960046_ENFORCEMENT_20171231

2 V
.d�
NUH I H CAROLINA
Department of Environmental Qual

ENFORCEMENT
ENFORCEMENT
ENFORCEMENT

Michael F. Easley, Governor
William G. Ross Jr., Secretary
North Carolina Department of Environment and Natural Resources
Coleen H. Sullins, Director
Division of Water Quality
August 15, 2008
Julian Nelms and Harvey L. Whitley, Jr.
N & W Pig Farms
601 East Main St.
Fremont, NC 27830
RE:. Acknowledgment of Receipt of Payment
Case No. PC-2008-0037
Farm # 96-0046
Wayne County
Dear Mr. Nelms and Mr. Whitley:
This letter is to acknowledge receipt of your check No. 4069 in the amount of $2579.18 on
August 15, 2008. This payment satisfies in full the civil assessment in the amount of $2579.18
levied against Julian Nelms and Harvey L. Whitley, Jr. and the case has been closed. If you have
any questions, please call me at [phone].
Sincerely,
(—P
Miressa D. Garoma
Animal Feeding Operations Unit
cc: David May, Washington APS Regional Supervisor
Mark E. Newsome, WARO
File # PC-2008-0037
APS Central Files
AUG 1 g 2008
10
WASHINGTON REGIONAL OFFICE
Aquifer Protection Section 1636 Mail Service Center Raleigh, NC 27699-1636
Internet: httn://h2o.enr.state.nc.us 2728 Capital Boulevard Raleigh, NC 27604
Nor` hCarolina
,113tatura!!y
Phone [phone] Customer Service
Fax [phone]
Fax [phone]
An Equal Opportunity/Affirmative Action Employer — 50% Recycled/10% Post Consumer Paper

.o�oF wArF9QG
� r
>
Michael F. Easley, Governor
William G. Ross Jr., Secretary
North Carolina Department of Environment and Natural Resources
July 24, 2008
CERTIFIED MAIL : # 7006 2150 0003 5466 6939
RETURN RECEIPT REQUESTED
Julian Nelms and Harvey L. Whitley, Jr.
N & W Pig Farms
601 East Main St.
Fremont, NC 27830
SUBJECT: Assessment of Civil Penalties for Violation(s) of
N.C. General Statute(s) 143-215.1
Farm # 96-0046
Wayne County ✓
File No. PC-2008-0037
Permit No. AWS960046 ✓
Dear Mr. Nelms and Mr. Whitley:
Coleen H. Sullins, Director
Division of Water Quality
-Davj W-1
WR0
This letter transmits notice of a civil penalty assessed against Julian Nelms and Harvey L. Whitley, Jr. in
the amount of $2579.18, which includes $579.18 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:
Miressa D Garoma
DWQ
1636 Mail Service Center
Raleigh, North Carolina 27699-1636
JUL 2 5
WASHINGTON REGIONALOFFICE
----. --D
Aquifer Protection Section 1636 Mail Service Center Raleigh, NC 27699-1636 Phone [phone] Customer Service
Internet: htto://h2o.enr.statc.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 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-282.1(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 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:
Miressa D. Garoma
Division of Water Quality
1636 Mail Service .Center
Raleigh, NC 27699-1636
Na
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

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:
Ms. Mary Penny Thompson, Registered Agent
DENR
1601 Mail Service Center
Raleigh, NC 27699-1601
Please mail or hand deliver a copy to:
Miressa D. Garoma
DWQ
1636 Mail Service Center
Raleigh, NC 27699-1636
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 Miressa D. Garoma at [phone].
Sincerely,
eodore L. Bush, Jr., Chief
Aquifer Protection Section
Division of Water Quality
ATTACHMENTS
cc: David May, Washington APS Regional Supervisor w/ attachments
Mark E. Newsome, WARO w/ attachments
File # PC-2008-0037 w/ attachments
APS Central Files w/ attachments
Susan Massengale w/ attachment

STATE OF NORTH CAROLINA
COUNTY OF WAYNE
IN THE MATTER OF
JULIAN NELMS AND
HARVEY L. WHITLEY, JR.
FOR VIOLATIONS OF SWINE WASTE
GENERAL PERMIT AWG100000
PURSUANT TO NORTH CAROLINA
GENERAL STATUE 143-215.1
NORTH CAROLINA
DEPARTMENT OF ENVIRONMENT AND
NATURAL RESOURCES
File No. PC-2008-0037
FINDINGS AND DECISION
AND ASSESSMENTS 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:
FINDINGS OF FACT:
A. Mr. Julian Nelms and Mr. Harvey L. Whitley, Jr. own and operate N & W Pig Farms, a
permitted/certified swine animal feeding operation in Wayne County.
B. Mr. Nelms and Mr. Whitley were issued a Certificate of Coverage AWS960046 under State
General Permit AWG100000 on October 1, 2004, effective upon issuance, with an expiration
date of September 30, 2009.
C. Condition No. I. 1. of the "Performance Standards" of the State General Permit states in part
that, "Any discharge of waste which reaches surface waters or wetlands is prohibited except
as otherwise provided in this permit. Waste shall not reach surface waters by runoff, drift,
manmade conveyance, direct application, direct discharge or through ditches not otherwise
classified as state waters. Any discharge or application of waste to a ditch that drains to
surface waters or wetlands is prohibited except as follows: (a) discharges from the ditches
are controlled by best management practices (BMPs) designed in accordance with NRCS
standards; (b) the BMPs have been submitted to and approved by the Division of Water
Quality (Division); (c) the BMPs were implemented as designed to prevent a discharge to
surface waters or wetlands; (d) the waste was removed immediately from the ditch upon
discovery; and (e) the event was documented and reported in accordance with Part 11I.13. of
this General Permit.
D. Condition No. 11. 1. of the "Operation and Maintenance Requirements" of the State General
Permit states that "The collection, treatment, and storage faQ,1;r;_ ��hVati=
equipment and fields shall be properly operated and
JUL' 2 5 2000
WASHINGION RE'viIONAL OFFICE

E. Condition No. II. 4. of the "Operation and Maintenance Requirements" of the State General
Permit states that "Land application rates shall be in accordance with the CAWMP. In no
case shall land application rates exceed the agronomic rate of the nutrient of concern for the
receiving crop. In no case shall land application rates result in excessive ponding or any
runoff during any given application event'.
F. Condition No. III. 13. of the "Monitoring and Reporting Requirements" of the State General
Permit requires in part 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
following: a) Any discharge to ditches, surface waters, or wetlands; d) Over applying waste
either in excess of the limits set out in the CAWMP or where runoff enters surface waters or
wetlands or; e) Failure of any component of the animal waste collection, treatment, storage
and land application system resulting in a discharge to surface waters or wetlands.
G. On March 20, 2008, The Division of Soil and Water Conservation conducted an annual
review and found that a discharge occurred into a drainage ditch at the N&W Pig Farms.
Also, visual evidence was found to indicate that the March 18, 2008 irrigation event caused
wastewater to pond in several places on a wheat field. The Division of Soil and Water
Conservation referred the discharge and ponding instances to DWQ. Once notified, DWQ
performed an onsite investigation at the facility and confirmed the presence of ponding and
wastewater in a drainage ditch. During the investigation, a facility records review supported
that irrigation activities had occurred onto 2.47 acres of a wheat crop. Wastewater runoff
traveled from the wheat field onto two lower fields, northwest of the wheat field. No
explanation was given by Mr. Nelms during the March 20, 2008 DWQ investigation as to
how the hydraulic overloading or discharge into the ditch occurred. In addition, investigation
revealed that loose fittings in the irrigation supply line discharged wastewater into a farm
drainage ditch.
H. Mr. Julian Nelms and Mr. Harvey L. Whitley, Jr. do not have a valid permit for the above -
described activity.
I. The Washington Regional Office had not received notification from Mr. Julian Nelms or Mr.
Harvey L. Whitley, Jr. of wastewater ponding and discharge events within the twenty-four
(24) hours of the occurrence.
J. The cost to the State of the enforcement procedures in this matter totaled $579.18.
Based upon the above Findings of Facts, I make the following:
II. CONCLUSIONS OF LAW:
A. Mr. Julian Nelms and Mr. Harvey L. Whitley, Jr. are each 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. The above -cited discharge to a ditch violated Condition No. I. 1. of the State General Permit.
D. The above -cited failure to properly operate and maintain the land application equipment and
fields violated Condition No. II. 1. of the State General Permit.

