470011_ENFORCEMENT_20171231

vl�
Facility Number / Dateoi'Visit: '- �a Time: -`!J
at O rational elow Threlhold
0 Permitted 0 Certified 0 Conditionally Certified 0 Registered Date Last Operated or Above Threshold:
�r ! J�sr
Farm Name: �_ I��' v/ s �4 j// ✓/•2a �a�'a1 County:
4
Owner Name: �'hR�'` C "/C (�CstF- rr J Phone No: 4Vy
Mailing Address: :2 r l f la 4,e w o a rt0 ,�ir .. h r ►.� L«..� // [ 2 t 3 J72__
Facility Contact: Title: Phone No:
Onsite Representative: Integrator:
Certified Operator: Operator Certification Number:
Location of Farm:
LKSwine ❑ Poultry ❑ Cattle ❑ Horse Latitude 0' � " Longitude • 0�
Swine,��C'-fiae §ai c
t`n tCuu1ation ; ;.a'dult 3Ca ani <'CDesign C`urrent
�o uatodCCa acy Pautationliattle
Wean to Feeder La er
❑Dairy
Feeder to FinishI M` [] Non -Laxer ❑Non -Dairy
farrow to Wean i.
Farrow to Feeder ❑ Other It
❑ Farrow to FinishDeslgIr CspBClty a
❑ Gilts
Boars Total SSLW
t,: E Number of Lagoons I' `I; ,;; ; Subsurface Drains Fresent ❑ Lagoon Area ❑ S rav Field Area
Holding`Ponefs,Y Solid Traps ❑ No Licluid Waste Management System i
Discharges & Stream ImIRacts
1. Is any discharge observed from any part of the operation? ❑ Yes �2 No
Discharge originated at: ❑ Lagoon ❑ Spray Field ❑ Other
a. If discharge is observed, was the conveyance man-made? ❑ Yes ❑ No
b. If discharge is observed, did it reach Water of the State? (If yes, notify DWQ) ❑ Yes ❑ No
c. If discharge is observed, what is the estimated flow in gal/min?
d. Does discharge bypass a lagoon system? (If yes, notify DWQ) ❑ Yes ❑ No
2. Is there evidence of past discharge from any part of the operation? ❑ Yes ❑ No
3. Were there any adverse impacts or potential adverse impacts to the Waters of the State other than from a discharge? ❑ Yes ❑ No
Waste tion & Treatment
4. Is storage capacity (freeboard plus storm storage) less than adequate? ❑ Spillway ❑ Yes ❑ No
Structure I Structure 2 Structure 3 Structure 4 Structure 5 Structure 6
Identifier:
Freeboard (inches):
05/03/01 Continued

Facility, Number• — // Date of inspection
5. Are there any immediate threats to the integrity of any of the structures observed? (ie/ trees, severe erosion, ❑ Yes ❑ No
seepage, etc.)
6. Are there structures on-site which are not properly addressed and/or managed through a waste management or ❑ Yes ❑ No
closure plan?
(If any of questions 4-6 was answered yes, and the situation poses an
immediate public health or environmental threat, notify DWQ)
7. Do any of the structures need maintenance/improvement? ❑ Yes ❑ No
8. Does any part of the waste management system other than waste structures require maintenancelimprovement? ❑ Yes ❑ No
9. Do any stuctures lack adequate, gauged markers with required maximum and minimum liquid level ❑ Yes ❑ No
elevation markings?
Waste Application
10. Are there any buffers that need maintenance/improvement? ❑ Yes ❑ No
11. Is there evidence of over application? If yes, check the appropriate box below. ❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ Excessive Ponding ❑ PAN ❑ Hydraulic Overload ❑ Frozen Ground ❑ Copper and/or Zinc
12. Crop type
13. Do the receiving crops differ with those designated in the Certified Animal Waste Management Plan (CAWMPV ❑ Yes ❑ No
14. a) Does the facility lack adequate acreage for land application? ❑ Yes ❑ No
b) Does the facility need a wettable acre determination? ❑ Yes ❑ No
c) This facility is pended for a wettable acre determination? ❑ Yes ❑ No
15. Does the receiving crop need improvement? ❑ Yes ❑ No
16. Is there a lack of adequate waste application equipment? ❑ Yes ❑ No
Odor Issues
17. Does the discharge pipe from the confinement building to the storage pond or lagoon fail to discharge at/or below ❑ Yes ❑ No
liquid level of lagoon or storage pond with no agitation?
18. Are there any dead animals not disposed of properly within 24 hours? ❑ Yes ❑ No
19. Is there any evidence of wind drift during land application? (i.e. residue on neighboring vegetation, asphalt, ❑ Yes ❑ No
roads, building structure, and/or public property)
20. At the time of the inspection did the facility pose an odor or air quality concern? If yes, contact a regional ❑ Yes ❑ No
Air Quality representative immediately.
12112103 Continued

Jnforr�ation contained in this database is from non agency sources and is considered unconfirmed.
Animal Operation Telephone Log
DWQ Facility Number FT]— 11
Farm Name lCharles Locklear Farm
Caller's Name INo call/ Inspector visit
O Reporting O Complaint
Caller's Phone # INA
Access to Farm
Farm Accessible
from main road O Yes O No
Animal Population
Confined 10 Yes O No
u.
Depop 10 Yes O No
Feed Available 10 Yes O No
Mortality 10 Yes O No
Spray_ Availability
Pumping
Equipment 10 Yes O No
Available
Fields 10 Yes O No
Date 9/9/2004
Time 1:00pm
Control Number 14628
Region JFRO
Lagoon Questions
Breached
O Yes O No
Inundated
O Yes O No
Overtopped
10yes ONO
Water on
O Yes O No
Outside Wall
Lagoon3
Dike Conditions
10 Yes O No
Freeboard Level
Freeboard
Plan Due Date Date Plan Date Freeboard
Inches
(? equals blank) Received Level OK
Lagoon/ 18
9/11/2004
Lagoon2
I_J
Lagoon3
Lagoon4
Lagoon5
Lagoon6
Farm inspected as result of storm lagoon checks being conducted by DWQ staff. No notification was
receiued..from..this.permi. tee......................:....................................................................................................................................................................................
.....................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................
.....................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................
NIA
Comments2

o�oF WA rF,�pG
OLD IUI�
r
J
Michael F. Easley
Governor
William G. Ross Jr., Secretary
Department of Environment and Natural Resources
p 'C Alan W. Klimek, P.E. Director
Division of Water Quality
July 1, 2004
MR. CHARLES LOCKLEAR
CHARLES LOCKLEAR FARM
12541 LAKEWOOD DRNE
LAURINBURG NC 28353-1650
SUBJECT: Acknowledgment Receipt Letter
Charles Locklear Farm
File # PC 04-003
Hoke County
Dear Mr. Locklear:
This letter is to acknowledge receipt of your check # 1999 in the amount of $1,690.30,
received on May 17, 2004.
This payment satisfies in full the civil assessment in the amount of $1,690.30 levied
against Charles Locklear Farm, and this enforcement case has been closed. Payment of these
penalties in no way precludes further action by this Division for future violations.
If you have any questions please call Keith Larick at [phone] ext. 571.
Sincerely,
Keith Larick
Non -Discharge Compliance & Enforcement
KL: sw
cc: Fayetteville Regional Office
Enforcement/Compliance Files # PC 04-003
Central Files
Customer Service: Mailing Address: Telephone [phone]
1-877-623-6748 1617 Mail Service Center Fax [phone]
Raleigh, North Carolina 27699-1617 State Courier#52.01-01
An Equal Opportunity/ Affirmative Action Employer
50% recycled/ 10% post -consumer paper
httpl1h2o. enr. state. nc. us
A*
,Tr°
aU-6E R
Location:
512 N. Salisbury St.
Raleigh, NC 27699-1617

April 12, 2004
CERTIFIED MAIL
RETURN RECEIPT REQUESTED
Mr. Charles Locklear
Charles Locklear Farm
12541 Lakewood Drive
Laurinburg, NC 28352
Michael F. Easley, Governor
William G. Ross Jr., Secretary
Department of Environment and Natural Resources
Alan W. Klimek, P.E. Director
Division of Water Quality
Coleen H. Sullins, Deputy Director
Division of Water Quality
®ENR—FRO
APR 16 2m
DWQ
SUBJECT: Assessment of Civil Penalties for Violation(s) of
N.C. General Statute(s) 143-215.1
Charles Locklear Farm
Hoke County
File No. PC 04-003
Permit No. AWS470011
Dear Mr. Locklear:
This letter transmits notice of a civil penalty assessed against Charles Locklear in the amount of
$I,690.30, including $190.30 in enforcement costs.
Attached is a copy of the assessment document explaining this penalty. This action was taken
under the authority vested in me by delegation pursuant to N.C.G.S. 143-215.6A(h). 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:
1. Submit payment of the penalty:
Payment should be made directly to the order of the Department of Environment and
Natural Resources (do not include waiver form). Payment of the penalty will not
foreclose further enforcement action for any continuing or new violation(s).
Please submit payment to the attention of:,
Keith Larick
Water Quality Section
1617 Mail Service Center, Raleigh,
North Carolina 27699-1617
OR
11 MENR
Customer Service: Mailing Address: Telephone [phone] Location:
1-877-623-6748 1617 Mail Service Center Fax [phone] N. Salisbury St.
Raleigh, North Carolina 27699-1617 State Courier #52-01-01 Raleigh, NC 27699-1617
An Equal opportunitylAtirmnative Action Employer
50% recycled/ 10% post -consumer paper
http://h2o. enr. state. nc. us

