 33 IJSC § 1342(a). •
40 C.F.R. § 122.23 provides:
Concentrated animal feeding operations, as defined in paragraph (b) of this
section, are point sources that require NPDES permits for discharges or potential
discharges. Once an operation is defined as a CAFO, the NPDES requirements
for CAFOs apply with respect to all animals in confinement at the operation and
all manure, litter, and process wastewater generated by those animals or the
production of those animals, regardless of the type of animal.
40 C.F.R. § 122.23.
Under the CWA, states are allowed to administer permitting under the NPDES program
upon EPA's approval of the state's NPDES permitting program. The state's program must
provide the responsible state agency with the necessary authority to issue permits that ensure
compliance with all applicable requirements of the CWA, as well as enforcement authority to
abate permit violations, including the ability to seek civil and criminal penalties. North Carolina
Department of Environment and Natural Resources, Division of Water Quality is the permitting
agency for the NPDES program. 33 USC §§ 1251(b) and 1342(b).
N.C. Gen. Stat. § 143-215.1(a)(1) provides that no person shall make any outlets to
waters of the State unless that person has first obtained a permit from the Environmental
Management Commission and has complied with all conditions in the permit.
N.C. Gen. Stat. § 143-215.1(a)(12) provides that no person shall construct or operate an
animal waste management system, as defined in N.C. Gen. Stat. § 143-215.10B, without first
obtaining a permit.
An "animal waste management system" is defined to mean "a combination of structures
and nonstructural practices serving a feedlot that provide for the collection, treatment, storage, or
land application of animal waste." N.C. Gen. Stat. § 143-215.1 OB(3).
N.C. Gen. Stat. § 143-215.10C(a) provides:
No person shall construct or operate an animal waste management system for an
animal operation or operate an animal waste management system for a dry litter
poultry facility that is subject to regulation under 40 C.F.R. § 122.23 without first
obtaining an individual permit or a general permit under this Article.
N.C. Gen. Stat. § 143-215.10C(a) (2005).
The General Assembly has indicated its intent that "most animal waste management
systems be permitted under a general permit." Id. ;_

N
The N.C. General Assembly has vested the authority to permit, inspect and take
enforcement actions over animal waste management systems in the Division of Water Quality.
N.C. Gen. Stat. § 143-215.10A. '
N.C. Gen. Stat. § 143-215. 10C(b) provides:
An animal waste management system shall be designed, constructed, and operated
so that the animal operation served by the animal waste management system does
not cause pollution in the waters of the State except as may result because of
rainfall from a storm event more severe that the 25-year, 24-hour storm or if
required by 40 C.F.R. § 122.23 from a storm event more severe than the 100-year,
24-hour storm.
N.C. Gen. Stat. § 143-215.1OC(b) (2005).
North Carolina's Animal Waste Management Systems statutes set forth requirements that
require testing of waste products prior to the time of land application and testing of the soil
where the animal waste is to be applied. N.C. Gen.-Stat. § 143-215.10C(e)(6). Waste utilization
plans must "assure a balance between nitrogen application rates and nitrogen crop requirements."
N.C. Gen. Stat. § 143-215.10C(e)(7). The permittee must maintain records documenting testing
requirements as well as the dates and rates that was are applied to soils. These documents
must be made available upon request by DWQ. N.C. Gen. Stat. § 143-215.1OC(e)(8).
Based upon the preponderance of the admissible evidence, the undersigned makes the
following:
FINDINGS OF FACT
I. At all times relevant to this proceeding, Petitioner William Barry Freedman (Petitioner)
owned and operated the Ronald Davis Farm (RDF) located on Highway 210 North of State Road
1503 in Bladen County, North Carolina.
2. The RDF is a Concentrated Animal Feeding Operation ("CAFO') or swine finishing
operation with a permitted design capacity for 3,200 swine. There are four finishing houses at
the facility; each house has a permit limit of 800 swine.
3_ In order to operate the lagoon and land application system, Petitioner was required to
have an individual permit or a general permit. See also N.C. Gen. Stat. § 143-215.1 OC.
4. On February 14, 2003, Petitioner submitted an application for coverage under North
Carolina's Swine Waste Management System General National Pollutant Discharge Elimination
Permit ("General Permit for swine facilities"). The General Permit was developed "to enable
swine facilities in North Carolina to obtain coverage under a single permit that addresses both
State and Federal requirements."
4

5. On April 9, 2003, DWQ issued a Certificate of Coverage (COC) authorizing Petitioner to
operate the faun and the waste collection, treatment, storage, and land application systerh on the
RDF in accordance with the terms and .requirement's of the General Permit. The COC required
Petitioner to operate the animal waste management system on the RDF "in conformity with the
conditions and limitations as specified in the General Permit, the facility's [Certified Animal
Waste Management Plan], and this COC." The COC specifically required that Petitioner
establish "an adequate system for collecting and maintaining the required monitoring data and
operational information."
6. Under the General Permit, the permittee is required to properly operate and maintain at
all times the collection, treatment and storage facilities and the land application equipment and
fields. Waste is to be applied after sampling and at the appropriate agronomic rate in order to
prevent pollution of either surface waters or groundwater. The appropriate agronomic rate .is
determined by soil type, the nutrient needs of the crops that are grown, and the nutrient content
of the waste.
7. The General Permit also requires the permittee to inspect equipment and document these
inspections, monitor and record precipitation events, conduct soil testing and maintain records of
so)] analyses for a minimum of five years, conduct waste analyses according to specified
parameters, and record all irrigation and land application events_ These records, along with a
copy of the General Permit and the facility's CAWMP, must "be maintained by the permittee in
chronological and legible form for a minimum of five years" and be "readily available for
inspection." The permittee is required to submit complete copies of the records to DWQ or EPA
upon request.
8. Petitioner also had a Nutrient Management Plan which provided that, before each land
application, the swine waste would be tested to ensure that waste would be applied based on the
nitrogen content of the waste and the nitrogen needs of the specific crop planted. Petitioner grew
only wheat and soybeans on the RDF and the limiting factor in Petitioner's nutrient management
plan was nitrogen.
9. The primary purpose of the requirements relating to land application which are set forth
in the General Permit, the COC and the facility's CAWMP is to ensure that waste is applied in
an environmentally safe manner and that no waste is discharged into surface waters. The waste
must be applied in such a manner that the nutrients in the waste are taken up and used by the
planted crops so that the nutrients are not being loaded into streams.
10. The General Permit for swine facilities prohibits the discharge of animal waste into
surface waters or wetlands with one exception. The General Permit specifically provides in part:
Any discharge of waste which reaches surface waters or wetlands is prohibited
except as otherwise provided in this permit and associated statutory and
regulatory provisions. Waste shall not reach surface waters or wetlands by run-
off, drift, manmade conveyance, direct application, direct discharge or through
ditches not otherwise classified as state waters.
5

r
The waste collection, treatment, storage and application system operated under
this permit shall toe effectively maintained and operated as a non -discharge system
to prevent the discharge of pollutants to surface waters or wetlands ....
Facilities must be designed, constructed and operated to contain all waste plus the
run-off from a 25-year, 24-hour rainfall event for the location of the facility. A
facility that has a discharge that results because of a storm event more severe than
the 25-year, 24-hour storm will not be considered in violation of this permit if the
facility is in compliance with its Certified Animal Waste Management Plan
(CAWMP), the Clean Water Act, (Act) and its implementing regulations, and this
permit.
11. The April 9, 2003 COC explicitly advised Petitioner that "any violation of the terms and
conditions specified in this COC, the General Permit, or the CAWMP may result in the
revocation of this COC, or penalties in accordance with N.C.G.A. 143-215.6A through 143-
215.6C, the Clean Water Act and 40 C.F.R. 122.41 including civil penalties, criminal penalties,
and injunctive relief."
12. The permittee or the operator -in -charge is responsible for ensuring that waste is applied
properly to the land and that no discharge of waste occurs. The Permit requires that, when land
applying waste, the system must be checked as often as needed to ensure that waste is being
applied in accordance with the CAWMP. The Permit provides that, in no instance, shall the time
between these inspections be more than 120 minutes during an application. These inspections
must be documented and the records maintained_
13. The General Permit, as well as Petitioner's own Nutrient Management Plan, prohibits the
application of waste "on land that is flooded, saturated with water, frozen or snow covered at the
time of application." Application of waste on saturated soils, during rain events or when the land
is frozen "may result in runoff to surface waters, which is not allowed under DWQ regulations."
14. Waste may not be applied to saturated or frozen ground because it is less likely to be
absorbed by the soil and more likely to move to groundwater or surface waters. If the waste
reaches surface water, such as creeks, streams, wetlands and estuaries, the waste overloads the
surface water with nutrients and it is highly detrimental to aquatic biological life and
microorganisms, which in turn is detrimental to the entire ecosystem. Groundwater
contamination gives rise to concerns about the safety of drinking water_ See N.C. Gen. Stat. §
143-212.
15., The General Permit requires that the permittee "consider pending weather conditions in
making the decision to land apply waste and shall document the weather conditions at the time of
land application on' forms supplied or approved by the Division."
16. At all times relevant to this proceeding, Petitioner was the operator -in -charge for the
RDF. 'As permittee and operator -in -charge, Petitioner was responsible for a•It pumping and
maintenance of equipment.