E. The above -cited failures to apply waste at land application rates in accordance with the
CAWMP and to avoid excessive ponding or runoff violated Condition No.11. 4. of the State
General Permit.
F. The above -cited failure to notify DWQ of a discharge violated Conditions No. III. 13 a, d,
and a of the State General Permit.
G. Mr. Julian Nelms and Mr. Harvey L. Whitley, Jr. 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
that twenty-five thousand dollars ($25,000.00) per violation may be assessed against a person
who is required but 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 Mr. Julian Nelms and
Mr. Harvey.L. Whitley, Jr., pursuant to G. S. 143-215.3(a)(9) and G. S. 14313-282.1(b)(8).
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 Facts and Conclusions of Law, I make the following:
III. DECISION:
Accordingly, Mr. Julian Nelms and Mr. Harvey L. Whitley, Jr., owners of N & W Pig Farms, are
hereby assessed a civil penalty of:
00
$ SD C�
For violating Condition No. I. 1., and No. H. 4. of the State General
Permit for failing to apply waste at a rate in accordance with the
CAWMP & discharging hog waste to a ditch that drains to surface waters
without the proper use of Best Management Practices.
$
For violating Conditions No. III. 13. a., d., and e. of the State General
Permit by failing to report by telephone to the appropriate Regional
Office as soon as possible, but in no case more than 24 hours following
first knowledge of a) the occurrence of a discharge to ditches, surface
waters, or wetlands; d) the occurrence of waste over -application, and e)
the failure of the land application system that led to the discharge.
$ 579.18 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 quantity or quality;
(4) The cost of rectifying the damage;
(5) The amount of money save by noncompliance;
(6) Whether the violation was committed willfully or intentional;
(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.
% �ga�
(Date) Th6odore L. Bush, Jr. Chief
Aquifer Protection Section
Division of Water Quality
0

N&W Pig Farms
601 East Main Street
Fremont, NC 27830
April 17. 2008
Mr. David May
Division of Water Quality
943 Washington Square Mall
Washington, NC 27889
RE: NOV/Notice of Recommendation for Enforcement
NOV-2008-PC-0225
Dear Mr. May:
We are replying to you with regard to the recommendation for enforcement action that you are
considering against N&W Pig Farms, Facility Number 96-46, located in Wayne County. We will address
the issues, per your letter dated April 1, 2008, and per the permit conditions as listed in your letter.
(1.) With regard to the unauthorized discharge or waste application since proper BMP's were not
used, nor was proper notification made to the WaRO: land application events were made on
3-15-08 from 1:15pm —6:15pm at the rate of 13,363 gal/ac and were inspected at 3:15pm and
5:15pm on 4.95 acres. On 3-18-08 another land application event was made from 6:15pm —
10:1.5pm at the rate of 10,909 gal/ac and was inspected at 8:15pm and 10:15pm on 4.12 acres.
On 3-19-08 the farm received .2 in of rain. The OIC was on site on and off during the entire
land application events on both 3-15 and 3-18. N&W Pig Farms employs an individual that
takes care of the day to day animal husbandry needs of the farm, and the OIC did not visit the
farm again (after 10:15pm on 3-18-08) until he was called by Martin McLawhorn with
DSWC on 3-20-08 and informed that he was on the farm and that there was a problem. When
the OIC left the farm on the evening of 3-18-08 after the last irrigation event, there was no
evidence of run-off from the field. Hence, no notification to DWQ was made, as there was no
evidence of a problem.
(2.) Hydraulic over -application and mechanical deficiencies were noted with the irrigation
equipment: As stated in the aforementioned statement, the two irrigation events resulted in
.49 in/ac and .40 in/ac application rates. We can only assume that there aseveral
contributing factors here, to include,re an Aycock soil type, which is a SC/CL, clay soil, and the
rainfall event the day after our second land application event, which contributed to the
ponding in the tractor ruts in the field, and the run-off from the ends of the fields. We were
unaware of the leaking around the seal in the aluminum pipe that occurred on 3-18-08, but
that has been taken care of.
(3.) Ponding was present at the time of the inspection: We concede that there was ponding in the
tractor ruts in the field and some slight ponding in the ditch that runs along side the path at the
field edge, but if you recall, the ditch on the other side of the path had the same amount of
liquid in it as well, and it was not swine liquid, purely rainwater. This would substantiate our
claim that the rainfall was a contributing factor.
(4.) Required inspections of the land application site DID NOT occur such that waste was applied
per the Confined Animal Waste Management Plan: In fact the required inspections DID
occur and the OIC was on the farm during the land application events, and found no animal
waste concerns at the conclusion of the land application event that evening.
(5.) The Permittee shall report by telephone to the Division Regional Office no later than 24 hours
following first knowledge of "any discharge to ditches, surface waters or wetland- : C
or owners had not visited the facility since the 3-18-081 c� t
had NO knowledge of the discharge until being notifie m=-,4=lbr e
eR �g

3-20-08. At the time he immediately responded to the farm, met with Mr. McLawhorn and
discussed and assessed the situation, and started immediate remedial action.
In defense of an appeal that you not forward a recommendation for enforcement action against us to the
Director of the Division of Water Quality; we would state that our facility has been in operation since
September 1994. We have never had a Notice of Violation at our farm. I think if you will check with both
the DS WC and DWQ inspectors, you will find that we are very conscientious operators, both from an
environmental standpoint and from a regulatory standpoint. We took immediate steps to remediate the
problem by returning the ponded water back into the lagoon once becoming aware of the situation. I will
note that we believe that the soil type and rainfall event the day after the application event contributed to
the run-off and pending, as was evidenced by the amount of liquid in the ditch on the other side of the farm
path at the end of the field of land application. Please also note that we contained all swine liquid on -site.
We were devastated by this event. It was as much a shock to us as it was to Mr. McLawhorn to find it
during his inspection, and has made us very, very conscious of the many other factors impacting land
application events. I assure you that we will take all of those factors into consideration before making any
land application in the future.
We are enclosing the IRR-2 form of the irrigation events we have discussed in this statement for you to
review. If there is anything else we can provide in our defense, please do not hesitate to contact us.
Respectfully submitted,
ulian Nelms
N&W Pig Farms
H.L. Whitley, r.
irAPR
2 5 20a�

NI'UtJ rUP&ro-c Lagoon uquio it n r-relas mecoro •
One Form for Eac eld per Crop Cycle
Tract #
Field Size (acres) = (A'
Farm Owner
Owner's Address
Owner's Phone #
Crop Type
Field
Fremont. N. C. 27830
1/9- 2-�12- 6r-�r7
(1) (2) (3) (4) (5) (6)
Facility Number
Irrigation Operator
Irrigation Operator's
Address .
Operator's Phone #
From Waste Utilization Plan
Recommended PAN
Loading (lb/acre) = (B
(7) (8) (9) (10) (11)
/5/S/
e5
3
"' Nutrient
Source
Date
(mm/dd/yr)
' Irrigation
Waste
Analysis
PAN"
(ib/1000 gal)
PAN Applied
(lb/acre)
(8) x I91
1000
Nitrogen
Balance`
(lb/acre)
W - 00)
'Weather
code
Insp
# 1
Insp
# 2
Op
IN
start
Time
End
Time
Total
Minutes
(3) - (2)
. f/ of
Sprinklers
Operating
Flow
Rate
(gal/min)
Total Volume
(gallons)
(6) x (5) x (4)
Volume
par Acre
(gaVacre)
(7) / (A)
B= /4y o
./aSoonl
M
.J
30
RS
7`faSo
`'•/S-o
.2•0
B•
/ 0
C
pm
7odPm
da A/
ISA*
"2 S
l
.7�5
S? S11S
2.9
Y. <o
P
0,9;ls�m
lo.(Si
�y0
1
2�5
—
ID to
2.9
.6
3
(Z
Ar
I �L2 Crop Cycle Totals
0
0.00
4e.-- Mµ'1 (`n-fr Owner's Signature �. / A.U�°�- Operator's Signature /
(3/40s') Certified Operator (Print IIA4,4r-) /J• NO/Ynx p Operator's Certification No. 14s%5
wU, 4 01 ' j 41-�- 1,0- ` Fwu t S wet
Weather Codes: C-Clear, PC -Partly Cloudy, R-Raln, S-Snow/Sleet, W-Windy
NCDA Waste Anaylsis or Equivalent or NRCS Estimate, Technical Guide Section 633. / Y44- 0 - VU4GY '00 ,,IZ~
Enter the value received by subtracting column (10) from (B). Continue subtracting column (10) from column (11) following each irrigation event. 7cj
/
Enter nutrient source ( ie. Lagoordstorage pond ID, commerical fertilizer, dry litter, etc.)

ft. �
�iig Farm
N&W
601 Ea�t Main Street
Frerr(6nt, NC 27830
F]
7004
1350
0003
4554
4768
U:S: POSIAGE
PAID
$5, Olt
C"0039767-02
Mr. David May
Division of Water Quality
943 Washington Square Mall
Washington, NC 27889

.i .
I Certlfled Mail Provides:
• A mailing receipt
■ A unique Identifier for your mallplace
• Arden tl:o
lmtmrtanI delivery kept by the Postal Service for two yea
t Reminders-
s Certified Mall may
s OONLY be combined with Flrst•Class Mails or Priority
BrtINed Mall•ls not available for any class of International mail.
■ NO INSURANCE COVERAGE IS PROVIDED with
valuables, please consider Insured or Registered Mail.
■ For an additional fee, a Return R Certified Mail
delivery, o obtain Retum Rscei t see ippt ma be requested to rovitle pn
Receipt (PS Forrn 38111 to the articl enrl add a p
fee. Endorse mallPiece RetimReceiptRequestedoTo(receiveaea waittach a t/
a duplicate return receipt, a USP PPl. To postage to cove
required. S®Postmark on your Certified Mail race
s endorsement
nt -R onzed ageFor an additional fee nt Advise the clebe rk meedik the he add
endorsement 7iesLlcted�livery resse.
■ If a postmark on the Certified Mall receipt Is deeired l (Plan he ,
cle ip the Post office for POWnerking If a poshne p receipt la not needed, detach end efflx label with P e98B Present the i
on the Certified f
IMPORTANT -Save thls receipt and present it yyh Postage and mail. _ Iry
PS Form 3800, August 2006 (Rewrae PSN ��.••_ ^ — —
i'
I

-.U.S.
Postal
Service,,
CERTIFIED
MAIL„
RECEIPT
(Domestic
Mail
Only;
No Insurance
Coverage
Provided)
OFFCOAL USA
Postage $
_
certlfled Fee
Retum ReceFee9
(EfWoreementRequd)
ResMctedDeliveryFee(EndoreemeMRequred)TotalP°M"^'�
C��7sn
�/
W JULSAN NENS & MR H.L. [- I I
nt ° N&W PIG
FARMS
iurA61d EAST MAIN STREET
°jP &cnysm.FREMONT
NC 27830
......•.