Mr. Locklear
Page 2
4/1212004
2. Submit a written request for remission including a detailed justification for such request:
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. 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 and agreement that no factual or legal issues are in dispute. Please prepare a detailed
statement that establishes why you believe the civil penalty should be remitted, and submit it to
the Division of Water Quality at the address listed below. In determining whether a remission
request will be approved, the following factors shall be considered:
(1) whether one or more of the civil penalty assessment factors in NCGS 143B-282.I(b)
were wrongfully applied to the detriment of the violator;
(2) whether the violator promptly abated continuing environmental damage resulting from
the violation;
(3) whether the violation was inadvertent or a result of an accident;
(4) whether the violator has been assessed civil penalties for any previous violations; or
(S) whether payment of the civil penalty will prevent payment for the remaining necessary
remedial actions.
Please note that all evidence presented in support of your request for remission must be submitted
in writing. The Director of the Division of the Division of Water Quality will review your
evidence and inform you of his decision in the matter of your remission request. The response
will provide details regarding the case status, directions for payment, and provision for further
appeal of the penalty to the Environmental Management Commission's Committee on Civil
Penalty Remissions (Committee). Please be advised that the Committee cannot consider
information that was not part of the original remission request considered by the Director.
Therefore, it is very important that you prepare a complete and thorough statement in support of
your request for remission.
In order to request remission, you must complete and submit the enclosed "Request for
Remission of Civil Penalties, Waiver of Right to an Administrative Hearing, and Stipulation of
Facts" form within thirty (30) days of receipt of this notice. The Division of Water Quality also
requests that you complete and submit the enclosed "Justification for Remission Request." Both
forms should be submitted to the following address:
Keith Larick
Division of Water Quality
1617 Mail Service Center
Raleigh, NC 27699-1617
OR
3. File a petition for an administrative hearing with the Office of Administrative Hearings:
If you wish to contest any statement in the attached assessment document you must file a petition
for an administrative hearing. You may obtain the petition form from the Office of
Administrative Hearings. You must file the petition with the Office of Administrative Hearings
within thirty (30) days of receipt of this notice. A petition is considered filed when it is received

Mr. Locklear
Page 3
4/12/2004
in the Office of Administrative Hearings during normal office hours. The Office of
Administrative Hearings accepts filings Monday through Friday between the hours of 8:00 a.m.
and 5:00 p.m., except for official state holidays. The original and one (1) copy of the petition
must be filed with the Office of Administrative Hearings. The petition may be faxed - provided
the original and one copy of the document is received in the Office of Administrative Hearings
within five (5) business days following the faxed transmission. The mailing address for the
Office of Administrative Hearings is:
Office of Administrative Hearings
6714 Mail Service Center
Raleigh, NC 27699-6714
Telephone [phone] Facsimile: [phone]
A copy of the petition must also be served on DENR as follows:
Mr. Dan Oakley, Registered Agent
DENR
1601 Mail Service Center
Raleigh, NC 27699-1601
WE
Keith Larick
DWQ
1617 Mail Service Center
Raleigh, NC 27699-1617
Please indicate the case number (as found on page one of this letter) on the petition.
Failure to exercise one of the options above within thirty (30) days of receipt of this letter, as evidenced
by an internal date/time received stamp (not a postmark), will result in this matter being referred to the
Attorney General's Office for collection of the penalty through a civil action. Please be advised that
additional penalties may be assessed for violations that occur after the review period of this assessment.
If you have any questions, please contact Keith Larick at [phone], extension 571.
Sincerely,
Jeffrey O. Poupart
Supervisor
Non -Discharge Compliance/Enforcement Unit
ATTACHMENTS
cc: Paul Rawls, Fayetteville Regional Office w/ attachments
Larry Baxley, Fayetteville Regional Office w/ attachments
File PC 04-003, wl attachments
Central Files w/ attachments
Public Information Office w/ attachments

STATE OF NORTH CAROLINA
COUNTY OF Hoke
ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT
COMMISSION
IN THE MATTER OF ASSESSMENT ) WAIVER OF RIGHT TO AN
OF CIVIL, PENALTIES AGAINST } ADMINISTRATIVE HEARING AND
Charles Locklear ) STIPULATION OF FACTS
FILE NO. PC 04-003
Having been assessed civil penalties totaling 11 690.30 for violation(s) as set
forth in the assessment document of the Director of the Division of Water Quality datedApril 12,
2004 , 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 RENIISSION'REQUEST
DWQ Case Number: PC 04-003 County: Hoke
Assessed Party: Charles Locklear
Permit No. (if applicable): AWS470011 Amount Assessed: $1,690.30
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 in_N.C.G.S_. _ 14313-282.1(b)
were wrongfully avl2lied 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 ficture
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 necessary
remedial actions (i.e., explain how payment of the civil penalty will prevent you from performing
the activities necessary to achieve compliance).
EXPLANATION:

STATE OF NORTH CAROLINA NORTH CAROLINA
DEPARTMENT OF ENVIRONMENT AND
NATURAL RESOURCES
COUNTY OF HOKE
File No. PC 04-003
IN THE MATTER OF )
CHARLES LOCKLEAR )
FINDINGS AND DECISION
FOR VIOLATIONS OF CONDITIONS ) AND ASSESSMENT OF
OF THE NON -DISCHARGE } CIVIL PENALTIES
GENERAL PERMIT AWG 100000 }
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, Jeffrey
O. Poupart, Supervisor of the Non -Discharge Compliance and Enforcement Unit of the Division
of Water Quality (DWQ), make the following: '
I. FINDINGS OF FACT:
A. Charles Locklear owns and operates Charles Locklear Farm, a swine operation in
Hoke County.
B. Charles Locklear was issued Certificate of Coverage AWS470011 under General
Permit AWG100000 for Charles Locklear Farm on August 21, 1998, effective
August 21, 1998, with an expiration date of October 1, 2004.
C. Condition II No. 4 of the issued permit states in part that land application rates
shall be in accordance with the Waste Utilization Plan (WUP) and in no case shall
land application rates exceed the Plant Available Nitrogen (PAN) rate for the
receiving crop.
D. Division of Soil and Water Conservation staff inspected Charles Locklear Farm
on October 10, 2003. The WUP for Charles Locklear Farm allows 50 pounds of
PAN per acre for the small grain overseed from September through March. A
review of the waste application records revealed that PAN application rates were
as follows:
Field 5, Pull 1 (5.1 acres)
80.0 pounds per acre
Field 5, Pull 2 (4.8 acres)
76.0 pounds per acre
Field 5, Pull 3 (3.9 acres)
63.4 pounds per acre
Field 5, Pull 4 (4.3 acres)
66.2 pounds per acre
Field 5, Pull (6.9 acres)
79.0 pounds per acre

E. Condition No. III. 6. f. of the issued permit requires that the permittee shall report
by telephone to the appropriate Regional Office as soon as possible, but in no case
more than 24 hours following fust knowledge of the occurrence of
overapplication of animal waste in excess of the limits set out in the WUP.
F. The Fayetteville Regional Office did not receive reports from the Charles
Locklear Farm regarding the overapplication of animal waste in excess of the
limits set out in the WUP.
G. The costs to the State of the enforcement procedures in this matter totaled
$190.30.
Based upon the above Findings of Fact, I make- the following:
II. CONCLUSIONS OF LAW:
A. Charles Locklear is a "person" within the meaning of G.S. 143-215.6A pursuant to
G.S. 143-212(4).
B. A permit for an animal waste management system is required by G.S. 143-215.1.
C. Charles Locklear violated Condition No. II. 4. of General Permit AWG100000 by
exceeding the land application rate for Plant Available Nitrogen for the receiving
crop.
D. Charles Locklear violated Condition No. III. 6. f. of General Permit AWG100000
by failing to report the overapplication of animal waste in excess of the limits set
out in the WUP.
E. Charles Locklear may be assessed civil penalties 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
violates or fails to act in accordance with the terms, conditions, or requirements of
a permit required by G.S. 143-215.1.
F. The State's enforcement costs in this matter may be assessed against Charles
Locklear pursuant to G.S. 143-215.3(a)(9) and G.S. 143B -282.1(b)(8).
G. The Supervisor of the Non -Discharge Compliance and Enforcement Unit,
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:
DECISION:
Charles Locklear is hereby assessed a civil penalty of:
$ soa'D0
for violation of condition No. II. 4. of Permit No.
AWS470011 by exceeding the land application rate for the
PAN for the receiving crop set out in the CAWMP
for violation of condition No. M. 6. f. of Permit No.
AWS470011 by failing to report exceeding the land
application rate for the PAN for the receiving crop
TOTAL CIVIL PENALTY
Enforcement costs
TOTAL AMOUNT DUE
As required by G.S. 143-215.6A(c), in determining the amount of the penalty I considered
the factors listed in G.S. 143B-282. I (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;
and
(8) The cost to the State of the enforcement procedures.
(bate) ey O. Poupart; Supervisor
on -Discharge Compliance and Enforcement Unit
Division of Water Quality