_ 17. Orr November 3, 2004, Mark Brantley, an inspector for the Concentrated Animal
Farming Operation Unit in DWQ's Aquifer Protection Section, conducted an inspection of the
RDF. Petitioner, his father and -Gino Kennedy were present at the beginning of the inspection.
Mr. Brantley reviewed what records were available but the records were incomplete. Brantley
asked to see a copy of the General Permit and Certificate of Coverage. Petitioner stated that the
Permit and COC were at his home office. Brantley asked Petitioner to keep a copy of these
documents at the farm in the future, as required by the General Permit. Petitioner had signed a
document in which Petitioner stated that he would be present during all waste applications. In
the document, Petitioner also stated that he intended to install a rain breaker, which would allow
him to leave the farm briefly during waste applications. Brantley reminded Petitioner that he
needed to keep rainfall records and to document his inspections of the facility after every I -inch
rain.
18. Brantley then did afield inspection. Petitioner did not have a rain gauge, as required by
the. General Permit. When Brantley walked through the fields, he observed ponding of waste in
one field as well as evidence that the waste had moved off Petitioner's field and onto a
neighbor's com field. Petitioner had left the farm by that time, so Brantley called Petitioner the
next morning to discuss the ponding and the discharge of waste onto the neighbor's land.
Petitioner admitted that he had problems with his irrigation gun when he had irrigated the day
before_ He had disked up the area which was oversaturated to try to facilitate absorption of the
waste. Petitioner stated that he would be more careful in the future.
19. On November 23, 2004, Art Barnhardt, Aquifer Protection Supervisor for DWQ's
Fayetteville Regional Office, mailed by certified mail, a Notice of Violation (NOV), informing
Petitioner that he had violated Section I1, Condition 4 in the General Permit by failing to apply
waste in accordance with the facility's animal waste plan, as evidenced by the ponding and a
previous discharge, as observed by Brantley on November 3, 2004.
20. In the NOV, DWQ requested "copies of all the pumping records, lagoon levels, rainfall
records, and waste analyses for [the RDF]'from January 1, 2004 to the present along with a copy
of the. CAWMP." DWQ also requested that Petitioner, as operator -in -charge, provide an
explanation as to how the violation, identified on November 4, 2004, had occurred and what
steps had been taken to correct the violation. Petitioner was asked to provide the requested
information on or before December 8, 2004. Petitioner received the NOV on November 29,
2004.
21. Petitioner did not respond to the November 23, 2004 NOV.
22. On December 29, 2004, Barnhardt mailed by certified mail a second NOV along with a
Notice of Intent to enforce. The second NOV cited Petitioner for his failure to respond, as
required under the General Permit, to DWQ's request for information. Petitioner was instructed
to provide the requested information on or before January 14, 2005. The second NOV further
advised Petitioner that DWQ had authority to assess a civil }penalty against Petitioner in an
amount not to exceed S25,000.00 per day as a result of his Laving violated the General Permit
requirements. I'cutioner received that second NOV on .Ianuary 3. 2005 but Petitioner dated the
7

As
receipt January 3, 2004. The certified mail receipt which had been signed by Petitioner was
returned to the Fayetteville Office on January 5, 2005.
23. On January 12, 2005, Petitioner's wife faxed a letter signed by Petitioner to the
Fayetteville Regional Office. The letter stated in part:
This is in response to the Notice of Violation issued due to ponding on the Ronald
Davis Farm. The violation occurred due to the fact that the person watching the
pump was probably inside the swine facility working with the animals. The reel
came in approximately 30 minutes before the pumping unit at the lagoon cut off.
I have addressed this with my personnel and they will be onsite and more alert to
the timing that the lagoon pump is to be shut off. We have also replaced the timer
on the pumping unit.
This should eliminate any future problems.
24_ At the time, no other records were provided in response to DWQ's request for records
and information even though Petitioner was required to provide the requested records under the
terms of the General Permit.
25. The RDF utilizes a lagoon and land application system to manage the animal waste
produced at the facility. The waste is transported from the swine houses to a lagoon through
pipes. To facilitate land application, a pump is located near the lagoon to pull the liquid waste
out of the lagoon and then transfer the waste through pipes to an inlaid irrigation system that
goes to a line with eight or nine hydrants. The field irrigation hose is connected to one of the
hydrants depending on what section of field is to be sprayed.
26. The field irrigation equipment consists of a hose that attaches to a hydrant. The hose,
which is several hundred feet in length, wraps around a reel, or spray cart, which has a gasoline
motor. To set up the system for irrigation, the hose is pulled out to into the field. At the end of
the hose is a spray gun_ The spray gun oscillates slowing as the motorized reel pulls in the hose
and spray gun_ The spray gun can be set to oscillate at 90 degrees, 180 degrees or 360 degrees,
depending on the amount of area to be sprayed, and the reel or spray cart can be adjusted to pull
the gun in at different rates of speed.
27. To operate the system, the hose must be attached to the hydrant and a valve on the
hydrant is turned to open. The spray gun is pulled out to the far end of the hose with a tractor or
truck. To begin spraying, the pump, which runs on diesel fuel, must be switched on with a key.
The pump may be "jump" started even without a key. After the pump switch is on, it must then
be primed by moving a lever up and down. Priming usually takes approximately ninety to one
hundred fifty strokes. Priming creates a vacuum with sufficient force to pull the waste from the
lagoon, through approximately ten feet of pipe, through the pump and carried a long distance
into the field to the hydrant. It usually takes one to two minutes to start the pump.

U
28. There is a separate gasoline motor on the spray cart or reel which also must be cranked so
that the reel can pull the spray gun in across the field. The spray cart holds approximately one
and one-half gallons of gasoline.
29. At approximately 4:00 p.m. on January 27, 2005, Brantley and Larry Baxley were driving
together on Highway 210 in Bladen County. Baxley was also an inspector for DWQ's CAFO
Unit. Brantley and Baxley drove past the RDF and noticed that the- spray gun was pulled all the
way out into the back field, which ordinarily means that the farmer is preparing to irrigate. The
system is set up ahead of time and is ready to go whenever the farmer decides to irrigate.
30. On the afternoon of January 27, 2005, the application system on the Ronald Davis Farm
had been set up in preparation for -irrigation. Brantley and Baxley commented at the time that
seeing the system set up was unusual because both of then had driyen by the RDF many times
and neither had ever seen irrigation taking place. Baxley had been by the farm hundreds of times
and had never once seen any spraying, although he does not doubt that there had been prior
applications. At the time, neither Brantley nor Baxley had seen pumping records to indicate the
dates, times and rates of land application of waste for the PDF.
31. DWQ staff had scheduled a meeting with Petitioner at the Fayetteville office for the very
next morning, January 28, 2005, to discuss the November 3, 2004 inspection, Petitioner's
problems with record -keeping and other matters.
32. During the night of January 27-28, 2005, both the pump motor and the spray cart motor
were started and the irrigation system began irrigating the back spray field. From all
appearances, the spray system was set up properly. The temperature dropped into the mid -
twenties during the night and the ground froze. During the irrigation event, the spray cart cut off
and stopped reeling in the spray gun_ The spray gun became stationary but continued spraying
waste onto the spray field through the night until approximately 8:00 a.m. the next morning
when the pump was cut off by a neighbor. The field was saturated and waste flowed out of the
field into a ditch. The discharge was discovered at approximately 7:45 a.m. on January 28, 2005,
when Baxley drove past the RDF on his way to the Fayetteville office. The temperature at the
time was approximately 26 degrees.
33. As he rode by the farm, Baxley saw that the spray cart on the RDF was operating and was
spraying waste. While there is no requirement about spraying at a particular time of day as long
as the land application is properly monitored, Baxley thought this was odd because all permittees
are prohibited from spraying on frozen ground under the General Permit.
34. Baxley stopped so that he could get a good look at what was happening on the property.
The spray gun was spraying but it was stationary and was not being reeled in. The gun had
pulled in from where it had been set up the day before but it had stopped, was not reeled in
completely and was spraying in one place. At that time the gun was not oscillating; however, it
was clear the spray gun had been oscillating earlier at the 180 degree setting as evidenced by the
pattern of frozen waste in the field. At the time, all the waste was being sprayed in one area and
there was a pool of wastc around the reel_ Baxley tried to call Petitioner on his cell phone but
9