Certified Mall Provides:
■ A mailing receipt
■ Aunique identifier for your mailpiece
■ A record of delivery kept by the Postal Service for two years
('portent RemhWers:
■ Certified Mall may ONLY be combined with First -Class Mailq or Priority Malk
■ Certified MalMs not available for any class of International mail.
■ NO INSURANCE COVERAGE IS PROVIDED with Certified Mail. Foi
valuables, please consider Insured or Registered Mail.
■ For an additional fee, a Return Receipt may be requested to provide proof of
delivery. o obtain Return Receipt service, plisse complete and attach a Return
Receipt (PS Form 3811) to the article and add applicable postage to cover the
fee. Endorse mallpiece'Return Receipt Requested". To receive a fee waiver for
a du licate return receipt, a USPSe postmark on your Certified Mail receipt Is
requQred.
■ For an additional fee, delivery may be restricted to the addressee of
addressee's authorized agent. Advise the clerk or mark the malipiace with the
endorsement `RestrlctedDefiverr.
• If a postmark on the Certified Mail receipt Is desired, please present the arll-
cle at the post office for postmarldng. If a postmark on the Certified Mall
receipt is not needed, detach and affix label with postage and mail.
IMPORTANT: Save this rtiselpt and present It when making an Inquiry.
PS Ran 3600, August 2006 (Reverse) PSN 7530-02-000.9047

UNITED STATES POSTAL SERVICE
A Sender: Please print your name, add ss, and Z104Wihis box
NC DEPARTMENT OF ENVIRONMENT &
NATURAL RESOURCES
Aquifer Protection Section
943 Washington Square Mail
Washington, NC 27869
NCDENR

■ Complete items 1, 2, and 3. Also complete
Item 4 if Restricted Delivery is desired.
■ Print your name and address on the reverse
so that we can return the card to you.
■ .Attach this card to the back of the mailplece,
or on the front if space permits.
1. Article Addressed to:
.0 JLIIAN-:,tars & rR. H.L. bTi= JR
N&W PIG WARMS
61.0 EAST'cMAIN STREET
FREMONT NC 27830
A. bignecure
•-�"' ❑ Agent
AA ❑ Addressee
B. Rec Ived by ( Printed Name) / C. Date of Declivvery
,,
D. Is delivery�ddress different from item 1? ❑ Yes
If YES, enter delivery address below: ❑ No
3. SaIce Type
fd Certified Mail
❑ Express Mail
❑ Registered
(Return Receipt for Merchandise
❑ Insured Mail
❑ C.O.D.
4. Restricted Delivery? (Extra Fee) ❑ Yes
2. Article Number 70_07[1,220 0;00-ItI1480 6545 i`
(rrensfer from service labels
PS Form 3811, February 2004 Domestic Return 7}r=�u� N�H/ }ly►N,3,7 O� n �102P-02-M-IW

�CF W A TBpO Michael F. Easley, Governor
�0 G William G. Ross Jr., Secretary
rNorth Carolina Department of Environment and Natural Resources
Colem EI. Sullins, Director
Chuck Wakrild, PE, Deputy Director
Division of water Quality
AQUIFER PROTECTION SECTION
April 1, 2008
CERTIFIED MAIL
RETURN RECEIPT REQUESTED
CM# 7007 0220 0003 1480 6545
Mr. Julian Nelms and Mr. H.L. Whitley, Jr.
N&W Pig Farms
601 East Main Street
Fremont, North Carolina 27830
RE: Notice of Violation / Notice of Recommendation for Enforcement
NOV-2008-PC-0225
N&W Pig Farms
Facility Number 96-46
Permit Certificate of Coverage No. AWS960046
Wayne County
Dear Mr. Nelms and Mr. Whitley:
This letter is to notify you that the Washington Regional Office of the Division of Water
Quality is considering sending a recommendation for enforcement action to the Director of the
Division of Water Quality. The recommendation concerns violation of conditions in your Swine
Waste Management System General Permit, Certified Animal Waste Management Plan
(CAWMP) and North Carolina Administrative Code Subchapter 15A NCAC 2T Section .1300.
The referenced facility, N&W Pig Farms, is located on State Road 1523 (Highway 111)
in Wayne County, North Carolina. On March 20, 2008 at 11:30 A.M., the North Carolina
Division of Water Quality (DWQ) received an initial report of wastewater discharge to a
drainage ditch from Mr. Martin McLawhorn, Environmental Specialist of the Division of Soil and
Water Conservation. On March 20, 2008 Eric Newsome of the DWQ investigated and
determined that hydraulic overload occurred on a 2.47-acre pull of a wheat field due to
excessive spray irrigation. The extent of the overload caused wastewater to run onto two lower
terraces northwest of the wheat field. According to facility records, the north lagoon (#1) was
pumped down by 6" (approximately of 88,451 gallons) on March 18, 2008. According to Mr.
Nelms, the north lagoon solely supplied wastewater for the above -described event. Visual
evidence of ponding was consistent with the fact that applying 88,451 gallons would have
exceeded the standard loading rate suggested by the Waste Utilization Plan for this field
(35,810 gallons/acre vs. 27,154 gallons/acre).
North Carolina Division of Water Quality Internet: www.ncwateroualitv.om ne Carolina
943 Washington Square Mall Phone [phone] Va
y�
Washington. NC 27889 Fax [phone] all;

Mr. Nelms and Mr. Whitley
'April 1, 2008
N&W Pig Farms
Page 2 of 3
In addition, the March 20, 2008 DWQ investigation revealed that loose fittings in the
Irrigation supply line discharged wastewater from this line into a farm drainage ditch. Although
the waste was recovered without it leaving the facility, it was estimated that 1,200 gallons of
water were seen standing in the ditch prior to clean up efforts beginning. No telephonic
notification was made to the Washington Regional Office within twenty-four (24) hours of
becoming aware of the March 18, 2008 discharge; furthermore, no explanation was given on
March 20, 2008 as to how the overload and discharge occurred. The specific violations are as
follows:
1. In contrast with Permit Condition I, number 1, an unauthorized discharge or waste
application occurred since proper Best Management Practices (BMPs) were not used,
nor was proper notification made to the Washington Regional Office:
"Any discharge or application of waste to a ditch that drains to surface
waters or wetlands is prohibited except as follows: (a) discharges from
the ditches are controlled by best management practices (BMPs)
designed in accordance with NRCS standards; (b) the BMPs have been
submitted to and approved by the Division of Water Quality (Division); (c)
the BMPs were implemented as designed to prevent a discharge to
surface waters or wetlands, (d) the waste was removed immediately from
the ditch upon discovery; and (a) the event was documented and
reported in accordance with Part lll. 13. of this General Permit. Nothing
in this exception shall excuse a discharge to surface waters or wetlands
except as may result because of rainfall from a storm event more severe
than the 25 year, 24-hour storm.
2. Permit Condition II, number 1, requires that, "The collection, treatment, and storage
facilities, and the land application equipment and fields shall be properly operated and
maintained at all times." Hydraulic over -application and mechanical deficiencies were
noted with the irrigation equipment.
3. According to Permit Condition II, number 4, "Land application rates shall be in
accordance with the CAWMP. In no case shall land application rates exceed the
agronomic rate of the nutrient of concem for the receiving crop. In no case shall land
application rates result in excessive ponding or any runoff during any given application
event: Ponding was present at the time of inspection.
4. In contrast to Permit Condition II, number 16, required inspections of the land
application site did not occur such that waste was applied per the Confined Animal
Waste Management Plan (CAWMP). "(The] Operator in Charge (01C) or a designated
back up OIC... shall inspect, or a person under the supervision of an O1C or designated
back up OIC shall inspect, the land application site as often as necessary to insure that
the animal waste is land applied in accordance with the CAWMP"
5. Permit Condition III, number 13a, states that the Permittee shall report by telephone to
the Division Regional Office no later than twenty-four (24) hours following first
knowledge of "Any discharge to ditches, surface waters or wetlands". Condition II,
number 13 further states the Permittee shall also file a written report to the appropriate

Mr. Nelms and Mr. Whitley
April 1, 2008
•N&W Pig Farms
Page 3 of 3
Division Regional Office within five (5) calendar days following first knowledge of the
occurrence. This report shall outline the actions taken or proposed to be taken to
correct the problem and to ensure that the problem does not recur. The subject incident
was not reported to the Washington Regional Office.
Please provide this office with an explanation of the violations within 30 working days after
receipt of this Notice to:
Mr. David May
Division of Water Quality
943 Washington Square Mall
Washington, North Carolina 27889
Your explanation will be reviewed and if an enforcement action is deemed appropriate,
your explanation will be forwarded to the Director with the enforcement package for his
consideration.
Please be advised that any violation of the terms and conditions specified in your
Certificate of Coverage (COC), the General Permit or the CAWMP may result in the revocation
of your COC, or penalties in accordance with the North Carolina General Stature 143-215.6A
through 143-215.6C including civil penalties, criminal penalties and injunctive relief.
If you have any questions concerning this matter, please contact me at 252-948-3939, or
Eric Newsome at 252-948-3942.
Sincerely,
David May
Aquifer Protection Regional Supervisor
Washington Regional Office
CC: Charlotte Jenkins, Wayne County Soil and Water Conservation District
Brent Mitchell, Goldsboro Hog Farms
NCDSWC-WaRO
Aquifer Protection Animal Central Files
WaRO Compliance Animal Files
I�u EIS Files