O�0'U D U37
Uj—.
w A r�gQG
—y
Michael F. Easley, Governor
William G. Ross Jr., Secretary
Department of Environment and Natural Resources
Alan W. Klimek, P.E. Director
Division of Water Quality
Coleen H. Sullins. Deputy Director
C Division of Water Quality
April 12, 2004 DENIII "-- FRO
CERTMIIED MAIL Arn i 6 1004
RETURN RECEIPT REQUESTED ®` a �J�fQ
Mr. Charles Locklear
Charles Locklear Farm
12541 Lakewood Drive
Laurinburg, NC 2$352
SUBJECT: Assessment of Civil Penalties for Violation(s) of
N.C. General Statute(s) 143-215.1
Charles Locklear Farm
Hoke County
File No. PC 04-003
Permit No. AWS470011
Dear Mr. Locklear:
This letter transmits notice of a civil penalty assessed against Charles Locklear in the amount of
S 1,690.30, including $190.30 in enforcement costs.
Attached is a copy of the assessment document explaining this penalty. This action was taken
under the authority vested in me by delegation pursuant to N.C,G.S. 143-215.6A(h). 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:
1. Submit payment of the penalty:
Payment should be made directly to the order of the Department of Environment and
Natural Resources (do not include waiverform). Payment of the penalty will not
foreclose further enforcement action for any continuing or new violation(s).
Please submit payment to the attention of:.
Keith Larick
Water Quality Section
1617 Mail Service Center, Raleigh,
North Carolina 27699-1617
OR
,;KY
1NMENR
Customer Service: Melling Address: Telephone [phone] Location:
1.877.623.6748 1617 Mall Service Center Fax [phone] N. Salisbury St.
Raleigh, North Carolina 27699.1817 State Courier 452-01-01 Raleigh, NC 27699-1617
An Equal Opportunity/Affimmative Action Employer
50% recycled/ 100% post -consumer paper
httpYlh2o, enr state.nc.us

Mr. Locklear
Page 2
4/17/2004
2. Submit a written request for remission including a detailed justification for such request:
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. 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 and agreement that no factual or Iegal issues are in dispute. Please prepare a detailed
statement that establishes why you believe the civil penalty should be remitted, and submit it to
the Division of Water Quality at the address listed below. In determining whether a remission
request will be approved, the following factors shall be considered:
(1) whether one or more of the civil penalty assessment factors in NCGS 143B-282.I(b)
were wrongfully applied to the detriment of the violator;
(2) whether the violator promptly abated continuing environmental damage resulting from
the violation;
(3) whether the violation was inadvertent or a result of an accident;
(4) whether the violator has been assessed civil penalties for any previous violations; or
(5) whether payment of the civil penalty will prevent payment for the remaining necessary
remedial actions.
Please note that all evidence presented in support of your request for remission must be submitted
in writing. The Director of the Division of the Division of Water Quality will review your
evidence and inform you of his decision in the matter of your remission request. The response
will provide details regarding the case status, directions for payment, and provision for further
appeal of the penalty to the Environmental Management Commission's Committee on Civil
Penalty Remissions (Committee). Please be advised that the Committee cannot consider
information that was not part of the original remission request considered by the Director.
Therefore, it is very important that you prepare.a complete and thorough statement in support of
your request for remission.
In order to request remission, you must complete and submit the enclosed "Request for
Remission of Civil Penalties, Waiver of Right to an Administrative Hearing, and Stipulation of
Facts" form within thirty (30) days of receipt of this notice. The Division of Water Quality also
requests that you complete and submit the enclosed "Justification for Remission Request." Both
forms should be submitted to the following address:
Keith Larick
Division of Water Quality
1617 Mail Service Center
Raleigh, NC 27699-1617
OR
3. File a petition for an administrative hearing with.the Office of Administrative Hearings:
If you wish to contest any statement in the attached assessment document you must file a petition
for an administrative hearing. You may obtain the petition form from the Office of
Administrative Hearings. You must file the petition with the Office of Administrative Hearings
within thirty (30) days of receipt of this notice. A petition is considered filed when it is received

Mr. Locklear
Page 3
4/12/2004
in the Office of Administrative Hearings during normal office hours. The Office of
Administrative Hearings accepts filings Monday through Friday between the hours of 8:00 a.m.
and 5:00 p.m., except for official state holidays. The original and one (1) copy of the petition
must be filed with the Office of Administrative Hearings. The petition may be faxed - provided
the original and one copy of the document is received in the Office of Administrative Hearings
within five (5) business days following the faxed transmission. The mailing address for the
Office of Administrative Hearings is:
Office of Administrative Hearings
6714 Mail Service Center
Raleigh, NC 27699-6714
Telephone [phone] Facsimile: [phone]
A copy of the petition must also be served on DENR as follows:
Mr. Dan Oakley, Registered Agent
DENR
I601 Mail Service Center
Raleigh, NC 27699-1601
AND
Keith Larick
DWQ
1617 Mail Service Center
Raleigh, NC 27699-1617
Please indicate the case number (as found on page one of this letter) on the petition.
Failure to exercise one of the options above within thirty (30) days of receipt of this letter, as evidenced
by an internal date/time received stamp (not a postmark), will result in this matter being referred to the
Attorney GeneraI's Office for collection of the penalty through a civil action. Please be advised that
additional penalties may be assessed for violations that occur after the review period of this assessment.
If you have any questions, please contact Keith Larick at [phone], extension 571.
Sincerely,
Jeffrey O. Poupart
Supervisor
Non -Discharge Compliance/Enforcement Unit
ATTACHMENTS
cc: Paul Rawls, Fayetteville Regional Office w/ attachments
Larry Baxley, Fayetteville Regional Office w/ attachments
File PC 04-003, w/ attachments
Central Files w/ attachments
Public Information Office w/ attachments

STATE OF NORTH CAROLINA
COUNTY OF Hoke
ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT
COMMISSION
IN THE MATTER OF ASSESSMENT ) WAIVER OF RIGHT TO AN
OF CIVIL PENALTIES AGAINST ) ADNIINISTRATIVE HEARING AND
Charles Locklear ) STIPULATION OF FACTS
FILE NO. PC 04-003
Having been assessed civil penalties totaling $1,690.30 for violation(s) as set
forth in the assessment document of the Director of the Division of Water Quality dated April 12,
2004 , 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: PC 04-003 County: Hoke
Assessed Party: Charles Locklear
Permit No. (if applicable): AWS470011 Amount Assessed: $1,690.30
Please use this form when requesting remission of this civil penalty. You must also complete the
"Request_ For Remission, Waiver of Rij2ht_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 'in N.C.G.S. 143B -282.1(b)
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 orevious violations;
(e) payment of the civil penalty will prevent Qay_ment 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:

STATE OF NORTH CAROLINA NORTH CAROLINA
DEPARTMENT OF ENVIRONMENT AND
NATURAL RESOURCES
COUNTY OF HOKE
File No. PC 04-003
IN THE MATTER OF )
CHARLES LOCKLEAR )
}
FINDINGS AND DECISION
FOR VIOLATIONS OF CONDITIONS ) AND ASSESSMENT OF
OF THE NON -DISCHARGE ) CIVIL PENALTIES
GENERAL PERMIT AWG 100000 )
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, Jeffrey
O. Poupart, Supervisor of the Non -Discharge Compliance and Enforcement Unit of the Division
of Water Quality (DWQ), make the following:
I. FINDINGS OF FACT:
A. Charles Locklear owns and operates Charles Locklear Farm, a swine operation in
Hoke County.
B. Charles Locklear was issued Certificate of Coverage AWS470011 under General
Permit AWGi00000 for Charles Locklear Farm on August 21, 1998, effective
August 21,.1998, with an expiration date of October I, 2004.
C. Condition II No. 4 of the issued permit states in part that land application rates
shall be in accordance with the Waste Utilization Plan (WUP) and in no case shall
land application rates exceed the Plant Available Nitrogen (PAN) rate for the
receiving crop.
D. Division of Soil and Water Conservation staff inspected Charles Locklear Farm
on October 10, 2003. The WUP for Charles Locklear Farm allows 50 pounds of
PAN per acre for the small grain overseed from September through March. A
review of the waste application records revealed that PAN application rates were
as follows:
Field 5, Pull 1 (5.1 acres)
80.0 pounds per acre
Field 5, Pull 2 (4.8 acres)
76.0 pounds per acre
Field 5, Pull 3 (3.9 acres)
63.4 pounds per acre
Field 5, Pull 4 (4.3 acres)
66.2 pounds per acre
Field 5, Pull 6 (6.9 acres)
79.0 pounds per acre