was unsuccessful. Baxley drove toward the driveway of the RDF and saw hog waste flowing in
the ditch
35. Baxley drove past the farm to a small church and, again, tried to tail Petitioner but could
not reach him. Baxley then called the Fayetteville office and spoke with Brantley. Baxley asked
Brantley to contact Petitioner to notify him that his irrigation equipment was running and that
waste was being discharged off the farm property. Brantley telephoned Petitioner and notified
him of the discharge.
36. Baxley asked Brantley to come out to the faun to assist with the situation. Baxley went
to the swine houses to see if he could find anyone working at the facility and saw no one. He
walked behind the houses and saw the pump. It was leaking badly in several places and there
was a lot of foam and some ice. The pump had icicles hanging off of it. Parts of the ground
were hard where the ground were frozen. Baxley then walked out into the field and saw icicles
on the spray cart. There was white foam aver much of the fields. Foam is generated from
turbidity. Where the sunlight shone on the field, the foam was brown and white, giving the
appearance of a "moonscape." Baxley could see that the spray gun had travelled approximately
three to four hundred feet before it stalled. The reel motor was not running. He hypothesized
that the reel had run out of gas, but he did not check the gas tank. If the gun had been pulled all
the way in, the system should have cut off automatically.
37. Baxley walked around the edge of the field and found where the waste was entering the
ditch. He followed the waste stream as it moved behind a small pond, came back to the ditch,
then flowed for several hundred feet along the access road to the highway, then along the side of
Highway 210 for several hundred feet, underneath the highway and into a ditch that led into
some woods behind the neighbor's house and into some wetlands. There is no evidence that
these wetlands drained into any tributary or other "waters of the State."
38. Baxley estimated that the waste flowed approximately one-half mile from the field
through the ditches to the road. The waste flowed a total distance of approximately three quarters
of a mile and entered the wetland on the opposite side of Highway 210 from the field. The waste
stream in the ditch was approximately one foot wide and at least eight inches deep.
39. When Baxley was near the pond, he saw a car coming down the access road. A man that
he did not recognize got out, went over to the pump and shut it off. On January 12, 2005,
Petitioner had written a letter to DWQ indicating that he had problems with the timer on the
pump. During the November 2, 2004 spray event, the reel pulled the spray gun in until it
stopped but the timer had not cut off the pump.
40. Baxley went back to the field to take some photographs and the man who had turned off
the pump came over. Baxley asked the man if he was an employee of the RDF and the man said
that he was not. He was Iater identified as a neighbor, Ronald Davis. Baxley thanked the man
for cutting the pump off and explained that as a State inspector, he was not allowed to do that.
41. Petitioner arrived approximately forty-five minutes later at 8:45 a.m., a reasonable time
to drive from his'home. Petitioner appeared anxious and nervous. The equipment had already

been turned off but Petitioner could see that the fields were saturated with wastewater and that
the ditches were full, in some areas the waste was as deep as eighteen to twenty inches. It was
still extremely cold and the wind was blowing. Petitioner could see that ice had formed around
the reel. When Brantley arrived, he, too, saw waste flowing out of the field and through the
ditches for approximately three-quarters of a mile before entering the wetland.
42. According to Brantley, there is no creek or tributary in the area, there was no impact to
"waters of the State", and that wetlands are not considered "surface waters." The discharge did
reach and impact the wetlands.
43. Petitioner and Baxley walked to an area behind the neighbor's house and began working
together to build a dam where the farm ditch emptied into flat water. They had difficulty
building a dam due to the heavy volume of the waste flow. After Brantley arrived, he worked
with Petitioner and Baxley to try to stop the flow of waste.
44. Late in the morning, when the initial work to address the situation had been -completed, at
approximately 11:00 a.m., Petitioner told Baxley that he had not started the pump and Petitioner
speculated that vandalism was a possible explanation for the discharge. Petitioner was also
informed that he was required under the General Permit to submit a written report concerning the
discharge to DWQ within five days.
45. Petitioner has consistently contended that he did not start the pump and that it was an act
of vandalism. He offered the theory that it was the act of a disgruntled neighbor of the RDF. No
evidence was produced about the police investigation or otherwise to either confirm or rebut the
allegation of vandalism. To vandalize this property, one could have simply unhooked the hose at
the pump or at the hydrant and created a huge problem without going through the time, effort and
trouble to fully extend the hose and to prime the pump and engage both motors
46. Baxley estimated that the pump had been in operation for six to seven hours, based on the
pump and the amount of waste on the ground and in the ditches. Since the pump was cut off at
8:00 a.m., it would have begun spraying approximately 1:00 a.m. to 2:00a.m.
47. The lagoon's design was such that it required a minimum of nineteen inches of freeboard,
and it had twenty six inches of freeboard on the date of the discharge. Petitioner had more than
enough land to easily handle the amount of waste he would need to discharge from the lagoon.
In other words, Petitioner would not have been stressed to comply with the statues, rules and
regulations concerning applying the waste to his land.
48_ Petitioner immediately called a company to help with the cleanup. Employees of the
company vacuumed wastewater out of the ditches. They also built a catch basin and put what
was recovered into the lagoon. The workers actually had to put the sump pump in the wetlands
to remove waste. They worked from approximately 4 p.m. until 11.00 p.m. At some point
during the day, Petitioner called the Bladen County Sheriff's Department and made a report of
vandalism. He told the Sheriff's Department that someone had turned the irrigation system on
during the night. w

49. The following day, Petitioner and others continued to pump the sump areas as needed.
They also dished the field to try to keep more waste from seeping out of the fields. Waste
continued to flow from the field for approximately one week following theinitiai discharge.
50. Barnhardt, a hydro -geologist who had worked as Program Manager for the Aquifer
Protection Section since 1996, did calculations to determine the volume of waste that had been
discharged from the RDF on January 28, 2005. Barnhardt did two sets of calculations by which
he estimated that between 151,200 gallons and 207,930 gallons of waste had been discharged.
51. On February 7, 2005, DWQ issued an NOV and Notice of Intent to enforce against
Petitioner on the grounds that: (1) Petitioner had discharged animal waste to surface waters
and/or wetlands in violation of the General. Permit, and (2) Petitioner had failed to provide a
written description of the discharge and the cause of the discharge within five days following the
discharge, in violation of the General Permit. DWQ informed Petitioner that, if he believed that
further enforcement action by DWQ was not warranted, he needed to submit a response on or
before February 24, 2005.
52. The February 7, 2005 notice was mailed by certified mail to Petitioner at the address
provided by Petitioner for Freedman Farms. The notice was returned after having been marked
"unclaimed." On March 21, 2005, the Bladen County Sheriffs Department personally served
Petitioner with a copy of the notice.
53. In early March 2005, Brantley and Baxley met with Petitioner at the Fayetteville office to
review record -keeping requirements with Petitioner. At this time, the notice had been sent to
Petitioner but not received.
54. On March 22, 2005, the day after Petitioner was served, Brantley and Baxley conducted a
follow-up inspection at the RDF. Petitioner was present during the inspection. Petitioner did not
have a copy of the Permit or his COC on site. He did not have other records which are required
under the NPDES General Permit. At the time of the hearing, Petitioner did not know whether all
of the information, which had been requested by DWQ in November 2004, had been provided.
55. After the discharge, Petitioner signed a letter, dated January 31, 2005, concerning his
response to the discharge_ Petitioner submitted this letter and records for the November 2, 2004
spray event to DWQ in late March 2005. At no time did Petitioner provide all of the requested
information. Petitioner did not recall when the January 31, 2005 letter was provided to DWQ. In
the January 31, 2005 letter, Petitioner did not state that the discharge was the result of tampering
or malfunctioning of equipment_ He did state that he had made a report to the Bladen County
Sheriffs Department_ However, at the time of the hearing (more than three years after the
event), he did not know whether the investigation had been completed, or, if so, what the results
of the investigation were_ Petitioner never contacted the Sheriffs Department about his report or
the investigation.
56. On May 5, 2005, DWQ assessed a $6,000.00 civil penalty, as well as enforcement costs
in the amount of $989.50, against Petitioner on the grounds that: (1) Petitioner had caused an
unpermttted discharge of animal waste into waters of the State in violation of N.C. Gen. Stat.