3I3��o8
�v� o7a2-T

Michael F. Easley, Governor
.V 1
William G. Ross Jr., Secretary
North Carolina Department of Environment and Natural Resources
Coleen Fl. Sullins, Director
Chock Wakild, PE, Deputy Director
Division of Water Quality
AQUIFER PROTECTION SECTION
March 31, 2008
CERTIFIED MAIL
RETURN RECEIPT REQUESTED
CM# xxxx xxxx xxxx xxxx xxxx
Mr. Julian Nelms and Mr. H.L. Whitley, Jr.
N&W Pig Farms
601 East Main Street
Fremont, North Carolina 27830
RE: Notice of Violation / Notice of Recommendation for Enforcement
NOV-200x-PC-xxxx
N&W Pig Farms
Facility Number 96-46
Permit Certificate of Coverage No. AWS960046
Wayne County
Dear Mr. Nelms and Mr. Whitley:
This letter is to notify you that the Washington Regional Office of the Division of Water
Quality is considering sending a recommendation for enforcement action to the Director of the
Division of Water Quality. The recommendation concerns violation of conditions in your Swine
Waste Management System General Permit, Certified Animal Waste Management Plan
(CAWMP) and North Carolina Administrative Code Subchapter 15A NCAC 2T Section .1800.
The referenced facility, N&W Pig Farms, is located on State Road 1523 (Highway 111)
in Wayne County, North Carolina. On March 20, 2008 at 11:30 A.M., the North Carolina
Division of Water Quality (DWQ) received an initial report of wastewater discharge to a
drainage ditch from Mr. Martin McLawhorn, Environmental Specialist of the Division of Soil and
Water Conservation. On March 20, 2008 Eric Newsome of the DWQ investigated and
determined that hydraulic overload occurred on a 2.47-acre pull of a wheat field due to
excessive spray irrigation. The extent of the overload caused wastewater to run onto two lower
terraces northwest of the wheat field. According to facility records, the north lagoon (#f) was
pumped down by 6" (approximately of 88,451 gallons) on March 18, 2008. According to Mr.
Nelms, the north lagoon solely supplied wastewater for the above -described event. Visual
evidence of ponding was consistent with the fact that applying 88,451 gallons would have
exceeded the standard loading rate suggested by the Waste Utilization Plan for this field
(35,810 gallons/acre vs. 27,154 gallons/acre).
North Carolina Division of Water Quality Internet: www.ncwatercualitv.om ne
943 Washington Square Mall Phone [phone] o Carolina
Washington, NC 27889 Fax [phone] Vtural;;

Mr. Nelms and Mr. Whitley
March 31, 2008
N&W Pig Farms
Page 2 of 3
In addition, the March 20, 2008 DWQ investigation revealed that loose fittings in the
irrigation supply line discharged wastewater from this line into a farm drainage ditch. Although
the waste was recovered without it leaving the facility, it was estimated that 1,200 gallons of
water were seen standing in the ditch prior to clean up efforts beginning. No telephonic
notification was made to the Washington Regional Office within twenty-four (24) hours of
becoming aware of the March 18, 2008 discharge; furthermore, no explanation was given on
March 20, 2008 as to how the overload and discharge occurred. The specific violations are as
follows:
1. In contrast to Permit Condition II, number 16, required inspections of the land
application site did not occur such that waste was applied per the Confined Animal
Waste Management Plan (CAWMP). "[The] Operator in Charge (OIC) or designated
back up OIC... shall inspect, or a person under the supervision of an OIC or designated
back up OIC shall inspect, the land application site as often as necessary to insure that
the animal waste is land applied in accordance with the CAWMP"
2. Permit Condition 11, number 1, requires that, "The collection, treatment, and storage
facilities, and the land application equipment and fields shall be properly operated and
maintained at all times."
3. According to Permit Condition II, number 4, "Land application rates shall be in
accordance with the CAWMP. In no case shall land application rates exceed the
agronomic rate of the nutrient of concern for the receiving crop. In no case shall land
application rates result in excessive ponding or any runoff during any given application
event".
4. Permit Condition II, number 13a, states that the Permittee shall report by telephone to
the Division Regional Office no later than twenty-four (24) hours following first
knowledge of "Any discharge to ditches, surface waters or wetlands". Condition 11,
number 13 further states the Permittee shall also file a written report to the appropriate
Division Regional Office within five (5) calendar days following first knowledge of the
occurrence. This report shall outline the actions taken or proposed to be taken to
correct the problem and to ensure that the problem does not recur.
Please provide this office with an explanation of the violations within 30 working days after
receipt of this Notice to:
Mr. David May
Division of Water Quality
943 Washington Square Mall
Washington, North Carolina 27889
Your explanation will be reviewed and if an enforcement action is deemed appropriate,
your explanation will be forwarded to the Director with the enforcement package for his
consideration.

Mr. Nelms and Mr. Whitley
March 31, 2008
N&W Pig Farms
Page 3 of 3
Please be advised that any violation of the terms and conditions specified in your
Certificate of Coverage (COC), the General Permit or the CAWMP may result in the revocation
of your COC, or penalties in accordance with the North Carolina General Stature 143-215.6A
through 143-215.6C including civil penalties, criminal penalties and injunctive relief.
If you have any questions concerning this matter, please contact me at 252-948-3939, or
Eric Newsome at 252-948-3942.
Sincerely,
David May
Aquifer Protection Regional Supervisor
Washington Regional Office
CC: Patrida4abWa ne County it and Water Conservation District
Brent , Goldsboro Hog Farms A j�j- ,Jq
NCDSWC-WaRO
Aquifer Protection Animal Central Files
WaRO Compliance Animal Files
MEN Files

�l
ka Le ;U5+ c,_ 4.Cc/
/hfno r- a aj uSfynPAf'
tn11lvr'QUe5f4;k ,
STF — 415 o lleeo-l- �7, c -LL r&S
pAo4orec,r,l f
t C c �r'hy n�,j'yy�r�G
COUNTY OF WAYNE
IN THE MATTER OF
N & W Pig Farms
.e U 1tie V)
�\qule
Lhaa�e
FOR VIOLATIONS OF SWINE WASTE
GENERAL PERMIT AWG100000
PURSUANT TO NORTH CAROLINA
GENERAL STATUE 143-215.1
9V)
Ka L.e ; LLS+ c,_-rPC-'/
rVrol-
a1j S(ryxeA
en1lor gUe5f'AN5 .
�{uiorPCa�d {o ir+ro�
,:ENT -OF -ENVIRONMENT AND
rURAL RESOURCES
c_reg4-e N',L,� rc ace/I
File No. N9V2448P
FINDINGS AND DECISION
AND ASSESSMENTS 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. Mr. Julian Nelms and Mr. Harvey L. Whitley, Jr. own and operate N & W Pig Farms, a
permitted/certified swine animal feeding operation in Wayne County.
B. Mr. Nelms and Mr. Whitley were issued a Certificate of Coverage AWS960046 under State
General Permit AWG100000 on October 1, 2004, effective upon issuance, with an expiration
date of September 30, 2009.
C. Condition No. I. 1. of the "Performance Standards" of the State General Permit states in part
that "Any discharge of waste which reaches surface waters or wetlands is prohibited except
as otherwise provided in this permit. Waste shall not reach surface waters by runoff, drift,
manmade conveyance, direct application, Pitggct discharge or through ditches not otherwise/
classified as state waters." ' A-150 4(451 p rc5,rop ti r- 1, 1 — ,Apy d4c4m se ...4o a
D. Condition No. II. 1. of the "Operation and Maintenance Requirements" of the State General
Permit states that "The collection, treatment, and storage facilities, and the land application
equipment and fields shall be properly operated and maintained at all times."
E. Condition No. II.4. of the "Operation and Maintenance Requirements" of the State General
Permit states that "Land application rates shall be in accordance with the CAWMP. In no
case shall land application rates exceed the agronomic rate of the nutrient of concern for the
receiving crop. In no case shall land application rates result in excessive ponding or any
runoff during any given application event'.
F. Condition No. II. 16. of the "Operation and Maintenance Requirements" of the State General
Permit states in part that the "Operator in Charge (OIC) or a designated back-up OIC of a
Type A Animal Waste Management System shall inspect, or a person under the supervision

of an OIC or designated back-up OIC shall inspect, the land application site as often as
necessary to insure that the animal waste is land applied in accordance with the CAWMP".
G. Condition No. III. 13. of the "Monitoring and Reporting Requirements" of the State General
Permit requires in part 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
following: a) Any discharge to ditches, surface waters, or wetlands; d) Over applying waste
either in excess of the limits set out in the CAWMP or where runoff enters surface waters or
wetlands or; e) Failure of any component of the animal waste collection, treatment, storage
and land application system resulting in a discharge to surface waters or wetlands.
H. On March 20, 2008, The Division of Soil and Water Conservation conducted an annual
review and found that a discharge occurred into a drainage ditch at the N&W Pig Farms.
Also, visual evidence was, found to indicate that the March 18, 2008 irrigation event caused
wastewater to pond in several places on a wheat field. The Division of Soil and Water
Conservation referred the discharge and ponding instances to DWQ. Once notified, DWQ
performed an onsite investigation at the facility to confirm the violations and to sample a
ponded area of the excessive irrigation. During the investigation, a facility records review
supported visual evidence that excess wastewater (no fewer than 88,451 gallons) was pumped
onto 2.47 acres of the wheat crop. Furthermo eN1t1Xa5)ewater runoff was seen on two lower
fields, northwest of the wheat field alfy,Tgation supply line was found lying
submerged in wastewater within the aforementioned drainage ditch; the supply line was
loosely connected at several fittings. No explanation was given by Mr. Nelms during the
March 20, 2008 DWQ investigation as to how the hydraulic overloading (35,810
gallons/acre) or discharge into the ditch occurred.
I. N&W Pig Farms have had no previous violations in their compliance history.
J. The cost to the State of the enforcement procedures in this matter totaled $610.31.
Based upon the above Findings of Facts, I make the following:
II. CONCLUSIONS OF LAW:
A. Mr. Julian Nelms and Mr. Harvey L. Whitley, Jr. are each 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.
aa d��-ti
C. The above -cited discharge to su€ase-auateFs violated Condition No. I. 1. of the State General
Permit.
D. The above -cited failure to properly operate and maintain the land application equipment and
fields violated Condition No. II. 1. of the State General Permit.
E. The above -cited failures to apply waste at land application rates in accordance with the
CAWMP and to avoid excessive ponding or runoff violated Condition No. II. 4. of the State
General Permit.
2