E. Condition No. III. 6. f. of the issued permit requires that the permittee shall report
by telephone to the appropriate Regional Office as soon as possible, but in no case
more than 24 hours following first knowledge of the occurrence .of
overapplication of animal waste in excess of the limits set out in the WUP.
F. The Fayetteville Regional Office did not receive reports from the Charles
Locklear Farm regarding the overapplication of animal waste in excess of the
limits set out in the WUP.
G. The costs to the State of the enforcement procedures in this matter totaled
$190.30.
Based upon the above Findings of Fact, I make the following:
II. CONCLUSIONS OF LAW:
A. Charles Locklear is a "person" within the meaning of G.S. 143-215.6A pursuant to
G.S. 143-212(4).
B. A permit for an animal waste management system is required by G.S. 143-215.1.
C. Charles Locklear violated Condition No. II. 4. of General Permit AWGI00000 by
exceeding the land application rate for Plant Available Nitrogen for the receiving
crop.
D. Charles Locklear violated Condition No. M. 6. L of General Permit AWG100000
by failing to report the overapplication of animal waste in excess of the limits set
out in the WUP.
E. Charles Locklear may be assessed civil penalties 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
violates or fails to act in accordance with the terms,, conditions, or requirements of
a permit required by G.S. 143-215.1.
F. The State's enforcement costs in this matter may be assessed against Charles
Locklear pursuant to G.S. 143-215.3(a)(9) and G.S. 14313-282.1(b)(8).
G. The Supervisor of the Non -Discharge Compliance and Enforcement Unit,
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:
ffi. DECISION:
Charles Locklear is hereby assessed a civil penalty of:
$ f 000' �� for violation of condition No. II. 4. of Permit No.
AWS470011 by exceeding the land application rate for, the
PAN for the receiving crop set out in the CAWMP
$ Sa a for violation of condition No. III. 6. f. of Permit No.
AWS47001I by failing to report exceeding the land
application rate for the PAN for the receiving crop
$ S0 0, 0 0 TOTAL CIVIL PENALTY
$ 19010 Enforcement costs
$_��3 a _ TOTAL AMOUNT DUE
As required by G.S. 143-215.6A(c), in determining the amount of the penalty I considered
the factors listed in G.S. 14313-282.1(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 faijing to comply with programs
over which the Environmental Management Commission has regulatory authority;
and
(8) The cost to the State of the enforcement procedures.
(bate) ey O. Poupart, Supervisor
on -Discharge Compliance and Enforcement Unit
Division of Water Quality

3
+ F WATF. Michael F. Easley, Governor
9 William G. Ross Jr., Secretary
`0� QG North Carolina Department of Environment and Natural Resources,
UJ r Alan W. Klimek, P. E. Director
> Division of Water Quality
Coleen H. Sullins, Deputy Director
Division of Water Quality
January 22, 2004
MEMORANDUM
TO: Jeff Poupart
Non-Dischpro Compliance
THRU: Paul Rawl
Water Qualit Regional Supervisor
Fayetteville Regional Office
FROM: Larry Baxley
Environmental Specialist
Fayetteville Regional Office
SUBJECT: Enforcement Package
Charles Locklear Farm
Facility No. 47-11
Hoke County
Please find enclosed a fast track enforcement package pertaining to the over application of
animal waste at the subject facility.
Thank you for your cooperation regarding this manner. If you have any further questions or
need clarification on any of the details, please contact me.
Fayetteville Regional Office
225 Green Street — Suite 714, Fayetteville, North Carolina 28301-5043
Phone: [phone] FAX: [phone] Internet: www.enr.state.nc.us/ENR
An Equal Opportunity 1 Affirmative Action Employer - 50% Recycled 110% Post Consumer Paper

STATE OF NORTH CAROLINA NORTH CAROLINA
DEPARTMENT OF ENVIRONMENT AND
NATURAL RESOURCES
COUNTY OF HOKE
File No.
IN THE MATTER OF )
CHARLES LOCKLEAR FARM )
FINDINGS AND DECISION
FOR VIOLATIONS OF CONDITIONS ) AND ASSESSMENT OF
OF ANIMAL WASTE PERMIT ) CIVIL PENALTIES
AWS470011 )
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, 1, Jeffrey
O. Poupart, Supervisor of the Non -Discharge Compliance and Enforcement Unit of the Division
of Water Quality (DWQ), make the following:
FINDINGS OF FACT:
A. Charles Locklear owns and operates Charles Locklear Farm, a swine operation in
Hoke County. -
B. Charles Locklear was issued Permit Number AWS47001 1 for Charles Locklear
Farm on August 21, 1998, effective August 21, 1998, with an expiration date of
April 30, 2003.
C. Condition It No. 4 of the issued permit states in part that land application rates
shall be in accordance with the Waste Utilization Plan (WUP) and in no case shall
land application rates exceed the Plant Available Nitrogen (PAN) rate for the
receiving crop.
D. SWCS staff from the Fayetteville Regional Office inspected Charles Locklear
Farm on October 10, 2003. The WUP for 'Charles Locklear Farm allows 50
pounds of PAN per acre for the small grain overseed from September to
November. The more recent updates give an application window of September
through March. A review of the waste application records revealed that an over
application occurred as the result of using a waste sample analysis that was not
current. Waste sample results can be used for the sixty days prior to and the sixty
days following the sample date. This caused them to exceed the PAN per acre rate
allowed in the WUP for pulls one through four and pull six by the following

amounts. Pull one by 30.00 pounds, pull two by 26.00 pounds, pull three by 13.4
pounds, pull four by 16.2 pounds and pull six by 29.00 pounds of PAN
respectfully.
E. Condition No. III. 6. f. of the issued permit requires that the permittee shall report
by telephone to the appropriate Regional Office as soon as possible, but in no case
more than 24 hours following first knowledge of the occurrence of overapplication
of animal waste in excess of the limits set out in the WUP.
F. The Fayetteville Regional Office did not receive reports from the Charles Locklear
Farm regarding the overapplication of animal waste in excess of the limits set out
in the WUP.
G. The costs to the State of the enforcement procedures in this matter totaled
$190.30.
Based upon the above Findings of Fact, I make the following:
II. CONCLUSIONS OF LAW:
A. Charles Locklear Farm is a "person" within the meaning of G.S. 143-215.6A
pursuant to G.S. 143-212(4).
B. A permit for an animal waste management system is required by G.S. 143-215.1.
C. Charles Locklear Farms' land application rates that exceeded the PAN rate for the
receiving. crop cited in Item D in the Findings of Fact violated Condition No. II. 4.
of Permit Number AWS470011.
D. Charles Locklear. Farms' failures to report the land application rates that exceeded
the PAN rate for the receiving crop cited in Item D in the Findings of Fact violated
Condition No. III. 6. f. of Permit Number AWS470011.
E. Charles Locklear Farm may be assessed civil penalties 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
violates or fails to act in accordance with the terms, conditions, or requirements of
a permit required by G.S. 143-215.1.
F. The State's enforcement, costs in this matter may be assessed against Charles
Locklear Farm pursuant to G.S. 143-215.3(a)(9) and G.S. 14313-282.1(b)(8).

G. The Supervisor of the Non -Discharge Compliance and Enforcement Unit,
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:
Ill. DECISION:
Charles Locklear Fdrm is hereby assessed a civil penalty of:
$ for I of two violations of condition No. ll. 4. of Permit
No. AWS470011 by exceeding the land application rate for
the PAN for the receiving crop set out in the CAWMP
$ for I of two violations of condition No. III. 6. f. of
Permit No. AWS470011 by failing to report exceeding the
land application rate for the PAN for the receiving crop
$ Enforcement costs
$ TOTAL AMOUNT DUE
As required by G.S. 143-215.6A(c), in determining the amount of the penalty I
considered the factors listed in G.S. 14313-282.1(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;
and
(8) . The cost to the State of the enforcement procedures.
(Date) Jeffrey O. Poupart, Supervisor
Non -Discharge Compliance and Enforcement Unit
Division of Water Quality

Lb
December 18, 2003 +� 2
Mr Larry Baxley Mr. Paul E. Rawls
N.G. Division of Water Quality -
225 Green Street
Fayetteville, N.C. 28301-5043
Dear Mr. Paul E. Rawls:
In relationship to excess violation of over applying P.A.N. It was an over sight on our part due to our not
sampling our waste Lagoon in 60 days of spraying.
We have now started taking samples of our Logoon at the 60 day intervals to prevent an over application of
P.A.N.
There is know intent of in doing anything wrong. We want to comply with all State and Federal regulations
associated with Water Quality.
It is our regret that this has happened and we will insure that greater efforts will be given to prevent this from
happening again
Sincerely,
Charles D. Locklear
12541 LAKEWOOD DR.
LAURINBURG,N.C. 28352

0� 1f4 A'r 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
December 1, 2003
CERT[FIED MAIL
RETURN RECEIPT REOU_ESTED
Mr. Charles Locklear
12541 Lakewood Drive
Laurinburg, NC 28352.
Subject: NOTICE OF VIOLATION/NOTICE OF INTENT
I Administrative Code 15A NCAC 2H .0217
Charles Locklear Farm
Facility No. 47-11
Hoke County
Dear Mr. Locklear:
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, you have been found to
be in violation of your 2H.0217 Permit.
On October 10, 2003, staff from the Fayetteville Regional Office of the Division of Soil and
Water conducted an operational reviewof your swine farm located in Hoke County. That routine
inspection revealed that during 200212003, irrigation events made to the small grain resulted in
excessive over applications of P.A.N. at this facility. The pulls noted were numbered one through
six and had the following over application amounts. Pull one was over applied by 30 pounds, Pull
two by 26 pounds, Pull three by 13.4 pounds, Pull four by 16.2 pounds, Pull five by 2 -pounds,
and Pull six by 29 pounds. Further, it should be noted that such over applications require
notification to the appropriate regional office of the Division of Water Quality. The Fayetteville
Regional Office has no record of this office being notified of the over applications or of the
written report as required by the permit. Also the facilities recordkeeping was not in order. The
review states that an incorrect waste sample was used and this resulted in, the over applications
taking place. Records of applications, samples, and lagoon levels must be taken as required by
the Permit and failure to do so is again a violation of a permit condition. This unsatisfactory
recordkeeping condition contributed to the over application of P.A.N. which occurred to the
small grain oat crop. Please be advised that such over applications are inconsistent with your
Waste Utilization Plan. These violations of the permit are the reasons this office will recommend
enforcement to the Central Office.
N. C. Division of Water Quality 225 Green Street Fayetteville,.Nortlt Carolina 28301-5043 [phone] Fax [phone] Customer Service
1-877-623-6748