W
143-215'.1, (2). Petitioner had violated NPDES General Permit Condition 11I.19 by applying
waste to land that was frozen, and (3) Petitioner had failed to provide copies of all requested
information and reports relating to the operation of his animal waste management system. In
assessing the civil penalty, DWQ considered Petitioner's allegation of sabotage. However,
DWQ found no evidence to support the allegation. DWQ concluded that the discharge was the
result of an' intentional irrigation event which had gone wrong. There was no evidence, other
than Petitioner's own speculation, that the discharge was caused by a third party_
57. In Petitioner's Prehearing Statement, Petitioner asserted that the discharge of waste was
the result of "unauthorized tampering with or malfunction of irrigation equipment." (Emphasis
added) To assert a "malfunction" implies that the equipment had been properly initiated but
thereafter encountered difficulty. During the hearing, Petitioner again speculated that it was an
act of vandalism.
58. During the period 2004 to the date of the hearing, DWQ's Fayetteville Office did not
receive any other allegations of any type of vandalism or sabotage at a hog farm except the
allegation made by Petitioner in this case.
CONCLUSIONS OF LAW
1. N.C. Gen_ Stat. § 143-215.1(a)(12) provides that no person shall construct or operate an
animal waste management system, as defined in N.C. Gen. Stat. § 143-215.10B, without first
obtaining a permit.
2. Petitioner was permitted to operate the Ronald Davis Farm in Bladen County under North
Carolina's Swine Waste Management System General NPDES Permit NCA200000 pursuant to a
Certificate of Coverage dated April 9, 2003.
3. The General Permit prohibits any discharge of waste which reaches surface waters or
wetlands. The Permit further requires that the waste collection, treatment, storage, and
application system be maintained and operated as a non -discharge system to prevent the
discharge of pollutants to surface waters or wetlands. The Permit also prohibits the application
of waste on ground that is flooded, saturated or frozen in order to prevent run-off of waste.
4. As permittee under the General Permit and as the operator -in -charge, Petitioner was
solely responsible for all pumping and land application of waste on the Ronald Davis Farm.
5. On January 28, 2005, during a planned land application of waste, approximately 151,200
gallons to 207,930 gallons of swine waste were discharged from the Ronald Davis Farm as a
result of spraying waste on frozen ground. Petitioner was not present to monitor the spray
irrigation, as required by the General Permit and Petitioner's own Nutrient Management Plan.
During the night, the equipment malfunctioned in that the motorized reel cut off and stopped
pulling in the spray gun which continued spraying waste throughout the night which caused the
field to become saturated with waste and caused a substantial dischargc of waste into wetlands in
violation of Petitioner's NPDES permit.
13

6. The definition of "waters" in N.C. Gen. Stat. § 143-212 (6) is sufficiently broad to
encompass wetlands. N.C.-Gen. Stat. § 1'43-215. l(a)(1) prohibits "making an outlet to waters of
the State" unless it is specifically permitted as required under N.C_ Gen. Stat. § 143-215.1.
7. The discharge of waste from the Ronald Davis Farm on January 28, 2005, constitutes
"making an outlet to waters of the State." Petitioner did not have a permit to discharge waste
from the Ronald Davis Farm into waters of the State and he is, therefore, in violation of N.C.
Gen. Stat. § 143-215.1(a)(1).
8. Although 'there is some evidence to support Petitioner's contention of vandalism, the
greater weight of the evidence does not support that contention, but to the contrary supports the
contention that the equipment malfunctioned during the course of an otherwise normal spraying
event.
9. The discharge of waste onto land that was frozen constitutes a violation of Condition 11.2
of NPDES General Permit NCA200000 by Petitioner.
10. Petitioner violated Condition II1.19 of NPDES General Permit NCA200000 by failing to
provide copies of all information and reports relating to the operation of the animal waste
management system after copies of the records were requested by DWQ.
11. Pursuant to N.C. Gen. Stat. § 143-215.6A(a)(2), DWQ has authority to assess civil
penalties against Petitioner in an amount not to exceed $25,000.00 per violation for making an
outlet to waters of the State without a permit, in violation of N.C. Gen. Stat. § 143-215.1(a)(1).
12. Pursuant to N.C. Gen. Stat. § 143-2I5.6A(a)(2), DWQ has authority to assess civil
penalties against Petitioner in an amount not to exceed $25,000.00 per violation for failure to
comply with the terms, conditions or requirements of a permit required by N.C. Gen. Stat. § 143-
215.1.
13. Pursuant to N.C. Gen. Stat. § 143-215.3(a)(9) and N.C. Gen. Stat. § 143B-282. I (b)(8),
Respondent is authorized to assess the State's enforcement costs against Petitioner.
14. Respondent did not err in assessing a civil penalty in the amount of $6,989.50, including
enforcement costs, against Petitioner for: (1) violating N.C. Gen. Stat. § 143-215.1 by making an
outlet to waters of the State without a permit and (2) violating Condition No. II. 20 of National
Pollutant Discharge Elimination System ("NPDES") Permit No. NCA200000 by applying
animal waste to land that was frozen; and (3) violating Condition No. III. 19 of the NPDES
General Permit No. NCA200000 by failing to provide copies of all requested information and
reports related to the operation of the animal waste management system at the Ronald Davis
Farm in Bladen County.
15. The civil penalty assessed by Respondent against Petitioner on May 5, 2005 is fair and
reasonable and should be enforced.
14

DECISION
NOW, THEREFORE, based upon the foregoing, the Undersigned hereby AFFIRMS
Respondent's decision to assess a civil penalty in the amount of $6,989.50 against Petitioner.
C!;!_W611
It is hereby ordered that the agency serve a copy of the final decision on the Office of
Administrative Hearings, 6714 Mail Service Center, Raleigh, NC 27699, in accordance with
N.C. Gen. Stat. § 150B-36(b).
NOTICE
Pursuant to N-C. Gen. Stat. § 150B-36, the agency making the final decision in this
contested case is required to give each party an opportunity to file exceptions to this decision and
to present written arguments to those in the agency who will make the final decision.
The agency is required by N.C. Gen. Stat. § 15013-36(b) to serve a copy of the final
decision on all parties and to furnish a copy to the parties attorneys of record and to the Office of
Administrative Hearings.
This the 23rd day of October, 2008.
Q�,4 0 (J
Donald W. Overby
Administrative Law Judge
15

W AgP
Michael F. Easley, Governor
�oF
�i
William G. Ross Jr., Secretary
�Q
Uj
North Carolina Departmcnt of Environment and Natural Resources
7 ti
Alan W. Klimek, P.E. Director
Division of Water Quality
May 5, 2005
CERTIFIED MAIL — 7002 2410 0003 0273 1415
RETURN RECEIPT REQUESTED
Mr. Barry Freedman
1282 Jordan Road
Clarkton, NC 28433
SUBJECT: Assessment of Civil Penalties
for Making an Outlet to Waters of the State
Without a Permit and Violation of
NPDES General Permit NCA200000
Farm # 9-186
Bladen County
File No. DV 05-006
Dear Mr. Freedman:
RF 1EIVED
Doi 1R - FAY�Tf-t LLE REUONAt QFRCE
This letter transmits notice of a civil penalty assessed against the Ronald Davis Farm in the
amount of $6,989.50 which includes $989.50 in investigative costs. Attached is a copy of the
assessment document explaining this penalty.
This action was taken under the authority vested in me by delegation provided by the Secretary
of the Department of Environment and Natural Resources and the Director of the Division of
Water Quality. Any continuing violation(s) may be the subject of a new enforcement action,
including an additional penalty.
Within thirty days of receipt of this notice, you must do one of the following three items:
1. Submit payment of the penalty:
Payment should be made to the order of the Department of Environment
and Natural Resources. Payment of the penalty will not foreclose further
enforcement action for any continuing or new violation(s). Do not include
the attached waiver form if making payment.
Please send payment to the attention of:
Mr. Steve Lewis
DWQ
1636 Mail Service Center
Raleigh, North Carolina 27699-1636
TOhCam
tnara2
Aquifer Protection Section 1636 Mail Service Center Raleigh, NC 27699-1636 Phone [phone] Customer Service
Internet: rttp://h2o.enr.state.nc.us 2728 Capital Boulevard Raleigh, NC 27604 Fax [phone]
Fax [phone]
An Equal opportunity/Affirmative Action Employer— 50% Recycled/10% Post Consumer Paper