i.c:15i 11��� JOV.JI'Q
F. The above -cited failure of the Operator In Charge (or their surrogate) to inspect the land
application site such that animal waste was applied in accordance with the CAWMP violated
Condition No. II. 16. of the State General Permit.
G. The above -cited failure to notify DWQ of a discharge violated Conditions No. III. 13 a, d,
and e of the State General Permit.
H. Mr. Julian Nelms and Mr. Harvey L. Whitley, Jr. 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
that twenty-five thousand dollars ($25,000.00) per violation may be assessed against a person
who is required but fails to act in accordance with the terms, conditions, or requirements of a
permit required by G. S. 143-215.1.
I. The State's enforcement costs in this matter may be assessed against Mr. Julian Nelms and
Mr. Harvey L. Whitley, Jr., pursuant to G. S. 143-215.3(a)(9) and G. S. 14313-282.1(b)(8).
J. 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 Facts and Conclusions of Law, I make the following:
DECISION:
Accordingly, Mr. Julian Nelms and Mr. Harvey L. Whitley, Jr., owners of N & W Pig Farms, arc
hereby assessed a civil penalty of:
$ For violating Condition No. I. 1. of the State General Permit for
discharging hog waste to a ditch that drains to surface waters without the
proper use of Best Management Practices and DWQ notification.
$ For violating Condition I of the State General Permit by failing
to properly operate and m at all times the collection, treatment and
storage facilities, 1 applicatio quipment, and fields.
$ For violating Condition No. II. 4. of the State General Permit by failing
to apply waste at a rate in accordance with the CAWMP. The facility did
not land apply such that excessive ponding or runoff was avoided.
$ For violating Condition No. II. 16. of the State General Permit by the
Operator In Charge (or their surrogate) failing to inspect the land
application site such that animal waste was applied per the CAWMP.
For violating Condition No. III. 13. a. of the State General Pennit by
failing to 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 a discharge to ditches, surface waters, or wetlands.
cdS Jn e - ,131 q, J) + e
;'AY" v N ea ;-�p M
3

$ For violating Condition No. III. 1 . d. of the State General Permit by
failing to report by telephone to e appropriate Regional Office as soon
as possible, but in no case mor than 24 hours following first knowledge
of the occurrence of waste ov r- pplication. Waste over-applicati6n is
defined as that which is in exces of the CAWMP limits or where runoff
enters surface waters or wetlands.
$ For violating Condition No. I 3. e. of the State General P.ermit by
failing to report by telepho the appropriate Regional Office as soon
as possible, but in no case re han 24 hours following first knowledge
of the failure of the land applicat on system that lead to the discharge.
$ 610.31 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 quantity or quality;
(4) The cost of rectifying the damage;
(5) The amount of money save by noncompliance;
(6) Whether the violation was committed willfully or intentional;
(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.
(Date) Theodore L. Bush, Jr. Chief
Aquifer Protection Section
Division of Water Quality

Memorandum
To:
Through:
From:
Keith Larick, Animal Feeding Operations Permitting and Compliance Unit Supervisor
Animal Feeding Operation Permitting Compliance Unit
David May, Water Quality Supervisor
Washington Regional Office
Mark E. Newsome, Environmental Engineer I
Washington Regional Office
Subject: Enforcement Package
N & W Pig Farms
Permit No. AWS960046
Wayne County
Date:
Introduction:
April 9, 2008
N & W Pig Farms is owned and operated by Mr. Julian Nelms and Mr. Harvey L. Whitley, Jr. This facility,
located on Highway I I I South in Wayne County, began operation in 1994. The facility has the capacity to
raise 7,000 wean to feeder swine and the overall design for this facility is 210,000 steady state live weight.
Report:
On March 20, 2008 at 11:30 A.M., the North Carolina Division of Water Quality (DWQ) received an
initial report of wastewater discharge to a drainage ditch from Mr. Martin McLawhorn, Environmental
Specialist of the Division of Soil and Water Conservation. On March 20, 2008 Eric Newsome of the
DWQ investigated and determined that hydraulic overload occurred on a 2.47-acre pull of a wheat field
due to excessive spray irrigation. The extent of the overload caused wastewater to run onto two lower
terraces northwest of the wheat field. According to facility records, the north lagoon (#1) was pumped
down by 6" (approximately of 88,451 gallons) on March 18, 2008. According to Mr. Nelms, the north
lagoon solely supplied wastewater for the above -described event. Visual evidence of ponding was
consistent with the fact that applying 88,451 gallons would have exceeded the standard loading rate
suggested by the Waste Utilization Plan for this field (35,810 gallons/acre vs. 2 7,15 4 gallons/acre). In
addition, the March 20, 2008 DWQ investigation revealed that loose fittings in the irrigation supply line
discharged wastewater from this line into a farm drainage ditch. Although the waste was recovered
without it leaving the facility, it was estimated that 1,200 gallons of water were seen standing in the ditch
prior to clean up efforts beginning. No telephonic notification was made to the Washington Regional
Office within twenty-four (24) hours of becoming aware of the March 18, 2008 discharge; furthermore,
no explanation was given by Mr. Nelms on March 20, 2008 as to how the overload and discharge
occurred.
Please find a table with the sample results below.
The Finding and Decisions and Assessment Factors are attached for review.
5

Conclusion: aNJ �oG� 0, cir �ctn
Mr. Julian N s and Mr. Harvey L. Whitley, Jr., owners and operators of N & W Pig Farms, are in
violati eir pen -nit and North Carolina General Statue 143-215.1(a) for discharging hog waste to surface
waters; failing to properly operate and maintain land application equipment and fields; failing to apply
wastewater such that pending and runoff were avoided, and; failing to notify DWQ of the non compliance
event.
Recommendations:
It is recommended that the appropriate civil penalties be assessed against this subject facility, N & W Pig
Farms, located in Wayne County, owned and operated by Mr. Julian Nelms and Mr. Harvey L. Whitley, Jr.
The Washington Regional Office recommends that penalties be assessed for the four violations described
in the Conclusion.

DIVISION OF WATER QUALITY
ANIMAL OPERATIONS
ENFORCEMENT CASE REPORT
ENFORCEMENT # NOV-2008-PC-0225
Section I: General Information
1. Facility Name: N & W Pi Farms
arms
2. Facility or Permit No.: AWS960046
3. Parties named in assessment: Mr. Julian Nelms and Mr. Harvey L. Whitley, Jr.
4. (Mailing) Address: 601 East Main Street, Fremont, NC 27830
5. Telephone No.: 919-242-6327
6. Location of Facility: At the junction of Hwy 222 and Hwy 111
7. Type of Operation: 7,000 Wean to Feeder
8. Registered Agent (if applicable): N/A
9. Registered Agent Address (if applicable): N/A
10. Date(s) of noted violations: March 20, 2008
11. Receiving Stream and Classification (if applicable): N/A
12. Regional Office: Washington Regional Office
13. Report Prepared By: M. Eric Newsome
Section II: Findings
Case Narrative: On March 20 2008 at 11.30 A.M., the North Carolina Division of Water Ouality
(DWQ) received an initial reuort of wastewater discharge to a drainage ditch from Mr. Martin
McLawhorn Environmental Specialist of the Division of Soil and Water Conservation. On March
20 2008 Eric Newsome of the DWQ investigated and determined that hydraulic overload occurred on
a 2 47-acre pull of a wheat field due to excessive spray irrigation The extent of the overload caused
wastewater to run onto two lower terraces northwest of the wheat field According to facility records,
the north lagoon (#1) was pumped down by 6" (approximately of 88,451 gallons) on March 18, 2008.
According to Mr. Nelms the north lagoon solely supplied wastewater for the above -described event.
Visual evidence of ponding was consistent with the fact that applying 88,451 gallons would have
exceeded the standard loadingrato suggested by the Waste Utilization Plan for this field (35.810
gallons/acre vs 27,154 gallons/acre) In addition the March 20 2008 DWQ investigation revealed
that loose fittings in the irrigation supply line discharged wastewater from this line into a farm
drainage ditch Although the waste was recovered without it leaving the facility, it was estimated that
1,200 gallons of water were seen standing in the ditch prior to clean up efforts be ig nning. No
telephonic notification was made to the Washington Regional Office within twenty-four (24) hours of
becoming aware of the March 18 2008 discharge• furthermore no explanation was given by Mr.
Nelms on March 20 2008 as to how the overload and discharge occurred.
2. Farm and/or company compliance History: A database and file review indicates that no violations or
penalties have been assessed against this farm in the past.
3. Amount of Waste discharged (if applicable). 1,200 gallons into a farm drainage ditch.
4. Sample Results (if applicable) with locations of samples taken noted in relation to discharge point:
One sample was taken of the water that was ponded in the eastern edge of the wheat field for nitrogen
and phosphorus analyses Lab results showed significant levels of ammonia (390 mg/L) and total

Sample
Sampling Date
Ammonia
TKN
Nitrates,
Phosphorus, '
Location
NH3 as N
(mg/L)
Nitrites
P (mg/L)
(mom)
(NO3f NOz)
mg/L)
East end of
3/20/2008
390
420
ND
50-:
wheat field
_)
(F-1)
ND -Not Detected
5. Violator's degree of cooperation (including efforts to prevent or restore) recalcitrance: Mr. Nelms and
Mr. Whitley have been cooperative• efforts to clean up the discharged and ponded wastewater began
during the March 20, 2008 investigation and were completed by March 24, 2008.
6. Damage? Y/N If yes, include report from WRC: No
7. Mitigating Circumstances: None
8. Recommendations made to the owner/operator: Mr. Nelms was advised on March 20, 2008 to do the
following: 1) numn the wastewater from the drainage ditch into a tank and transfer the contents back
into the north lagoon (lagoon #1)• 2) Collect the ponded areas and pump this wastewater back into the
north lagoon (laizoon #1) and, 3) Seal the "washout" drain on the northern edge of the wheat field
with compacted soil or clay to prevent further runoff to the lower terraced fields.
9. Costs to the State for the enforcement procedures (Show Breakdown):
Total Staff Time (14 hours) $ 392.75
p Central Office $ 100.00
1 Travel Cost 38.29 miles x 4 a 00.445) $ 52.51
Laboratory Cost $ 65.05
TOTAL $ 610.31
10. Recommendations for further DWQ Action: Continue to focus on facility records and field
conditions during annual compliance inspections.
11. Other Comments: N/A
Section III: Assessment Factors required to be considered by G.S. 14313-282.1(b):
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: Animal waste has the potential to deplete dissolved oxygen in
the affected water bodv to a point which is harmful to aquatic life. Waste water also contains
nutrients which have the potential to spawn algal growth to the point which is harmful to aquatic life.
Surface waters --the drainage ditch --did receive wastewater.
2. The duration and gravity of the violation: The violations occurred March 18 through March 20, 2008.