Mr. Butler
11-2.4-03
Page 2
The Division of Water Quality requests that the following items be addressed:
1. Improve recordkeeping by following permit guidelines for applications, sampling, lagoon
levels and the appropriate approved forms.
2. Avoid over application of P.A.N. and report them as required by the Permit.
3. Maintain all required records up to date and available for inspection on site for three years.
Failure to comply with the above conditions may result in the facility losing its General
Permit and being required to obtain an individual non -discharge permit for the. facility.
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. You are hereby
notified that based on the above information, the Division of Water Quality is forwarding a
recommendation to the Director for consideration of enforcement for these violations.
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 these violations that you wish to present to this office, please
forward a detailed explanation, in writing, of the events noted and why you feel that this office
should not proceed with recommendation- for enforcement. This office on or before December
24, 2003 should receive this response. Information provided to this office will be reviewed
and, if enforcement is still deemed appropriate, your response 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. Larry Baxley, Environmental Specialist, or myself at [phone].
Q.
Paul E. awls
Regional Water Quality Supervisor
PR/lb
cc: Keith Larick - Compliance Group
John Ray - Hoke Co. NRCS
Danny Edwards — SWC, FRO
Central Files - Raleigh,
N. C. Division of Water Quality 225 Green Street Fayetteville, North Carolina 28301-5043 [phone] Fax [phone] Customer Service
1-877-623-6748

State of North Carolina
Department of Environment
and Natural Resources
Fayetteville Regional Office
Michael F. Easley, Governor
William G. Ross, Secretary
Division of Soil & Water Conservation
Mr. Charles Locklear
12541 Lakewood Drive
Laurinburg, North Carolina 28352
October 10, 2003
SUBJECT: Operation Review Notice of Referral for
Charles Locklear Farm,
Facility Number 47-11
Hoke County
Dear Mr. Locklear,
■ � • �r tttttttt� . ttttt� ■I . � ■ ,�
NORTH CAROLINA 6EPARTMENT OF
ENVfRONMENT AND NATURAL RESOURCES
L,P
On October 1, 2003, an operation review was conducted of the Charles Locklear Farm, facility
number 47-11, in Hoke County. This -review, undertaken in accordance with G.S. 1.43-
215.10D, is 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 item was noted:
• Over application to the small grain crop. Over application amounts are as follows -
Pull Number Over application Amount (pounds of N per acre)
1 30
2 26
3 13.4
4 16.2
6 29
The allowable nitrogen rate on the small grain crop is 50 pounds of nitrogen per acre.
These over applied amounts are greater than the 10% allowed by the waste plan and
require a notice of referral to the Division of Water Quality.
225 Green Street, Suite 714 1 Systel Bid. Fayetteville, North Carolina 28301-5043 Telephone [phone]
FAX [phone] An Equal Opportunity Affirmative Action Employer

Mr. Cha-rles`Locklear
October.10, 2003..
Page
:It.was .for this -"reason, that your operation was referred to. the Division of Water Quality for
.,further. -investigation:. and possible enforcement action. G.S. 143-215.10E- requires staff from
the Division of. Soil and Water Conservation to notify the Division of Water Quality and the
owner/operator of this observed violation.
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.
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
this operation review. Please do not hesitate to contact me at 910-486-1.541 if you have any
questions, concerns or need additional information. i
Sincerely,
Danny Edwards
Environmental Specialist
cc: Paul: Rawls, Division of Water- Quality.
John Ray, Hoke Soil & Water Conservation District
Kraig Westerbeek, Murphy Farms
Carroll Pierce, Division of Soil & Water Conservation
225 Green Street, Suite 714 / Systel.Bld. Fayetteville, North Carol ina'28301-5043 Telephone [phone]
FAX [phone] An Equal Opportunity Affirmative Action Employer

Division of Soil and Water Conservation
Natural Resources Conservation Service
Soil and Water Conservation District
Other...
Facility Number 47 - 11 Date: 10!1!03 Time: 9:30 Time on Farm: 80 FRO
Farm Name Charles Locklear Farm County .Hoke Phone:
Mailing Address 12541 Lakewood Drive
910-276-9484
Laurinburg NC 28352
Onslte
Representative Charles Locklear integrator Murphy 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
Purpose Of Visit
0 Routine
Q Response to DWQ/DENR referral
O Response to DSWC/SWCD referral
O Response to compiainUlocal referral
O Requested by producer/integrator
O Follow-up
O Emergency
Q Other...
Design Current Design Current
Capacity Population Ca acit Po ulation
❑ Wean to Feeder
❑ Feeder to Finish
❑ Farrow to Wean
® Farrow to Feeder
❑ Farrow to Finish
❑ Gilts
❑ Boars
4200 1200
❑ 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 ❑ 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 ® no
Structure! Structure 2 Structure 3 Structure 4 Structure 5
Identifier
Level (Inches) 34 ,
CROP TYPES 1coastal Bermuda hay small grain overseed
5PRAYFIELD
SOIL TYPES NoA
7. What type of technical assistance does the onsite representative feel is needed? (list in comment section)
03/10/03

Facility Number' 47 ' - 11 Date: 10/11103
PARAMETER
[] 8.
Waste spill leaving site
® 9.
Waste spill contained on site
[:]'10.
Level in structural freeboard
❑ 11.
Level in storm storage
❑ 12.
Waste structure integrity compromised
❑ 13.
Waste structure needs maintenance
® 14: Over application >= 10% & 10 lbs.
❑ 15. Over application < 10% or < 10 lbs.
❑ 16. Hydraulic overloading
❑ 17. Deficient irrigation records
❑ 18. Late/missing waste analysis
❑ 10. Late/missing lagoon level records
❑ 20. Late/missing soils analysis
[121. Crop needs improvement
❑ 22. Crop inconsistent with waste plan
❑ 23. Irrigation maintenance deficiency
❑ 24. Deficient sprayfield conditions
Regulatory Referrals
®_Referred to DWQ Date: 10/13/2003
❑ Referred to NCDA Date:
❑ Other... Date:
LIST IMPROVEMENTS _
MADE BY OPERATION
I1 Installing float switchs on flush tanks to help
prevent tank overflows.
12
13
0
15.
Q
O No assistance provided/requested
TECHNICAL ASSISTANCE
Needed
25. Waste Plan Revision or Amendment
26. Waste Plan Conditional Amendment
❑
27. Review or Evaluate Waste Plan w/producer ❑
28. Forms Need (list in comment section)
❑
29. Missing Components (list in comments)
30. 21-1.0200 re -certification
❑
M. Five & Thirty day Plans of Action (PoA)
❑
32. Irrigation record keeping assistance
33. Organize/computerization of records
❑
34. Sludge Evaluation
❑
35. Sludge or Closure Plan
❑
36. Sludge removal/closure procedures
❑
37. Waste Structure Evaluation
❑
38. Structure Needs Improvement
❑
39. Operation & Maintenance Improvements
❑
40. Marker check/calibration
❑
41. Site evaluation
❑
42. Irrigation Calibration
43. Irrigation system design/installation
44. Secure irrigation information (maps, etc.)
45. Operating improvements (pull signs, etc.)
46. Wettable Acre Determination
47. Evaluate WAD certification/rechecks
❑
❑
❑
❑
❑
❑
48. Crop evaluation/recommendations
❑
49. Drainage work/evaluation
❑
50. Land shaping, sutisoiling, aeration, etc.
❑
51. Runoff control, stormwater diversion, etc.
❑
52. Buffer improvements
❑
53. Field measurements(GPS, surveying, etc.)
❑
54. Mortality BMPs
❑
55. Waste operator education (NPDES) ,
❑
56. Operation & maintenance education
❑
57. Record keeping education
❑
58. Crop/forage management education
❑
59. Soil and/or waste sampling education
❑
Provided
2 03/10/03

Facility Number 47 - 11 Date: 1 1011103
COMMENTS:
VVaste samples:
9125102 -- 1.9
1114103 -- 3.1
419/03 -- 2.6
7122/03 -- 2.0
/ 14. Over applied nitrogen to 2002/2003 small grain crop as follows:
Pull
Over application Amount
1
30
2
26
3
13.4
4
16.2
5
2
6
29'.
:)wable P.A.N. rate on small grain is 50 #'s of nitrogen per acre.
is requires notification to DWQ. This over application occurred due to using incorrect waste sample. Waste samples are
A 60 days before and 60,days after date of sample. Recommend taking waste samples every 60 days to avoid over
alication in the future.
Small amount of waste overflowed flush tank. Waste did not reach waters of the state. Mr. Locklear will clean up spilled j
Waste plan should be revised to show current cropping system in field 1 B. This field has not been pumped on yet.
ntact Hoke Soil and Water for assistance with this.
3. Put copy of new permit with farm paperwork.
Z. P,A.N. rate on IRR 2 forms should be 296 #'s of N per acre, not 305. No over application occurred on bermuda.
ote: Monitor bermuda in low areas of spray field. Re -sprig if needed. Be sure to take a new waste sample soon. Last
aste sample expired 9122103.
TECHNICAL SPECIALIST Danny Edwards
SIGNATURE
Date Entered: 10/10/03 Entered By: jDanny Edwards
3 03110/03