2. Submit a written request for remission or mitigation including a
detailed justification for such request:
A request for remission or mitigation is limited to consideration of the reasonableness
of the amount of the penalty and is not the proper procedure for contesting the
accuracy of any of the statements contained in the assessment letter. Because a
remission request forecloses the option of an administrative hearing, such a request
must be accompanied by a waiver of your right to an administrative hearing and a
stipulation that there are no factual or legal issues in dispute. You must execute and
return to this office the attached waiver form and the attached "Justification for
Remission Request" which should describe why you believe:
(a) one or more of the civil penalty assessment factors in G.S. 143B-282.1(b)
were wrongfully applied to the detriment of the petitioner;
(b) the violator promptly abated continuing environmental damage resulting from
the violation;
(c) the violation was inadvertent or a result of an accident;
(d) the violator had been assessed civil penalties for any previous violations;
(e) payment of civil penalty will prevent payment for the remaining necessary
remedial actions.
Please submit this information to the attention of.
Mr. Steve Lewis
DWQ
1636 Mail Service Center
Raleigh, North Carolina 27699-1636
1`
NW
3. Submit a written request for an administrative hearing:
If you wish to contest any portion of the civil penalty assessment, you must request an
administrative hearing. This request must be in the form of a written petition to the
Office of Administrative Hearings and must conform to Chapter 150B of the North
Carolina General Statutes. You must file your original petition with the:
Office of Administrative Hearings
6714 Mail Service Center
Raleigh, North Carolina 27699-6714

AND
Mail or hand -deliver a copy of the petition to:
UT iT,03
Mr. Dan Oakley
NCDENR
Office of General Counsel
1601 Mail Service Center
Raleigh, NC 27699-1601
Mr. Steve Lewis
DWQ
1636 Mail Service Center
Raleigh, North Carolina 27699-1636
Failure to exercise one of the options above within thirty days, as evidenced by a date stamp (not
a postmark) indicating when we received your response, will result in this matter being referred
to the Attorney General's Office with a request to initiate a civil action to collect the penalty.
Please be advised that additional assessments may be levied for future violations which occur
after the review period of this assessment.
If you have any questions, please contact Mr. Steve Lewis at [phone] or Mr. Keith Larick
at [phone].
Sincerely,
Theodore L. Bush, Jr., Chief
Aquifer Protection Section
TLB/scl
ATTACHMENTS
cc: Art Barnhardt, Fayetteville APS Regional Supervisor w/ attachments
&azk?Brantley; FRO w/ attachments
File 9 DV 05-006 w/ attachments
APS Central Files w/ attachments
Susan Massengale, PIO w/ attachments

STATE OF NORTH CAROLINA
COUNTY OF BLADEN
IN THE MATTER OF ASSESSMENT
OF CIVIL PENALTIES AGAINST
BARRY FREEDMAN
ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT
COMMISSION
WAIVER OF RIGHT TO AN
ADMINISTRATIVE HEARING AND
STIPULATION OF FACTS
FILE NO. DV 05-006
Having been assessed civil penalties totaling $6,989.50 for
violation(s) as set forth in the assessment document of the Director of the Division of Water Quality
dated May_5.2005 _ , the undersigned, desiring to seek remission of the civil
penalties, does hereby waive the right to an administrative hearing in the above -stated matter and
does stipulate that the facts are as alleged in the assessment document.
The undersigned further understands that all evidence presented in support of remission of
this civil penalty must be submitted to the Director of the Division of Water Quality within thirty (30)
days of receipt of the civil penalty assessment. No new evidence in support of a remission request
will be allowed after thirty (30) days from the receipt of the civil penalty assessment.
This the
day of
ADDRESS
TELEPHONE
SIGNATURE
20

JUSTIFICATION FOR REMISSION REQUEST
DWQ Case Number: DV 05-006 County: Bladen
Assessed Party: Bang Freedman
Permit No. (if applicable): NCA209186 Amount Assessed: $6,989.50
Please use this form when requesting remission of this civil penalty. You must also complete the
"Request For Remission, Waiver of Right to an Administrative Hearing, and Stipulation of
Facts" form to request remission of this civil penalty. You should attach any documents that
you believe support your request and are necessary for the Director to consider in evaluating
your request for remission. Please be aware that a request for remission is limited to
consideration of the five factors listed below as they may relate to the reasonableness of the
amount of the civil penalty assessed. Requesting remission is not the proper procedure for
contesting whether the violation(s) occurred or the accuracy of any of the factual statements
contained in the civil penalty assessment document. Pursuant to N.C.G.S. § 143B-282.1(c),
remission of a civil penalty may be granted only when one or more of the following five factors
applies. Please check each factor that you believe applies to your case and provide a detailed
explanation, including copies of supporting documents, as to why the factor applies (attach
additional pages as needed).
_ (a) one or more of the civil penalty assessment factors inN.C.G.S_ 143B-282.1
were wrongfully_ applied to the detriment of the petitioner (the assessment factors are listed in
the civil penalty assessment document);
(b) the violator promptly abated continuing environmental damage resulting from the
violation (i.e., explain the steps that you took to correct the violation and prevent future
occurrences);
(c) the violation was inadvertent or a result of an accident (i.e., explain why the
violation was unavoidable or something you could not prevent or prepare for);
(d) the violator had not been assessed civil penalties for any previous _ violations;
(e) payment of the civil penalty will prevent payment for the remaining necess
remedial actions (i.e., explain how payment of the civil penalty will prevent you from performing
the activities necessary to achieve compliance).
EXPLANATION (attach additional pages as necessary):

STATE OF NORTH CAROLINA
COUNTY OF BLADEN
IN THE MATTER OF
BARRY FREEDMAN
FOR MAKING AN OUTLET TO THE )
WATERS OF THE STATE OF )
NORTH CAROLINA WITHOUT A PERMIT)
AND VIOLATION OF CONDITIONS OF )
NPDES GENERAL PERMIT NCA200000 }
NORTH CAROLINA
DEPARTMENT OF ENVIRONMENT AND
NATURAL RESOURCES
FILE NO. DV 05-006
FINDINGS AND DECISION
AND ASSESSMENT OF
CIVIL PENALTIES
Acting pursuant to delegation provided by the Secretary of the Department of
Environment and Natural Resources and the Director of the Division of Water Quality, I,
Theodore L. Bush, Jr., Chief of the Aquifer Protection Section of the Division of Water Quality
(DWQ), make the following:
1. FINDINGS OF FACT:
A. Barry Freedman owns and operates the Ronald Davis Farm, a swine operation
located along Highway 210 in Bladen County.
B. Barry Freedman was issued Certificate of Coverage NCA209186 under NPDES
General Permit NCA200000 for the Ronald Davis Farm on April 9, 2003,
effective April 9, 2003, with an expiration date of July 1, 2007. This permit does
not allow the discharge of waste to waters of the State.
C. On January 28, 2005, DWQ staff observed a discharge of wastewater at the
Ronald Davis Farm from a sprayfield to wetlands that drain to an unnamed
tributary of the South River, which are Class C Sw waters of the State within the
Cape Fear River Basin.
D. Barry Freedman had no valid permit for the above -described activity.
E. Condition No. I1. 20. of the NPDES General Permit states "Waste shall not be
applied on land that is flooded, saturated with water, frozen or snow covered at
the time of land application."
F. During the inspection on January 28, 2005, staff observed waste being applied to
land that was frozen.

G. Condition No. III. 19. of the NPDES General Permit states in part "Within five (5)
working days of receiving the request from the Division, the Permittee shall
provide to the Division one (1) copy of all requested information and reports
related to the operation of the animal waste management system."
H. On November 3, 2004, DWQ staff inspected the Ronald Davis Farm and observed
wastewater ponded in a sprayf eld and evidence of a discharge from a sprayfield.
On or about November 22, 2004, DWQ sent a Notice of Violation (NOV) to
Barry Freedman. The NOV requested that copies of all pumping records, lagoon
levels, rainfall records and waste analyses from January 1, 2004 to the present be
submitted before December 8, 2004. DWQ has the certified mail green card
showing that Barry Freedman received the NOV on November 29, 2004.
1. On or about December 29, 2004, DWQ sent another NOV to Barry Freedman
stating that Mr. Freedman had failed to respond to the request for the records
referenced in Item G. This NOV requested that the records be submitted by
January 14, 2005. DWQ has the certified mail green card showing that Barry
Freedman received the second NOV on January 3, 2005. To date, DWQ has not
received the requested records.
J. The cost to the State of the enforcement procedures in this matter totaled $989.50.
Based upon the above Findings of Fact, I make the following:
II. CONCLUSIONS OF LAW:
A. Barry Freedman is a "person" within the meaning of G.S. 143-215.6A pursuant to
G.S. 143-212(4).
B. The wetlands that drain to an unnamed tributary to the South River constitute
waters of the State within the meaning of G.S. 143-215.1 pursuant to G.S. 143-
212(6).
C. The above -cited discharge constituted making an outlet to waters of the State for
purposes of G.S. 143-215.1(a)(1), for which a permit is required by G.S. 143-
215.1.
D. Barry Freedman may be assessed civil penalties in this matter pursuant to G.S.
143-215.6A(a)(2), which provides that a civil penalty of not more than twenty-
five thousand dollars ($25,000.00) per violation may be assessed against a person
who is required but fails to apply for or to secure a permit required by G.S. 143-
215.1.
E. Barry Freedman violated Condition No. H. 20. of NPDES General Permit
NCA200000 by applying waste to land that was frozen.