The effect on ground or surface quantity or quality: The two northwest (terraced) fields served as a
vegetative filter, preventing wheat field runoff from entering the nearby Nahunta Swamp. The farm
drainage ditch was sloped such that wastewater was contained onsite until water was removed. One
waste sample was collected in an eastern area of the wheat field where ponding was observed. The
results are illustrated in the followin table:
able:
Sample
Sampling
Ammonia
TKN
Nitrates,
Phosphorus,
Location
Date
NH3 as N
(mg/L)
Nitrites
P (mg/L)
(mg/L)
(NO3, NOZ)
m
East end of
3/20/2008
390
420
ND
50
wheat field
(F-1)
ND -Not Detected
4. The cost of rectifying the damage: The farm managers could have spent far fewer hours being
preventative (monitoring the spray operations) than the time they spent cleaning up the area-48 to 72
hours. Ruts created by the excessive irrigation and farm equipment have damaged part of the wheat
crop.
5. The amount of money saved by noncompliance: Money is saved when better management skills are
implemented to improve overall management of the facility, environmentally and productively.
6. Whether the violation was committed willfully or intentional: Mr. Nelms and Mr. Whitley both have
an active Tvoe A operator's license. Althoueh it cannot be proven whether either of them was onsite
during the March 18, 2008 event, each is responsible for the consequence of the action. Therefore,
either: a) the decision to let the active violation occur, b) the decision to leave someone in charge
who was incapable of properly Meratine the system, or c) the decision to leave the spray gun running
unattended was willful
The prior record of the violator(s) in complying or failing to comply with programs over which the
Environmental Management Commission has regulatory authority: N & W Pig Farms has not been
cited for any Dermit violations prior to this event.
8. The cost to the State of the enforcement procedures:
Total Staff Time (14 hours)
Central Office
Travel Cost (38.29 miles x 4 @ 0.445)
Laboratory Cost
TOTAL
$ 392.75
$ 100.00
$ 52.51
$ 65.05
$ 610.31

STATE OF NORTH CAROLINA
l�
COUNTY OF WAYNE
IN THE MATTER OF
N & W Pig Farms
FOR VIOLATIONS OF SWINE WASTE
GENERAL PERMIT AWGI00000
PURSUANT TO NORTH CAROLINA
GENERAL STATUE 143-215.1
NORTH CAROLINA
DEPARTMENT OF ENVIRONMENT AND
NATURAL RESOURCES
File No. NOV-2008-PC-0225
FINDINGS AND DECISION
AND ASSESSMENTS 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:
FINDINGS OF FACT:
A. Mr. Julian Nelms and Mr. Harvey L. Whitley, Jr. own and operate N & W Pig Farms, a
permitted/certified swine animal feeding operation in Wayne County.
B. Mr. Nelms and Mr. Whitley were issued a Certificate of Coverage AWS960046 under State
General Permit AWG100000 on October 1, 2004, effective upon issuance, with an expiration
date of September 30, 2009.
C. Condition No. I. 1. of the "Performance Standards" of the State General Permit states in part
that "Any discharge of waste which reaches surface waters or wetlands is prohibited except
as otherwise provided in this permit. Waste shall not reach surface waters by runoff, drift,
manmade conveyance, direct application, direct discharge or through ditches not otherwise
classified as state waters."
D. Condition No. II. 1. of the "Operation and Maintenance Requirements" of the State General
Permit states that "The collection, treatment, and storage facilities, and the land application
equipment and fields shall be properly operated and maintained at all times."
E. Condition No. II. 4. of the "Operation and Maintenance Requirements" of the State General
Permit states that "Land application rates shall be in accordance with the CAWMP. In no
case shall land application rates exceed the agronomic rate of the nutrient of concern for the
receiving crop. In no case shall land application rates result in excessive ponding or any
runoff during any given application event".
F. Condition No. II. 16. of the "Operation and Maintenance Requirements" of the State General
Permit states in part that the "Operator in Charge (OIC) or a designated back-up OIC of a
Type A Animal Waste Management System shall inspect, or a person under the supervision

of an OIC or designated back-up OIC shall inspect, the land application site as often as
necessary to insure that the animal waste is land applied in accordance with the CAWMP"
G. Condition No. III. 13. of the "Monitoring and Reporting Requirements" of the State General
Permit requires in part 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
following: a) Any discharge to ditches, surface waters, or wetlands; d) Over applying waste
either in excess of the limits set out in the CAWMP or where runoff enters surface waters or
wetlands or; e) Failure of any component of the animal waste collection, treatment, storage
and land application system resulting in a discharge to surface waters or wetlands.
H. On March 20, 2008, The Division of Soil and Water Conservation conducted an annual
review and found that a discharge occurred into a drainage ditch at the N&W Pig Farms.
Also, visual evidence was found to indicate that the March 18, 2008 irrigation event caused
wastewater to pond in several places on a wheat field. The Division of Soil and Water
Conservation referred the discharge and ponding instances to DWQ. Once notified, DWQ
performed an onsite investigation at the facility to confirm the violations and to sample a
ponded area of the excessive irrigation. During the investigation, a facility records review
supported visual evidence that excess wastewater (no fewer than 88,451 gallons) was pumped
onto 2.47 acres of the wheat crop. Furthermore, wastewater runoff was seen on two lower
fields, northwest of the wheat field. Finally, the irrigation supply line was found lying
submerged in wastewater within the aforementioned drainage ditch; the supply line was
loosely connected at several fittings. No explanation was given by Mr. Nelms during the
March 20, 2008 DWQ investigation as to how the hydraulic overloading (35,810
gallons/acre) or discharge into the ditch occurred.
I. N&W Pig Farms have had no previous violations in their compliance history.
J. The cost to the State of the enforcement procedures in this matter totaled $610.31.
Based upon the above Findings of Facts, I make the following:
11. CONCLUSIONS OF LAW:
A. Mr. Julian Nelms and Mr. Harvey L. Whitley, Jr. are each 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. The above -cited discharge to surface waters violated Condition No. 1. 1. of the State General
Permit.
D. The above -cited failure to properly operate and maintain the land application equipment and
fields violated Condition No. 11. 1. of the State General Permit.
G. The above -cited failures to apply waste at land application rates in accordance with the
CAWMP and to avoid excessive ponding or runoff violated Condition No. 11. 4. of the State
General Permit.
2

F. The above -cited failure of the Operator In Charge (or their surrogate) to inspect the land
application site such that animal waste was applied in accordance with the CAWMP violated
Condition No. II. 16. of the State General Permit.
G. The above -cited failure to notify DWQ of a discharge violated Conditions No. 111. 13 a, d,
and e of the State General Permit.
H. Mr. Julian Nelms and Mr. Harvey L. Whitley, Jr. 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
that twenty-five thousand dollars ($25,000.00) per violation may be assessed against a person
who is required but fails to act in accordance with the terms, conditions, or requirements of a
permit required by G. S. 143-215.1.
I. The State's enforcement costs in this matter may be assessed against Mr. Julian Nelms and
Mr. Harvey L. Whitley, Jr., pursuant to G. S. 143-215.3(a)(9) and G. S. 14313-282.1(b)(8).
J. 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 Facts and Conclusions of Law, I make the following:
III. DECISION:
Accordingly, Mr. Julian Nelms and Mr. Harvey L. Whitley, Jr., owners of N & W Pig Farms, are
hereby assessed a civil penalty of:
For violating Condition No. I. 1. of the State General Permit for
discharging hog waste to a ditch that drains to surface waters without the
proper use of Best Management Practices and DWQ notification.
$ For violating Condition No. 11. 1. of the State General Permit by failing
to properly operate and maintain at all times the collection, treatment and
storage facilities, land application equipment, and Fields.
$ For violating Condition No. 11. 4. of the State General Permit by failing
to apply waste at a rate in accordance with the CAWMP. The facility did
not land apply such that excessive pending or runoff was avoided.
$ For violating Condition No. II. 16. of the State General Permit by the
Operator In Charge (or their surrogate) failing to inspect the land
application site such that animal waste was applied per the CAWMP.
$ For violating Condition No. III. 13. a. of the State General Permit by
failing to 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 a discharge to ditches, surface waters, or wetlands.
k