CERTIFIED MAIL
RETURN RECEIPT REQUESTED
Mr. Charles Locklear
12541, Lakewood Drive
Laurinburg, NC 28352,
Michael F. Easley, Governor
William G. Ross Jr., Secretary
North Carolina Department of Environment arid Natural Resources
December I, 2003
Subject: NOTICE OF VIOLATION/NOTICE OF INTENT
Administrative Code 15A NCAC 2H .0217
Charles Locklear Farm
Facility No. 47-1-1
Hoke County
Dear Mr. Locklear:
Alan W. Klimek, P. E. Director
Division of Water Quality
ColeenH. Sullins, Deputy Director
Division of Water Quality
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, you have been found to
be in violation of your 2H.0217 Permit.
On October 10, 2003, staff from the Fayetteville Regional Office of the Division of Soil and
Water conducted an operational review of your swine farm located in Hoke County. That routine
inspection revealed that during 200212003, irrigation events made to the'small grain resulted in
excessive over applications of P.A.N. at this facility. The pulls noted were numbered one through
six and had the following over application amounts. Pull one was over applied by 30' pounds, Pull
two by 26 pounds, Pull three by 13.4 pounds, Pull four -by 16.2 pounds, Pull five by 2 pounds,
and Pull six by 29 pounds. Further, it should be noted that. such over applications require
notification to the appropriate regional office of the Division of Water Quality. The Fayetteville
Regional Office has no record of this office being notified of the over applications or of the
written report as required by the permit. Also the facilities recordkeeping was not in order. The
review states that an incorrect waste sample was used and this resulted in the over applications
taking place. Records of applications, samples, and lagoon levels must be taken as required by
the Permit and failure to do so is again a violation of a permit condition. This unsatisfactory
recordkeeping condition contributed to the over application of P.A.N. which occurred to the
small grain oat crop. Please be advised that such over applications are inconsistent with your
Waste Utilization Plan. These violations of the permit are the reasons this office will recommend
enforcement to the Central Office.
M* rt
N. C. Division of Water Quality 225 Green Street Fayetteville,.North Carolina 28301-5043 [phone] Fax [phone] Customer Service
1-877-623-6748'

Mr. Butler
11-24-03
Page 2
The Division of -Water Quality requests that the following items be addressed:
1. Improve recordkeeping by following permit guidelines for applications, sampling, lagoon
levels and the appropriate approved forms.
2. Avoid over application of P.A.N. and report them as required by the Permit.
3. Maintain all required records up to date and available for inspection on site for three. years.
Failure to comply with the above conditions may result in the facility losing its General
Permit and being required to obtain an individual non -discharge permit for the. facility.
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. You are hereby
notified that based on the above inforliiation, the Division of Water Quality is forwarding a
recommendation to the Director for consideration of enforcement for these violations.
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 these violations that you wish to present to.this office, please
forward a detailed explanation, in writing; of the events noted and why you feel that this office
should not proceed with recommendation for enforcement. This office on or before December
24, 2003 should receive this response. Information provided to this office will be reviewed
and,. if enforcement is still deemed appropriate, your response 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. Larry Baxley, Environmental Specialist, or myself at [phone].
9PaulicEe'
Cawls
Regional Water Quality Supervisor
PR/lb
cc: Keith Larick - Compliance Group
John Ray - Hoke Co. NRCS
Danny Edwards — SWC, FRO
Central Files - Raleigh R
REM
N. C. Division of Water Quality 225 Green Street Fayette,111e, North Carolina 28301-5043 [phone] Fax [phone] Customer Service
1-877-623-6748

State or ivorzn varum id
Department of Environment
-and Natural Resources
n -r �,
Fayetteville Regional Office ACT CT 2 ,"13
Michael. F. Easley,. Governor.
William G. Ross, Secretary.
Division of Soil &Water Conservation
October 10, 2003
Mr. Charles Locklear
12541 Lakewood Drive
Laurinburg, North Carolina 28352
SUBJECT: Operation Review Notice of Referral for
Charles Locklear Farm,
Facility Number 47-11
Hoke'County
Dear Mr. Locklear,
NCD­
NORTWCAR6L_IPE4 DEP4RTMENT'OP
ENVIRONMENT Amo NATURAL. RESOURCES
On October 1, 2003, an 'operation review was conducted of the Charles Locklear. Farm, facility
number 47-11, in Hoke County,' This- review, undertaken in accordance with G.S. 1.43-
215.1 OD, is 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 item was noted:
• Over application to the small grain crop. Over application amounts areas follows,-
Pull
ollows:
Pull Number Over application Amount (pounds of N per acre)
1 30
2 26
3 13.4
4 16.2
6 29
The allowable nitrogen rate on the small grain crop is 50 pounds of nitrogen per acre.
These over applied amounts are greater than the 10% allowed by the waste plan and
require a notice of referral to the Division of Water Quality.
225 Green Street, Suite 7141 Systel Bid. Fayetteville, North Carolina 28301-5043 Telephone [phone]
FAX [phone] An Equal Opportunity Affirmative Action Employer

Mr. CtarlesLocklear:;° „ -. '
October:10,'2003 '..._
Page-2;'
was` for ;this-='reason;`that -your operation was referred -to the Division of Water Quality for
rfurtf er:: inve. stigation,`and possible enforcement action. G.S. 143=215.10E=.requires 'staff from
the Division of: Soil and Water Conservation to notify the Division of Water Quality and the
owner/operator of this.observed violation.
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.
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
this operation review. Please do not hesitate to contact me" at 910-486-1541 if you have any
questions, concerns or need additional information.
Sincerely,
Danny Edwards
Environmental Specialist
cc: Paul. Rawls;'Division of Wat&r Quality
John Ray, Hoke Soil & Water Conservation District
Kraig Westerbeek, Murphy Farms
Carroll Pierce, Division of Soil & Water Conservation
225 Green Street, Suite 714 / Systel Bld. Fayetteville, North Carolina'28301-5043 Telephone [phone]
FAX [phone] - An Equal Opportunity Affirmative Action Employer

O Natural Resources Conservation Service
O Soil and Water Conservation District
O Other:..
Facility Numb'ar, 47`" - 1,1 Data: 1411103' Time:. 9:30 Tlme on Farm; 80 FRO
Farm Name Charles Locklear Farm County .Hoke Phone: [phone]
Mailing Address 12541 Lakewood Drive Laurinburg NC 28352
Onsite
Representative Charles Locklear Integrator IMurphy Brown.
Type Of Visit Purpose 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
O Routine - --
O Response to DWQIDENR referral .
O Response to DSWC/SWCD referral
O Response to complaint/local referral
O Requested by producer/integrator
O Follow-up
O Emergency
O Other... -
Design Currant Design Current
Capacity Population
❑ Wean to Feeder
❑ Feeder to Finish
❑ Farrow to Wean
IS1 Farrow to Feeder 1200 1200
❑ Farrow to Finish
❑ Gilts
❑ Boars
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 R 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 R no
and/or public health?
6. Is the waste level within the structural freeboard elevation range for any waste structure? ❑ yes R no
Structurel Structure 2 Structure 3 Structure '4 Structure 5
Identifier
Level (Inches) 1 34
CROP TYPES [Coastal Bermuda -hay ISmall grain overseed
SPRAYFjgLO
SOIL TYPES. NoA
7. What type of technical assistance does the onsite representative feel is needed? (list in comment section)
03/10/03

Facility Number' 47 - 11 Da
PARAMETER
❑ 8. Waste'spill leaving site
® 9. Waste spill contained'on site
10: Level in structural freeboard
❑ 11. Level in storm storage.
❑ 12, ,Waste structure integrity compromised
`. ❑ 13. Waste. -structure needs rhaintehance
® 14. Over application >=-10% & 1.0 lbs:
❑ 15, Over application < 10% or < 10 lbs.
❑ 16. Hydraulic overloading
❑ 17. Deficient irrigation records
❑ 18. Late/missing Waste analysis
0 19. Late/missing lagoon level records
❑ 20. Late/missing 'soils analysis
❑ 21. Crop needs improvement,
❑ 22. Crop inconsistent with waste plan
❑ 23. Irrigation maintenance deficiency_
Ll 24. Deficient sprayfield conditions
Regulatory Referrals
® Referred to DWQ Date: 10/13/2003
IFI Referred to NCDA Date:. -
El Other... Date:
LIST IMPROVEMENTS
MADE BY OPERATION
Installing float switchs on flush tanks to help
prevent tank overflows.
12
�3
15.
te: 10/ 1 /03
O. No assistance, provided/requested
TECHNICAL ASSISTANCE Needed
25. Waste Plan Revision or Amendment
26. Waste Plan Conditional Amendment
❑
27. Review or Evaluate Waste Plan w/producer
❑
28. Forms Need (list in comment section)
❑, .
29. Missing Components (list in comments)
23
30. 21-1.0200 re -certification
❑
31. Five & Thirty day Plans of Action (PoA)
❑
32. Irrigation record keeping assistance
33. Organize/computerization of records
❑ .
34. Sludge Evaluation
❑
35. Sludge or Closure Plan
❑
36. Sludge removal/closure procedures
❑
37. Waste Structure Evaluation
❑
38. Structure Needs Improvement'
❑
39. Operation & Maintenance Improvements
❑
40. Marker check/calibration
❑
41. Site evaluation..'
❑
42. Irrigation Calibration
❑
43. Irrigation system design/installation
❑
44. Secure irrigation information (maps, etc.)
❑
45. Operating improvements (pull -signs, etc.)
❑
46. Wettable Acre Determination
❑
47. Evaluate WAD certification/rechecks
❑
48. Crop evaluation/recommendations
❑
49. Drainage work/evaluation
❑
50. Land shaping, subsoiling, aeration, etc.
❑
51. Runoff control, stormwater diversion, etc.
❑
52. Buffer improvements
❑
53. Field measurements(GPS, surveying, etc.)
❑
54. Mortality BMPs
❑
55. Waste operator education (NPDES) _
❑
56. Operation & maintenance education
❑
57. Record keeping education ,
❑
58. Crop/forage management education
❑
59. Soil and/or waste sampling education
❑
Provided .�
2 03/10/03