F. Barry Freedman violated Condition No. III. 19. of NPDES General Permit
NCA200000 by failing to provide copies of all requested information and reports
related to the operation of the animal waste management system.
G. Barry Freedman may be assessed civil penalties in this matter pursuant to G.S.
143-215.6A(a)(2), which provides that a civil penalty of not more than twenty-
five thousand dollars ($25,000.00) per violation may be assessed against a person
who fails to act in accordance with the terms, conditions, or requirements of a
permit required by G.S. 143-215.1.
H. The State's enforcement costs in this matter may be assessed against Barry
Freedman pursuant to G.S. 143-215.3(a)(9) and G.S. 143B-282. I (b)(8).
I. The Chief of the Aquifer Protection Section, Division of Water Quality, pursuant
to delegation provided by the Secretary of the Department of Environment and
Natural Resources and the Director of the Division of Water Quality, has the
authority to assess civil penalties in this matter.
Based upon the above Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law, I make the following:
M. DECISION:
Accordingly, Barry Freedman is hereby assessed a civil penalty of:
D D 0 C? 0 for making an outlet to the waters of the State without a
permit as required by G.S. 143-215.1.
p 719 for violating Condition No. II. 20. of the NPDES General
Permit NCA200000 by applying waste to land that was
frozen
$ ! 9 D for violating Condition No. III. 19. of the NPDES General
Permit NCA200000 by failing to provide copies of all
requested information and reports related to the operation
of the animal waste management system
19 D Q, TOTAL CIVIL PENALTY
$ / 989.50 Enforcement costs
TOTAL AMOUNT DUE

As required by G.S. 143-215.6A(c), in determining the amount of the penalty I have
considered the factors listed in G.S.143B-282.1(b), which are:
(1) The degree and extent of harm to the natural resources of the State, to the public
health, or to private property resulting from the violation;
(2) The duration and gravity of the violation;
(3) The effect on ground or surface water quantity or quality or on air quality;
(4) The cost of rectifying the damage;
(5) The amount of money saved by noncompliance;
(6) Whether the violation was committed willfully or intentionally;
(7) The prior record of the violator in complying or failing to comply with programs
over which the Environmental Management Commission has regulatory authority;
(8) The cost to the State of the enforcement procedures.
C7 '
(Datef The re L. Bush, Jr., Chief
Aquifer Protection Section
Division of Water Quality

1 �I
C O: V E R
-.r
S H
To: Ted Bush, Aquifer Prot
Program Supervisor;
jfi
Art Barnhardt, Fayetteville
egional Office Supervisor,
Larry Baxley, Enviromnenta
I Specialist; and
Mark Brantley, Environment
Specialist.
Fax #: TB - 715-0588
FRO - (91.0) 486-1541
I
Subject, Freedman Farms, Petitioner j
Date: June 17, 2005
Pages: 3, including this cover sheetland
Petition -
FAX
COMMENTS:
f
Please see attached for important dates and petition for the above -subject case.
Only one (1) fax will come to each loc4n, please copy and circulate when necessary.
If you have any questions, please call_
RACKI
�lG •
l
AIJO SCV n `J ANC r
From the desk of.__
�A>n�KS
Ja tCe
Ppepartment o9001 Mail Servic
Raleigh, NC 27699-9001
(919) 716-6W
Fax: [phone]
ileaCh(QnCd0f.00M
10:d TZ:£1 SO, I unf 99Z9-91Z-6T6rxpJ NOIi33S GNErI '8 d3iUM

y* !EQK
• A' i
State of North Carolina
I ON, (-.r)oPr%n npn rtment c)f .hLStic e
AI-YORNFY GENET2AL R O. Sox 629
RALEIGH
2 i 602-0629
TO: Ted Bush, Aquifer Prote
Art Barnhardt, Fayettevi.
Larry Baxley, Environml
Mark Brantley, Enviranr
FROM: ,lane L. Oliver, Assistant
DATE; : June 17, 2005
RE: Appeal by Freedman Far
Agency No.: 05-006; O.
an Program Supervisor;
Regional Office Supervisor,
al Specialist; and
ital Specialist-
tomey Gen
;�ff
of Bladen County
No.: 05 EHR 0905
12cplr to:
Jane L.Oliver
EnvimurimWl Division
[phone]
}pax: [phone]
Please note that I have been assigned to handle the above referenced contested case_
Please review the important dates listed Below and mark your calendars accordingly.
July 8, 2005
Prehearing State>nne>at
and Documents Constituting Agency Action.
We have requeste4
a copy of the enforcement file From the Parker Lincoln
Office (Steve Lewis) but I also need a copy of any worksheets, test
results, reports an analysis related to the assessment- If any of this
material is not included in the documents at the central office, please send
these materials, I all other doewnentation associated with this case upon
receipt of the date
f this memo.
August 22, 2005
Any Discovery mfist
be sent to Petitioner by this date to give us enough
time to receive am,veers
prior to hearing. Any discovery sent to us by
Petitioner must be
responded to within l5 days of receipt of the questions.
By Order of the as
3igned Administrative Law Judge, ALL discovery m ust
be completed by September 26, 2005.
Week Beginning
October,'1.0, 2005
Hearing is set in Fayetteville, NC with Chief Administrative Law Judge
Julian Mann, a j residing. You have been listed as witnesses in this case,
If you feel you shdu.ld not be listed as a witness or if you know of
additional witnesses, please notify this office immediately.
If you have any questions, please ado not hesitate to contact this office immediately.
ZO 'd ZZ:,2T SD. zT unE 9919-9TL-6T6: xp-� NOMM QNUI 'S �MUM

PLFASF. PRTW Cl•lEAKLY Out xYYL ,JUN
2005
.F OF NORTtl CAROLINA IN 71rF. OFMCF. OF
ENVIRONMENT &rwiNisTRASIVE HEARINGS
UY OFF (I)_fiI,AI)EN , MTURk REgpO�g CFM
(2) FREED1biAN__FARMS l 1
I )
(your n&nc) P!r IT110NER, )
PETITION
v. j ) FORA
CONTFS'I'ED CASE iIEARTNC
FAYM- EVILLE DIVISION OF WATER QLTIITY
RESPONDENT. )
(The State agency or board about which you arc oomph ing) )
I hereby risk for a consisted case hearing as provided for by North Carolina General Statute § I SOB 23 because the Respondent has;
(Britny state facts showing how y I believe you have been bwmod by the Stare agency or board-)
(RE: FARM.# 9-186), mile No. DV 05-006
A civil penalty has been assessed against the Ronald Dlmis Farm for an act that occurred from unauthorized tarnporing with irrigation
equipment rcaulting in a discharge. Freedman Farms maintains the position that we are in no way responsibla for the discharge that
occurred. A police report hn_s been filed with the Blsdeq County Sherifrs Depsrtmoot documenting the event and whni-sses are arailarhlc
to d4ute liability.
(If mnrc
(4) Because of these facts, the STate agency or board I
depriv6d me of property;
x _ordered me to pay a fine or civil penalty; or
otherwiSa srbstaniialty prejudiced my rights;
(5) Date: )une 3, 2(IO5
is n=dcd, attach additional pages.)
(check -at least one from each column)
exceeded its authority or jurisdiction;
____x acted cmaeously;
AND failed to use prvper pmccdure;
acted arbitrarily or capriciously; or
failed to act as required by law or rule.
(6) Your phone number: [phone]
(7) Print youi full address: 1282 Jordan Road Clarkib p, NC 28433
(street eddress/p.o. box)
(8) Print your name: Freedman Rums (William R. F edman)
i
i003 (5/04) ,
(city) (state) (zip)
20'd ZZ:2T S0. Zi unr 99Z9-9TL-6T6:xe3 NOI193S QN13-1' �GibM