$ For violating Condition No. III. 13. d. of the State General Permit by
failing to 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 waste over -application. Waste over -application is
defined as that which is in excess of the CAWMP limits or where runoff
enters surface waters or wetlands.
For violating Condition No. III. 13. e. of the State General Permit by
failing to 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 failure of the land application system that lead to the discharge.
$ 610.31 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 quantity or quality;
(4) The cost of rectifying the damage;
(5) The amount of money save by noncompliance;
(6) Whether the violation was committed willfully or intentional;
(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.
(Date) Theodore L. Bush, Jr. Chief
Aquifer Protection Section
Division of Water Quality
M

Memorandum
To: Keith Larick, Animal Feeding Operations Pennitting and Compliance Unit Supervisor
Animal Feeding Operation Pennitting Compliance Unit
Through: David May, Water Quality Supervisor
Washington Regional Office
From: Mark E. Newsome, Environmental Engineer I
Washington Regional Office
Subject: Enforcement Package
N & W Pig Farms
Permit No. AWS960046
Wayne County
Date: April 9, 2008
Introduction:
N & W Pig Farms is owned and operated by Mr. Julian Nelms and Mr. Harvey L. Whitley, Jr. This facility,
located on Highway I I I South in Wayne County, began operation in 1994. The facility has the capacity to
raise 7,000 wean to feeder swine and the overall design for this facility is 210,000 steady state live weight.
Report:
On March 20, 2008 at 11:30 A.M., the North Carolina Division of Water Quality (DWQ) received an
initial report of wastewater discharge to a drainage ditch from Mr. Martin McLawhorn, Environmental
Specialist of the Division of Soil and Water Conservation. On March 20, 2008 Eric Newsome of the
DWQ investigated and determined that hydraulic overload occurred on a 2.47-acre pull of a wheat field
due to excessive spray irrigation. The extent of the overload caused wastewater to run onto two lower
terraces northwest of the wheat field. According to facility records, the north lagoon (#1) was pumped
down by 6" (approximately of 88,451 gallons) on March 18, 2008. According to Mr. Nelms, the north
lagoon solely supplied wastewater for the above -described event. Visual evidence of ponding was
consistent with the fact that applying 88,451 gallons would have exceeded the standard loading rate
suggested by the Waste Utilization Plan for this field (35,810 gallons/acre vs. 27,154 gallons/acre). In
addition, the March 20, 2008 DWQ investigation revealed that loose fittings in the irrigation supply line
discharged wastewater from this line into a farm drainage ditch. Although the waste was recovered
without it leaving the facility, it was estimated that 1,200 gallons of water were seen standing in the ditch
prior to clean up efforts beginning. No telephonic notification was made to the Washington Regional
Office within twenty-four (24) hours of becoming aware of the March 18, 2008 discharge; furthermore,
no explanation was given by Mr. Nelms on March 20, 2008 as to how the overload and discharge
occurred.
Please find a table with the sample results below.
The Finding and Decisions and Assessment Factors are attached for review.
5

Conclusion:
Mr. Julian Nelms and Mr. Harvey L. Whitley, Jr., owners and operators of N & W Pig Fanns, are in
violation of their permit and North Carolina General Statue 143-215.1(a) for discharging hog waste to surface
waters; failing to properly operate and maintain land application equipment and fields; failing to apply
wastewater such that pending and runoff were avoided, and; failing to notify DWQ of the non compliance
event.
Recommendations:
It is recommended that the appropriate civil penalties be assessed against this subject facility, N & W Pig
Farms, located in Wayne County, owned and operated by Mr. Julian Nelms and Mr. Harvey L. Whitley, Jr.
The Washington Regional Office recommends that penalties be assessed for the four violations described
in the Conclusion.
6

DIVISION OF WATER QUALITY
ANIMAL OPERATIONS
ENFORCEMENT CASE REPORT
ENFORCEMENT # NOV-2008-PC-0225
Section L• General Information
1. Facility Name: N & W Pig Farms
2. Facility or Permit No.: AWS960046
3. Parties named in assessment: Mr. Julian Nelms and Mr. Harvey L. Whitley, Jr.
4. (Mailing) Address: 601 East Main Street, Fremont, NC 27830
5. Telephone No.: 919-242-6327
6. Location of Facility: At the junction of Hwy 222 and Hwy I I I
7. Type of Operation: 7,000 Wean to Feeder
8. Registered Agent (if applicable): N/A
9. Registered Agent Address (if applicable): N/A
10. Date(s) of noted violations: March 20, 2008
11. Receiving Stream and Classification (if applicable): N/A
12. Regional Office: Washington Regional Office
13. Report Prepared By: M. Eric Newsome
Section II: Findings
Case Narrative: On March 20 2008 at 11:30 A.M. the North Carolina Division of Water Quality
(DWO) received an initial report of wastewater discharge to a drainage ditch from Mr. Martin
McLawhornEnvironmental Specialist of the Division of Soil and Water Conservation. On March
20, 2008 Eric Newsome of the DWO investigated and determined that hydraulic overload occurred on
a 2 47-acre pull of a wheat field due to excessive spray irrigation. The extent of the overload caused
wastewater to run onto two lower terraces northwest of the wheat field. According to facility records,
the north lagoon (#1) was pumped down by G' (approximately of 88,451 gallons) on March 18, 2008.
According to Mr. Nelms the north lagoon solely supplied wastewater for the above -described event.
Visual evidence of ponding was consistent with the fact that applying 88,451 gallons would have
exceeded the standard loadingrato suggested by the Waste Utilization Plan for this field (35,810
gallons/acre vs 27,154 gallons/acre) In addition the March 20 2008 DWO investigation revealed
that loose fittings in the irrigation supply line discharged wastewater from this line into a farm
drainage ditch. Although the waste was recovered without it leaving the facility, it was estimated that
1,200 gallons of water were seen standing in the ditch prior to clean up efforts beginning. No
telephonic notification was made to the Washington Regional Office within twenty-four (24) hours of
becoming aware of the March 18, 2008 discharge: furthermore, no explanation was given by Mr.
Nelms on March 20, 2008 as to how the overload and discharge occurred.
2. Farm and/or company compliance History: A database and file review indicates that no violations or
penalties have been assessed against this farm in the past.
3. Amount of Waste discharged (if applicable). 1,200 gallons into a farm drainage ditch.
4. Sample Results (if applicable) with locations of samples taken noted in relation to discharge point:
One sample was taken of the water that was ponded in the eastern edge of the wheat field for nitrogen
and phosphorus analyses. Lab results showed significant levels of ammonia (390 mg/L) and total

kieldahl nitrogen (420 mg/L) present. Also, the amount of total phosphorus found (50 m g/l-) was
elevated compared to wastewater results typically seen at other sprayfield operations (12 mg/L).
Sample
Sampling Date
Ammonia
TKN
Nitrates,
Phosphorus,
Location
NH3 as N
(mg/L)
Nitrites
P (mg/L)
(mg[L)
(NO3, NOz)
m /L
East end of
3/20/2008
390
420
ND
50
wheat field
(F-1)
ND -Not Detected
5. Violator's degree of cooperation (including efforts to prevent or restore) recalcitrance: Mr. Nelms and
Mr. Whitley have been cooperative; efforts to clean up the dischar eg d and ponded wastewater bes:an
during the March 20, 2008 investigation and were completed by March 24, 2008.
6. Damage? Y/N If yes, include report from WRC: No
7. Mitigating Circumstances: None
8. Recommendations made to the owner/operator: Mr. Nelms was advised on March 20, 2008 to do the
following: 1) Dump the wastewater from the drainage ditch into a tank and transfer the contents back
into the north lagoon (lagoon #1); 2) Collect the ponded areas and pump this wastewater back into the
north lagoon (lagoon #1), and; 3) Seal the "washout" drain on the northern edge of the wheat field
with compacted soil or clay to prevent further runoff to the lower terraced fields.
9. Costs to the State for the enforcement procedures (Show Breakdown):
Total Staff Time (14 hours)
$ 392.75
Central Office
$ 100.00
Travel Cost (38.29 miles x 4 @ 0.445)
$ 52.51
Laboratory Cost
$ 65.05
TOTAL
$ 610.31
10. Recommendations for further DWQ Action: Continue to focus on facility records and field
conditions during annual compliance inspections.
11. Other Comments: N/A
Section III: Assessment Factors required to be considered by G.S. 14313-282.1(b):
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: Animal waste has the potential to deplete dissolved oxygen in
the affected water bodv to a point which is harmful to aouatic life. Waste water also contains
nutrients which have the potential to spawn algal growth to the point which is harmful to aquatic life.
Surface waters --the drainage ditch --did receive wastewater.
2. The duration and gravity of the violation: The violations occurred March 18 through March 20, 2008.