FaclIIty,Number 47 - 11 Date: 1011103
COMMENTS:
Waste samples: •;
9125102 -- 1.9
1114103 -- 3.1
419103 -- 2.6
7122103 -- 2.0
1 14. Over applied nitrogen to 2002/2003 small grain crop as follows:
Pull Over application Amount
1 30
2 26
3 13.4
4 16.2
5 2
6 29.
towable P.A.N. rate on small grain is 50 #'s of nitrogen per acre,
its requires notification to DWQ, This over application occurred due to using incorrect waste sample. Waste. samples are
fod 60 days before and 60,days after date of sample. Recommend taking waste samples every 60 days to avoid over
)plication in the future.
Small amount of waste overflowed flush tank. Waste did not reach waters of the state. Mr, Locklear'will clean up spilled
Waste plan should be revised to show current cropping system in field 1 B. This field has not been pumped on yet.
tact Hoke Soil and Water for assistance with this.
9. Put copy of new permit with' farm paperwork.
2. P.A.N, rate on IRR.2 forms should be 296 #'s of N per acre, not 305, No over application occurred on bermuda.
ote: Monitor bermuda in low areas of spray field. Re -sprig if needed. Be sure to take a new waste sample'soon. Last
aste sample expired 9122103.
TECHNICAL SPECIALIST" 10anny Edwards 1 F_'_'
SIGNATURE
Date Entered: 10/10/03
3
Entered By:. [Danny Edwards
03110/03

4. Restricted Delivery? (Extra Fee) p Yes
2.• Article Number
(transfer from servrce,tletie!) j I= `' ;7; Q Q i i 2 °51 D .14•' f1,.� p i+ b 7 9 7920
PS Form 3811, March 2001 Domestic Return Recelpt 102595-01-M•14A
;tt” ail. AI Ii. ,I?i .i i K I j ';,5.+ i ! .... - Fr
SENDER. COMPLETE THIS SECTION
COMPLETE THIS SECTION ON DELIVERY
■ Complete items,'1, 2, and 3, Also complete
Item !17, 4 If Restricted DeIWe a Is'deslred:.
`A,. Received by (Please Pdnt Clearly) B. bate of Delivery
-/0
■ Print your name and address on the reverse
so that we can return the card to you.
■ Attach, this card to the backlof the mailpiece,
or on the front if space permits.
C„Sig_ tore. .
; , p Agent
❑'Addresses
D'i le delive address different from ftem 17 ❑ Yes
If YES, enter delivery address below. ❑ No
t, Article Addressed t6;
;. MR CKARL ER LQCKLE AR..
12541 LAKEWOOD DR
LAURINBURG NC 28352
3. 5ervice.Type
❑ Certlfted Mall ❑ Express Mail
i
❑ Registered ❑ Return Recelpt for Merchandise
jj
❑ insured MRIs ❑ C.O.D.
4. Restricted Delivery? (Extra Fee) p Yes
2.• Article Number
(transfer from servrce,tletie!) j I= `' ;7; Q Q i i 2 °51 D .14•' f1,.� p i+ b 7 9 7920
PS Form 3811, March 2001 Domestic Return Recelpt 102595-01-M•14A
;tt” ail. AI Ii. ,I?i .i i K I j ';,5.+ i ! .... - Fr

State of North Carolina
Department of Environment
and Natural Resources
Fayetteville Regional Office
Michael F. Easley, Governor
William G. Ross, Secretary
Division of Soil & Water Conservation
Mr. Charles Locklear
12541 Lakewood Drive
Laurinburg, North Carolina 28352
UG"I 2 2 OrtT;'
October 10, 2003
SUBJECT: Operation Review Notice of Referral for
Charles Locklear Farm,
Facility Number 47-11
Hoke County
Dear Mr. Locklear,
r-4 0 --ft
NCDENR
ENVIRONMENT ANA NATURAL RESOURCES
On October 1, 2003, an operation review was conducted of the Charles Locklear Farm, facility
number 47-11, in Hoke County. This review, undertaken in accordance with G.S. 143-
215.104, is 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 item was noted:
• Over application to the small grain crop. Over application amounts are as follows:
Pull Number Over application Amount (pounds of N per acre)
1 30
2 26
3 13.4
4 16.2
6 29
The allowable nitrogen rate on the small grain crop is 50 pounds of nitrogen per acre.
These over applied amounts are greater than the 10% allowed by the waste plan and
require a notice of referral to the Division of Water Quality.
225 Green Street, Suite 7141 Systel Bid. Fayetteville, North Carolina 28301-5043 'telephone [phone]
FAX [phone] An Equal Opportunity Affirmative Action Employer

Mr. Charles Locklear
October 10, 2003
Page 2
It was for this reason that your operation was referred to the Division of Water Quality for
further investigation and possible -enforcement action. G.S. 143-215.10E requires staff from
the Division of. Soil and Water Conservation to notify the Division of Water Quality and the
owner/operator of this observed violation.
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.
Please remember that in order for your facility to' remain in compliance with environmental
regulations, an 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
this operation review. 'Please do not hesitate to contact me at 910-486-1541 if you have any
questions, concerns or need additional information.
Sincerely, -
Danny -Edwards
Environmental Specialist
cc: Paul Rawls, Division of Water Quality
John Ray, Hoke Soil & Water Conservation District
Kraig Westerbeek, Murphy Farms -
Carroll Pierce, Division of Soil & Water Conservation
225 Green Street, Suite 714 / Systel Bld. Fayetteville, North Carolina 28301-5043 Telephone [phone]
FAX [phone] An Equal Opportunity Affirmative Action Employer

Technical Assistance Site Visit Report
Division of Soil and Water Conservation
Natural Resources Conservation Service
Soil and Water Conservation District
Other:..
Facility Number 47 - 11 Date: 1011103 Time: 9:30 Time On Farm
Farm Name Charles Locklear Farm
County Hoke Phone:
80 FRO
910-276-9484
Mailing Address 12541 Lakewood Drive Laurinburg NC 28352
Onsite
Representative Charles Locklear Integrator Imurphy Brown
Type Of Visit Purpose 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
O Routine
O Response to D,V1/Q/DENR referral
O Response to DSWC/SWCD referral
O Response to complaint/local referral
O Requested by producer/integrator
O Follow-up
O Emergency
O Other...
Design Current Design Current
Capacity Population
❑ Wean to Feeder
❑ Feeder to Finish
❑ Farrow to Wean
® Farrow to Feeder 1200 1200
❑ Farrow to Finish
❑ Gilts
❑ Boars
Capacity Population
❑ Layer
❑ Non -Layer
❑ Dairy I .
❑ Non -Dairy
I❑ 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?
B. Is the waste level within the structural freeboard elevation range for any waste structure? []yes ® no
Structurel Structure 2 Structure 3 Structure 4 Structure 5
Identifier J
Level (Inches) -34 IF
CROP TYPES Icoastal Bermuda -hay' Small grain overseed
SPRAYFIELD
SOIL. TYPES NoA
7. What type of technical assistance does the onsite representative feel is needed? (list in comment section)
03/10/03