NCDENR
North Carolina Department of Environment and
Division of Water Quality
Beverly Eaves Perdue
Governor
Coleen H. Sullins
Director
Natural Resources
AQUIFER PROTECTION SECTION
October 14, 2010
CERTIFIED MAIL,
RETURN RECEIPT REQUESTED
Ron Davis
811 Timberlake Dr,
Clinton NC 28328
Subject: NOTICE OF DEFICIENCY / NOD-2010-PC-1091
Ron Davis Farm
A W S090 I 86
Bladen County
Incident No. 201000781
Dear Mr. Davis:
Dee Freeman
On February 8, 2010, staff of the NC Division of Water Quality (DWQ), Aquifer Protection Section
(APS) were notified by Ron Davis of a high freeboard level in the lagoon 1. We wish to thank Mr_
Davis for notifying DWQ of this incident.
As a result of this incident, you are hereby notified that, having been permitted to have a non -discharge
permit for the subject animal waste disposal system pursuant to 15A NCAC 2T Section .1300, you have
been found to be in violation of your Certified Animal Waste Management Plan and the Swine Waste
System General Permit No. AWG100000 that you are covered to operate under, as follows:
Deficiency 1:
Failure to maintain waste levels in your lagoon/storage ponds in accordance with the facility's Certified
Animal Waste Management Plan in accordance with Condition V. 2. of Swine Waste System General
Permit No. AWG 100000.
On February 8, 2010 a lagoon/storage pond level was documented at 17.00 inches in lagoon 1. A level
of 19 inches is the maximum level allowed by your permit and Certified Animal Waste Management
Plan.
North Carolina Division of Water Quality Internet: www.nCwater ualit .or
225 Green St., Ste. 714 Phone: [phone]
Fayetteville, NC 28301 FAX [phone]
An Equal Opportunity/Affirmative Action Employer- 50% ReCydetl110% Post Consumer Paper
NorthCarolina
Natmrallff

>i
Mr. Davis
October 14, 2010
Page 2
Required Corrective Action for Deficiency 1:
DWQ has received a copy of your 30 Day Plan of Action (POA) for the high freeboard occurrence.
Take all necessary additional steps to insure lagoon levels remain in compliance with Section 2 of your
permit.
A compliance inspection was done 10/05/2010 and all records were reviewed and the date and time
lagoon 1 returned to compliance on 02/14/2010,
If you have any questions conceming this notice, please contact me at (910)-433-3300.
Sincerely,
Steve Guyton
Environmental Specialist
Fayetteville Regional Office
cc: Keith Larick, CAFO Unit
Bladen Soil and Water Conservation District
NCDSWC-FRO
FRO Compliance Animal Files
Murphy Farms

STATE OF NORTH CAROLINA
COUNTY OF BLADEN
IN THE GENERAL COURT OF JUSTICE
SUPERIOR COURT DIVISION
FILE NO: r n r
,�f:�t86 79
FREEDMAN FARMS, )
Petitioner )
V. }
FAYETTEVILLE DIVISION OF WATER)
QUALITY OFFICE }
Respondent
�V
PETITION FOR JUDICIAL REVIEW PURSUANT TO N.C. GEN. STAT 5150B-45
COMES NOW the Petitioner pursuant to N.C. Gen. Stat. §150B-
45 petitioning the Superior Court to review the record of the
hearing in the matter entitled "Freedman Farms, Petitioner, vs.
Fayetteville Division of Water Quality Office, Respondent,"
showing the court the following in support of its petition:
1. The Petitioner was assessed a fine by the Respondent in
the amount of $8,800 as a result of water discharged from a
lagoon on property owned by William B. Freedman and wife, Lisa
Freedman.
2. That the Petitioner does not own an interest in said
property, does not operate the lagoon where the water was
discharged from and generally has no connection with the
property where the wastewater was discharged from. That the
HESTER.GRADY
&HESTERPLLC Petitioner is informed and believes that this property is owned
ATTORNEYS AT LAW
115 C0uRTi10U5E DRIVE
:LIZABETNTOWN. N.C. 20337

by William B. Freedman and wife, Lisa Freedman and that the
lagoon in question is under their operation and control.
3. That the Petitioner did not cause the discharge of the
wastewater in question and the Petitioner is informed and
believes that this discharge was a direct and proximate result
of vandalism by third parties. This vandalism was reported by
William B. Freedman and was investigated by the Bladen County
Sheriffs Department.
4. That after the fine was assessed the Petitioner filed a
Petition for a Contested Case Hearing in the Office of
Administrative Hearings.
5. That this hearing was scheduled on November 14th, 2005,
however the Petitioner did not receive written notice of said
hearing. The Petitioner did receive a telephone message the
weekend of November loth, 2005 that the hearing was scheduled the
following Monday, however the Petitioner was not able to prepare
or obtain counsel due to the minimal notice given. The
Petitioner was further unable to appear and represent itself at
the hearing.
6. In accordance with N.C. Gen. Stat. §150B-46 the
Petitioner takes exception to the findings:
a. Findings of fact: 15
b. Conclusions of law: 5,6,and 7.

7.The Petitioner further asserts that the findings stated
above are not supported by substantial evidence in that the
claim was dismissed without the Petitioner having adequate
notice of the hearing.
8. Furthermore, the Petitioner contends that the decision
was in violation of Petitioner's constitutional rights to due
process and equal protection, was in excess of the statutory
authority or jurisdiction of the agency, was made upon unlawful -
procedure, and was unsupported by substantial evidence, and
further was an arbitrary, capricious and abuse of the agencies'
discretion.
Wherefore, the Petitioner prays as follows:
1.That the Superior Court reverse the decision of the
Administrative Law Judge dismissing the Petitioner's petition.
2.That the Court find that based upon the record that the
fine assessed by the Respondent was improper, and that the
action of the Respondent should be reversed.
3.That the Court enter an order staying the enforcement of
the action of the Respondent pending a hearing on this matter.

115i;VSO879
CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE
I hereby certify that a copy of the foregoing Petition for
Review was served on all parties entitled to receive a copy of
the same -by depositing such a copy in a postpaid, properly
addressed wrapper in a post office or official depository under
the exclusive care and custody of the U.S. Postal Service on the
date indicated above and addressed as follows:
Jane L. Oliver
Assistant Attorney General
N.C. Department of Justice
9001 Mail Service Center
Raleigh, N.C. 27699-9001
With a copy to: �L
Office of Administrative Hearings
6714 Mail Service Center
Raleigh, NC 27699-6714
This the L& day of December 2005.
HESTER, GRADY & HESTER, P.L.L.C.
BY. /-
A. dRADN
P.O. DRAWER 130
ELIZABETHTOWN, NC 28337
STATE BAR NO. 8781
TEL.: [phone]
TELEFAX: 910-862-4802
F:\SHARE\CZV \f ree-far\pet-for-review.doc

STATE OF NORTH CAROLINA
COUNTY OF BLADEN
WII -LA,M B. FREEDMAN, first being duly sworn, deposes and says:
THAT he is� of Freedman Farms the Petitioner in the foregoing
Petition For Judicial Review Pursuant To N.C. Gen. Stat §150B45; that he is of full age and
competent to testify as to the matters and things set forth herein; that he has read the same and
knows the contents thereof, and that the same is true of his own knowledge, except as to allegations
therein stated on information and belief, and as to such allegations he verily believes the same to be
true.
I : •
Sworn to and subscribed before me thi
My Commission Expires: - 1 S- aoo to
YJPUBLIC VJ
�uQseF
• =
dop v ,
quo
'••,���,q�EN G�ftqt/

STATE OF NORTH CAROLINA
COUNTY OF BLADEN
FREEDMAN FARMS,
Petitioner,
V.
FAYETTEVILLE DIVISION OF
WATER QUALITY OFFICE,
Respondent.
IN THE GENERAL COURT OF JUSTICE
SUPERIOR COURT DIVISION
05 CVS 0879
RESPONDENT NORTH CAROLINA
DEPARTMENT OF ENVIRONMENT
AND NATURAL RESOURCES,
DIVISION OF WATER QUALITY'S
RESPONSE TO PETITION FOR
JUDICIAL REVIEW
NOW COMES Respondent North Carolina Department of Environment and Natural
Resources, Division of Water Quality (hereinafter "Agency") by and through counsel, Roy Cooper,
Attorney General of the State of North Carolina, and Jane L. Oliver, Assistant Attorney General,
pursuant to N.C. Gen. Stat. § 15013-46, and requests that the Final Decision Order of Dismissal be
affirmed, a copyof which is attached hereto as Respondent's Exhibit 1, and that Petitioner's requests
for relief be denied. In addition, the Agency objects to the presentation by Petitioner of any new or
additional evidence which is outside the official record in this matter to the Superior Court_ The
Agency reserves the right to file a Brief in Support of it's Response to Petition for Judicial Review
following receipt by Respondent of the official record.
This the 18th" day of January, 2006.
ROY COOPER
Attorney General
,:�� L 14'v+V
Jane L. Oliver
Assistant Attorney General
NC Department of Justice
9001 Mail Service Center
Raleigh, NC 27699-9001
[phone]
NC State Bar No. 16771

CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE
It is hereby certified that a copy of the foregoing RESPONDENT NORTH CAROLINA
DEPARTMENT OF ENVIRONMENT AND NATURAL RESOURCES, DIVISION OF WATER
QUALITY'S RESPONSE TO PETITION FOR JUDICIAL REVIEW was this day served upon
counsel for Petitioner by depositing a copy of the same in the United States Mail, first-class postage
prepaid and addressed as follows:
Gary A. Grady
Hester, Grady & Hester, PLLC
Attorneys at Law
Post Office Drawer 130
Elizabethtown, NC 28337
This the 18th day of January, 2006.
Jane L. Oliver
Assistant Attorney General

FILED
0FFI(,'=
�.C1.,11!. ', 7 ".C. :'CC,
STATE OF NORTH CAROLINA IN THE OFFICE OF
NIV Z i 1 15 PH '05 ADMINISTRATIVE HEARINGS
COUNTY OF BLADEN 05 EHR 0905
FREEDMAN FARMS, )
Petitioner, }
} FINAL DECISION
V. ) ORDER OF DISMISSAL
FAYETTEVILLE DIVISION OF WATER )
QUALITY OFFICE, )
Respondent. )
NOW COMES Administrative Law Judge James L. Conner, I1, judge presiding,
upon Respondent's Motion to Dismiss and makes the following:
FINDINGS OF FACT
1. On June 6, 2005, Petitioner filed a Petition for Contested Case Hearing in
the Office of Administrative Hearings. Chief Administrative Law Judge was assigned
initially to preside at the hearing in this contested case.
2- On June 8, 2005 Chief Administrative Law Judge Mann issued a
Scheduling Order in which he ordered that discovery be completed by September 26,
2005 and that the hearing by held during the week of October 10, 2005.
3. On August 23, 2005, Respondent served discovery requests on Petitioner
in the form of Request for Admissions, Request for Interrogatories, and Request for
Production of Documents. Petitioner failed to respond to these discovery requests.
4. On September 19, 2005, Respondent filed a Motion to Compel Petitioner
to Respond to Respondent's Discovery Requests.
5. On September 26, 2005, Respondent filed a motion to amend the
scheduling order and to continue the hearing because Petitioner had not yet responded to
Respondent's discovery requests.
6. On September 28, 2005, Chief Administrative Law Judge Mann ordered
Petitioner to respond on or before October 6, 2005 if he had objections to the motion
which he wanted to be considered.
7. Petitioner failed to respond by October 6, 2005, as ordered by the Chief
Administrative Law .fudge, but he telephoned the Office of Administrative Hearings on

October 7, 2005. Petitioner was instructed by the Chief Administrative Law Judge Mann
to respond to Respondent's discovery requests on or before October 10, 2005.
8. Petitioner failed to respond to Respondent's discovery requests on or
before October 10, 2005, as ordered by Chief Administrative Law Judge Mann. On
October 10, 2005 Chief Administrative Law Judge Mann reassigned the contested case to
the undersigned Administrative Law -Judge and scheduled the hearing far the week of
November 14, 2005. A copy of the Order of Continuance and Order of Reassignment
was mailed to both Petitioner and counsel for Respondent on October 12, 2005.
9. On October 11, 2005, Petitioner faxed his responses to Respondent's
discovery requests.
10. On October 20, 2005, the undersigned Administrative Law Judge issued a
Notice of Hearing informing the parties that the hearing in this contested case had been
scheduled for November 14, 2005 in Fayetteville, North Carolina. On the same date, the
Office of Administrative Hearings mailed the Notice of Hearing by certified mail to both
Petitioner and Respondent.
11. The Notice of Hearing was mailed to Petitioner at the address listed by
Petitioner in his Petition for Contested Case Hearing: William B. Freedman, Freedman
Farms, 1282 Jordan Road, Clarkton, NC 28433_ The envelop containing the notice was
returned to the Office of Administrative Hearings and marked "unclaimed" by the U.S.
Postal Service.
12. A second Notice of Hearing was mailed by certified mail to Petitioner at
the address listed in Petitioner's Petition. The second notice was also returned to the
Office of Administrative Hearings marked "unclaimed."
13. On November 10, 2005, the Office of Administrative Hearings called
Petitioner at the telephone number listed by Petitioner in the Petition and left a message
informing Petitioner that the hearing was scheduled in Fayetteville at 9:30 a.m. on
November 14, 2005.
14. On the morning of November 14, 2005, Petitioner contacted an employee
of the Division of Water Quality's Fayetteville Regional Office by telephone. Petitioner
indicated that he was aware that the hearing had been scheduled for November 14, 2005
as a result of the telephone message left for him on November 10, 2005.
15. This case was called for hearing at approximately 9:35 a.m. on November
14, 2005 in the Old Cumberland County Courthouse in Fayetteville. Respondent was
present and ready to go forward with evidence. However, Petitioner failed to appear.
The case was left open to allow additional time for Petitioner to appear. Neither
Petitioner nor anyone on Petitioner's behalf appeared. Petitioner also failed to contact the
Office of Administrative Hearings regarding this matter.
PI

16. Counsel for Respondent. made a Motion to Dismiss in open court and on
the record on the ground that Petitioner had failed to prosecute his case by failing to
appear.
CONCLUSIONS OF LAW
1. N.C. Gen. Stat. § 15013-33(b) authorizes the presiding Administrative Law
Judge in a contested case to rule on all pre -hearing motions that are authorized by N.C.
Gen. Stat. Ch. IA-1, the Rules of Civil Procedure, and to impose sanctions provided for
in N.C. Gen. Stat. Ch. 1 A-1 and in 26 NCAC Ch. 3.
2. N.C. Gen. Stat. § 150B-36 authorizes the presiding' administrative law
judge to enter a final decision and order dismissing a contested case for failure of the
petitioner to prosecute.
3. Under the Rules of Civil Procedure, an administrative law judge may
impose sanctions for failure to prosecute when a petitioner "manifests an intention to
thwart progress of an action to its conclusion" or "fails to progress the action towards its
conclusion" by engaging in some delaying tactic. N.C. Gen. Stat. § lA-1, Rule 41(b).
4. Under the rules governing administrative hearings, "if a party fails to
appear at a hearing or fails to comply with an interlocutory order of an administrative law
judge, the administrative law judge may dismiss or grant a motion to dismiss. 26 NCAC
3.0114(a).
5. By failing to accept delivery of the Notice of Hearing for the November
14, 2005 hearing when the Office of Administrative Hearings attempted notice by proper
service, and by failing to appear at the hearing or to contact the Office of Administrative
Hearings to cancel or reschedule the hearing, Petitioner has manifested an intention to
thwart to progress of this contested case to its conclusion."
6. The undersigned has considered actions less drastic for disposing of this
contested case and has determined that less drastic actions would not suffice. Petitioner's
failure, after receiving notice of the hearing, to appear or to try to reschedule is
inexcusable_
7. Imposition of sanctions and disposition of this case by dismissal of the
Petition because of Petitioner's failure to prosecute in accord with Chapter 3 of Title 26
of the North Carolina Administrative Code is proper pursuant to N.C. Gen. Stat. § 15013-
33(b)(10) and N.C. Gen. Stat. § lA-1, Rule 41(b).
3

FINAL DECISION
NOW, THEREFORE, based upon the foregoing, the Undersigned hereby grants
Respondent's Motion to Dismiss and ORDERS that this contested case be dismissed with
prejudice.
This is a Final Decision under the authority of G.S. 15013-36(c).
NOTICE
Pursuant to G.S. 150B-45, any party wishing to appeal the final decision of the
Administrative Law Judge may commence such appeal by filing a Petition for Judicial
Review in the Superior Court of Wake County or in the Superior Court of the county in
which the party resides. The party seeking review must file the petition within 30 days
after being served with a written copy of the Administrative Law Judge's Decision and
Order. Pursuant to G.S. 15013-47, the Office of Administrative Hearings is required to
file the official record in the contested case with the Clerk of Superior Court within 30
days of receipt of the Petition for Judicial Review. Consequently, a copy of the Petition
for Judicial Review must be sent to the Office of Administrative Hearings at the time the
appeal is initiated in order to ensure the timely filing of the record.
IT IS SO ORDERED.
y`1
This the day of November'2005.
James L. Conner, II
Administrative Law J
4

A copy of the foregoing was mailed to:
William B Freedman
Freedman Farms
1282 Jordan Road
Clarkton, NC 28433
PETITIONER
Jane L. Oliver
Assistant Attorney General
NC Department of Justice
9001 Mail Service Center
Raleigh, NC 27699-9001
ATTORNEY FOR RESPONDENT
This the 21 st day of November, 2005.
Offi of Administrative Hearings
6714 Mail Service Center
Raleigh, NC 27699-6714
[phone]
Fax: [phone]