Facility Number 47 ' - 11 Date:
10/1/03
PARAMETER'-
0 No.assistance:provided/requested
❑ 8._.Waste spill leaving site
TECHNICAL ASSISTANCE, -'Needed
Provided
® 9. Waste -spill contained on site
25: Waste Plan Revision or Amendment-
®
❑
❑ 10. Level in structural freeboard
❑ 11. Level in storm storage
26. Waste Plan'Conditional Amendment
❑'
El
27. Review or Evaluate Waste Plan W/producer
❑
❑
❑ 12. Waste structure integrity compromised
28, Forms Need (list in comment section)
❑
❑
❑ 13. Waste structure needs maintenance
®-
❑
29.°Missing Components (list in comments)
®14: Over application >= 10% & 10.Ibs.
30.
❑
❑
[116. Over application < 10% or < -10 lbs.
21-1.0200 re -certification
.
❑ 16. Hydraulic overloading
31. Five & Thirty day Plans of Action (PoA)
❑
❑
32. Irrigation record keeping assistance
❑ 17. Deficient Irrigation records-
❑-18. Late/missing waste analysis
33. Organize/computerization of records
❑
❑ 19."Late/missing lagoon•level records
34. Sludge Evaluation
❑ ..
❑
❑ 20. Late/missing soils analysis
❑ 21. Crop needs improvement
35. Sludge or Closure Plan
❑ -
❑
❑ 22. Crop inconsistent with waste plan .
36. Sludge removal/closure procedures
❑
❑
37. Waste Structure Evaluation
❑
E
❑ 23. Irrigation maintenance deficiency
❑ 24. Deficient sprayfield conditions
'38. Structure Needs Improvement
❑
❑ -
39. Operation &.Maintenahce.Improvements,
❑
❑
40. Marker check/calibration
❑
❑
Regulatory Referrals
41. Site evaluation
❑
❑
® Referred. to DWQ Date! 10/13/2003
4P. Irrigation Calibration
❑-
❑
❑•Referred to NCDA Date
❑ Other...
43. Irrigation system design/installation
❑
❑.
Dater
'44.'Secure irrigation. information (maps, etc.)
❑
El .
LIST IMPROVEMENTS
45.Operating improvements (pull signs, etc.) .:
❑
'❑
MADE BY OPERATION
46. Wettable Acre Determination
❑•
0
• Installing float switchs on flush tanks to help ` ~
47. Evaluate WAD certification/rechecks
❑
❑ _
48. Crop, evaluation/recommendations
❑
❑ .
prevent tank overflows.
2.
49: Drainage work/evaluatioh
❑
❑
50. Land shaping, subsoiling, aeration, -etc.
51. Runoff control, stormwater diversion, etc.
❑.
El
❑. .
El'
3•
52. Buffer improvements
❑
❑
53. Field measurements(GPS, surveying, etc.)
❑.
❑
4'
54. Mortality BMPs
❑
❑.
55. Waste operator education (NPDES) _
❑
El
5,
.56. Operation & maintenance:education
❑ ,El
57.. Record keeping education
❑
6
58."Crop/forage management education
❑
❑ -
59. Soif and/or waste sampling education-
' ❑
❑
2, 03/10/03

Facility Number 47 - 11 Date: I 1011103
COMMENTS:
Waste samples:
9125102 -- 1.9
1114103 -- 3.1
419103 -- 2.6
7122103 -- 2.0
1 14. Over applied nitrogen to 2002/2003 small grain crop as follows:
Pull
Over application Amount
1
30
2
26
3
13.4
4
16.2
5
2
6
29
Jlowable P.A.N. rate on small grain is 50 #'s of nitrogen per acre.
his requires notification to DWQ. This over application occurred due to using incorrect waste sample. Waste samples are
oad 60 days before and 60 days after date of sample, Recommend taking waste samples every 60 days to avoid over
DDlication in the future.
Small amount of waste overflowed flush tank. Waste did not reach waters of the state. Mr. Locklear will clean up spilled
Waste plan should be revised to show current cropping system in field 1 B. This field has not.been pumped on yet.
fact Hoke Soil and Water for assistance with this.
Put copy of new permit with farm paperwork.
J
P.A.N. rate on IRR 2 forms should be 296 #'s of N per acre, not 305. No over application occurred on bermuda.
: Monitor bermuda in low areas of spray field. Re -sprig if needed. Be sure to take a new waste sample'soon. Last
3 sample expired 9122103.
TECHNICAL SPECIALIST jDanny Edwards
SIGNATURE
Date Entered: 10/10/03
Entered By: jDanny Edwards
03/10/03

The Waste Utilization -table shown below summarizes the waste utilization plan for this operation. This plan provides an estimate of the number of acre,
cropland. needed to use the nutrients being produced. The plan requires consideration of the realistic yields of the crops to be grown, their nutrient re(fuirr,
and proper timing of applications to maximize nutrient uptake.
This table provides an estimate of the amount of nitrogen required by the crop being grown and an estimate of the nitrogen amount being supplied by manure o,
other by-products, commercial fertilizer and residual from previous crops. An estimate of the quantity of solid and liquid waste that will be applied on each fieln
in order to supply the indicated quantity of nitrogen from each source is also included.
A balance of the total manure produced and the total manure applied is included in the table to ensure that the plan adequately provides for the utilization of the
manure generated by the operation. Animal operations that generate liquid waste and utilize waste storage facilities (lagoons or holding ponds) may apply more or
less waste in any given year than is annually generated by the facility. in order to determine whether the plan adequately utilizes the waste produced by the
facility, the storage capacity table included in this plan should be reviewed to ensure that the design capacity of the storage facility is not exceeded during the
planning period.
Depending on the requirements of the crop and the nutrient content of the waste, some nutrients will likely be over or under applied if animal waste is being
utilized. Waste should be analyzed before each application cycle and annual soil tests are required if animal waste is being applied. Soil tests should be used to
balance the nutrient application amounts with the realistic yields of the crop to be grown. Nutrient management plans may require that the application of animal
waste be limited so as to prevent over application of phosphorous when excessive levels of this nutrient are detected in a field.
Waste Utilization Table
Year I
Tract
I Field
Source
I.D.
Soil Series
Total
Acre
Use,
Acres
crop
RYE
RYE
F Unit
Applic.
Period I
Nitrogen Comm-
PA Fort.
Nutrient Nutrient
Req'd Applied
N N
Res.
Obs/A)
N I
Applic.
Method
Manure Liquid
PA.` Manure
Nutrient, Applied
Applied (acre)
Solid
Manure
Applied
(acre)
liquid
Manure
Applied
(Field)
Solid
Manure
Applied
(Held)
1000
lbs/A al/A
Ions
1000 Is
tons
5
113
Sit
Norfolk
10.5
6.5
Bermudagrass Hay
6.5
Tons
3/1-9130
296 0
0
brig.
296 .• 176.4
0.0
1,146.4
0.0
5
-Pull 1
Sl!
Norfolk
5.1
5.1
Small Grain Overseed
1.0
Tons
10/1-3131
50 0
0
Irri^.
50 29.8
0.0
152.5
0.0
5
-Pull I
SI
Norfolk
5.1
5.1
Bermuda s Hay
6.5
Tons
3/1-9/30
296 0
0
Irrig.
296 170.4
0.0
903.0
0.0
5
-Pull 2
-I
Sl 1
Norfolk
4.8
4.8
Small Grain Oversced
1.0
Tons
1011-3/31
50 0
0
Inti .
50 29.8
0.0
142.1
0.0
5
-Pull2
Sl l
Norfolk
4.8
4.8
Bermuda ss Hay
6.5
Tons
3/1-9130
296 0
0
Irri .
296 176.4
0-0
841.3
0.0
5
-Pull 3
S11
Norfolk
3.9
•3.9
Small Grain Overseed
1.0
Tons
1011-3/31
50 0
0
Irrig.
: 50 29.8
0.0
115.9
0.0
5
-Pull3
1 SII
Norfolk
3.9
39
Bermudagrass Hay
6.5
Tons
3/1-9/30
296 0
•296 176.4
0.0
686-1
0.0
5
-Pull4
SII
Norfolk
43
43'
Small Grain Overseed
1.0
Tons
1011-3/31
50 0
�Irn
:• 50 29.8
o.0
128.4
0.0
5
-Pull4
SII
Norfolk
4.3
-:43
Bermuda ss Ha
6.5
Tons
311-9/30
296 0
296 176.4
0.0
760.1
0.0
_ __ 4 ________ _____
------- ----- ------------------------------------------------------ ---- -----------
----- - - ----- ---- -
4873D2 Database Version 1.06 Date Printed: 08-24-2001 WUT Page I

Waste Utilization Table
Year 1
Tract
I Field
Source
I -D,
I Soil Series
Total
Acre
Use.
Acres
1 Crap
RYfi
RYE
I Unit
Applie.
i Period
Nitrogen
PA
Nutrient
Req'd
Comm.
Fert.
Nutrient
Applied
Res.
(tbs/A)
I N
Applic.
Method
Manure
PA
Nutrient
Applied
Uquid
Manure
Applied
(acre)
Solid liquid
Manure Manure
Applied Applied AA
(acre) (Field) (Fie
N
N
lhs/A
1000
VA
tons I IWn MIS [Otis
5
-Pull 5
SI I
Norfolk
4.9
4.9
1 Small Grain Overseed
1.0
Tons
I 10/I-3/31
50
0
0
Irri .
SO
29.8
0.0 145.1 0.0
S
Pu115
S11
Norfolk
4.9
4.91
BcrnvudaKM Hay
6.3
Tons
3/1-9130
296
0
0
Irri .
296
170A
0.0 858.9 0.0
5
-Pull 6
SII
Norfolk
6.9
6.9
Small Grain Overseed
1.0
Tons
10/1-3/31
50
0
0
1m .
50
29.8
0.0 205.0 0.0
5
-Pull6
S11
Norfolk
6.9
6.91
$ermuda sHa
6.5
Tons
3/1-9/30
296
0
0
Irri .
;296
176A
0-0 1.213.4 0.0
Lagoon Liquids
Total Applied, 1000 gallons 7,298
Total Produced, 1000 gallons 4.633
Balance 1000 eallons -2.665
Manure Solids
Total Anplied, tuns 0
Total Produced, tons 0
Balance, tons 0
Notes: 1. In the tract column, symbol -- means leased, otherwise, owned. 2. Symbol * means user entered data.
D
--- ---- - ---------- ------- -- - - ---- --- -
- 4$7302- ----- Database V-ersion--1.06----- --- - --- Date Printed: 08-242001 WUT Page 2
.s--.a`_w'^' r4 - --•.-.�_-es,v�4:_. -' �.�-.� s xi- '�C.y.'°'{
s.�_._ —-.K--.t..-- _- .M.+.,+a+-rr,•r_+�_r. _ti.`t4�a�..r'_ '.. � �- _ � T ..
N