3. The effect on ground or surface quantity or quality: The two northwest (terraced) fields served as a
vegetative filter, preventing wheat field runoff from entering the nearby Nahunta Swamp. The farm
drainage ditch was sloped such that wastewater was contained onsite until water was removed. One
waste sample was collected in an eastern area of the wheat field where ponding was observed. The
results are illustrated in the followingtable:
able:
Sample
Sampling
Ammonia
TKN
Nitrates,
Phosphorus,
Location
Date
NH3 as N
(mg/L)
Nitrites
P (mg/L)
(mg/L)
(NO,, NO2)
m /L
East end of
3/20/2008
390
420
ND
50
wheat field
(F-1)
ND -Not Detected
4. The cost of rectifying the damage: The farm managers could have spent far fewer hours being
preventative (monitoringthe he spray operations) than the time they spent cleaning up the area--48 to 72
hours. Ruts created by the excessive irrigation and farm equipment have damaged part of the wheat
crop.
5. The amount of money saved by noncompliance: Money is saved when better management skills are
implemented to improve overall management of the facility, environmentally and productively.
6. Whether the violation was committed willfully or intentional: Mr. Nelms and Mr. Whitley both have
an active Tvpe A operator's license. Although it cannot be proven whether either of them was onsite
during the March 18, 2008 event, each is responsible for the consequence of the action. Therefore,
either: a) the decision to let the active violation occur, b) the decision to leave someone in charge
who was incanable of properly operating the system. or c) the decision to leave the sorav gun running
unattended was willful.
7. The prior record of the violator(s) in complying or failing to comply with programs over which the
Environmental Management Commission has regulatory authority: N & W Pig Farms has not been
cited for any permit violations prior to this event.
S. The cost to the State of the enforcement procedures:
Total Staff Time (14 hours)
$ 392.75
Central Office
$ 100.00
Travel Cost (38.29 miles x 4 @ 0.445)
$ 52.51
Laboratory Cost
$ 65.05
TOTAL
$ 610.31

-7 t i
STATE OF NORTH CARC / NORTH CAROLINA
A'OlSP as S/ DEPARTMENT OF ENVIRONMENT AND
C�a NATURAL RESOURCES
COUNTY OF WAYNE
o. NOV-2008-1'C-0225
IN THE MATTER OF
N & W Pig Farms
FINDINGS AND DECISION
i AND ASSESSMENTS OF
FOR VIOLATIONS OF SW
NPDES PERMIT NCA200000 !+,,; '�i K;���y,� ) CIVIL PENALTIES
PURSUANT TO NORTH CAR iI
GENERAL STATUE 143-215.1
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:
FINDINGS OF FACT:
A. Mr. Julian Nelms and Mr. Harvey L. Whitley, Jr. own and operate N & W Pig Farms, a
permitted/certified swine animal feeding operation in Wayne County.
B. Mr. Nelms and Mr. Whitley were issued a Certificate of Coverage AWS960046 under State
General Permit AWG100000 on October 1, 2004, effective upon issuance, with an expiration
date of September 30, 2009. /1
C. Condition No. I. 1. of the "Performance Standards" of the Gcnerml-?dP449 Permit states in
part that "Any discharge of waste which reaches surface waters or wetlands is prohibited
except as otherwise provided in this permit. Waste shall not reach surface waters by runoff,
drift, manmade conveyance, direct application, direct discharge or through ditches not
otherwise classified as state waters."
D. Condition No. II. 1. of the "Operation and Maintenance Requirements" of the General
NPDES Permit states that "The collection, treatment, and storage facilities, and the land
application equipment and fields shall be properly operated and maintained at all times."
E. Condition No. II. 4. of the "Operation and Maintenance Requirements" of the General
NPDES Permit states that "Land application rates shall be in accordance with the CAWMP.
In no case shall land application rates exceed the agronomic rate of the nutrient of concern for
the receiving crop. In no case shall land application rates result in excessive ponding or any
runoff during any given application event".
F. Condition No. IL 16. of the "Operation and Maintenance Requirements" of the General
NPDES Permit states in part that the "Operator in Charge (OIC) or a designated back-up OIC
of a Type A Animal Waste Management System shall inspect, or a person under the

supervision of an OIC or designated back-up OIC shall inspect, the land application site as
often as necessary to insure that the animal waste is land applied in accordance with the
CAWMP".
G. Condition No. III. 13. of the "Monitoring and Reporting Requirements" of the General
NPDES Permit requires in part that the permittee shall report by telephone to the appropriate
Regional Office as soon as possible, but in no case m than 24 hours following first
knowledge of the following: a) Any discharge to_. tc ; surface waters, or wetlands; d)
Over applying waste either in excess of the 1 1 6 m the CAWMP or where runoff
enters surface waters or wetlands or; e) Fa ui o ny `o onent of the animal waste
collection, treatment, storage and la h tto�f yste sulting in a discharge to surface
waters or wetlands.
H. On March 20, 2008, T 11-
v�syto'n" r il' 6d Water Conservation conducted an annual
review and found ac'':'dt r' cc }` d into a drainage ditch at the N&W Pig Farms.
Also, visual eviden e>, fo et indicate that the March 18, 2008 irrigation event caused
wastewater to pond i 'ls ra hpI ces on a wheat field. The Division of Soil and Water
Conservation referred "err.'scharge and ponding instances to DWQ. Once notified, DWQ
performed an onsite investigation at the facility to confirm the violations and to sample a
ponded area of the excessive irrigation. During the investigation, a facility records review
supported visual evidence that excess wastewater (no fewer than 88,451 gallons) was pumped
onto 2.47 acres of the wheat crop. Furthermore, wastewater runoff was seen on two lower
fields, northwest of the wheat field. Finally, the irrigation supply line was found lying
submerged in wastewater within the aforementioned drainage ditch; the supply line was
loosely connected at several fittings. No explanation was given by Mr. Nelms during the
March 20, 2008 DWQ investigation as to how the hydraulic overloading (35,810
gallons/acre) or discharge into the ditch occurred.
I. N&W Pig Farms have had no previous violations in their compliance history.
J. The cost to the State of the enforcement procedures in this matter totaled $610.31.
Based upon the above Findings of Facts, I make the following:
II. CONCLUSIONS OF LAW:
A. Mr. Julian Nelms and Mr. Harvey L. Whitley, Jr. are each 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. The above -cited discharge to surface waters violated Condition No. I. 1. of the General
NPDES Permit.
D. The above -cited failure to properly operate and maintain the land application equipment and
fields violated Condition No. 11. 1. of the General NPDES Permit.
E. The above -cited failures to apply waste at land application rates in accordance with the
CAWMP and to avoid excessive ponding or runoff violated Condition No. 11. 4. of the
General NPDES Permit.
2

F. The above -cited failure of the Operator In Charge (or their surrogate) to inspect the land
application site such that animal waste was applied in accordance with the CAWMP violated
Condition No. IL 16. of the General NPDES Permit.
G. The above -cited failure to notify DWQ of a discharge violated Conditions No. 111. 13 a, d,
and e of the General NPDES Permit.
H. Mr. Julian Nelms and Mr. Harvey L. Whitley, Jr. aya:c'assessed civil penalties in this
matter pursuant to G. S. 143-215.6A(a)(2), c vt s that a civil penalty of not more
that twenty-five thousand dollars ($25,00 00 p vto ° fi may be assessed against a person
who is required but fails to act �'n ac � nc w> e to i ; conditions, or requirements of a
permit required by G. S. 143 21
I. The State's enforceme c ts,t at r' ay be assessed against Mr. Julian Nelms and
Mr. Harvey L. W e'rll r r I"" t t i '. S. 143-215.3(a)(9) and G. S. 143B-282.1(b)(8).
Y Yc1 N. d.
J. The Chief of the Aq feW.'i6 ec>'ion Section, Division of Water Quality, pursuant to
delegation provided b °,n, ecretary 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 Facts and Conclusions of Law, I make the following:
III. DECISION:
Accordingly, Mr. Julian Nelms and Mr. Harvey L. Whitley, Jr., owners of N & W Pig Farms, are
hereby assessed a civil penalty of:
$ For violating Condition No. I. 1. of the General NPDES Permit for
discharging hog waste to a ditch that drains to surface waters without the
proper use of Best Management Practices and DWQ notification.
For violating Condition No. 11. 1. of the General NPDES Permit by
failing to properly operate and maintain at all times the collection,
treatment and storage facilities, land application equipment, and fields.
For violating Condition No. H. 4. of the General NPDES Permit by
failing to apply waste at a rate in accordance with the CAWMP. The
facility did not land apply such that excessive ponding or runoff was
avoided.
$ For violating Condition No. II. 16. of the General NPDES Permit by the
Operator In Charge (or their surrogate) failing to inspect the land
application site such that animal waste was applied per the CAWMP.
$ For violating Condition No. III. 13. a. of the General NPDES Permit by
failing to 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 a discharge to ditches, surface waters, or wetlands.
3

For violating Condition No. III. 13. d. of the General NPDES Permit by
failing to 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 waste over -application. Waste over -application is
defined as that which is in excess of the CAWMP limits or where runoff
enters surface waters or wetlands.
For violating Condition No.ii1� `; ''. of the General NPDES Permit by
failing to report by tele n �,,,'�u,'�e ppropriate Regional Office as soon
as possible, but in no as` - } e th''n 4 hours following first knowledge
of the failure ofAjfC,, n ;ap'. ", ation tem that lead to the discharge.
UE
As required by G. S. 143-2 �5; ' c), in determining the amount of the penalty I have considered
the factors listed in G. S. 14 B-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 quantity or quality;
(4) The cost of rectifying the damage;
(5) The amount of money save by noncompliance;
(6) Whether the violation was committed willfully or intentional;
(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.
(Date) Theodore L. Bush, Jr. Chief
Aquifer Protection Section
Division of Water Quality
4

Memorandum
To: Keith Larick, Animal Feeding Operations Permitting and Compliance Unit Supervisor
Animal Feeding Operation Permitting Compliance Unit
Through:
From:
Subject:
Date:
Introduction:
David May, Water Quality Supervisor
Washington Regional Office
Mark E. Newsome, E
Washington Regional
Enforcement
N&WPigF
Permit r� , ,
Wavn &&ial,
April 9,
N & W Pig Farms is owned and operated by Mr. Julian Nelms and Mr. Harvey L. Whitley, Jr. This facility,
located on Highway I 1 South in Wayne County, began operation in 1994. The facility has the capacity to
raise 7,000 wean to feeder swine and the overall design for this facility is 210,000 steady state live weight.
Report:
On March 20, 2008 at 11:30 A.M., the North Carolina Division of Water Quality (DWQ) received an
initial report of wastewater discharge to a drainage ditch from Mr. Martin McLawhorn, Environmental
Specialist of the Division of Soil and Water Conservation. On March 20, 2008 Eric Newsome of the
DWQ investigated'and determined that hydraulic overload occurred on a 2.47-acre pull of a wheat field
due to excessive spray irrigation. The extent of the overload caused wastewater to run onto two lower
terraces northwest of the wheat field. According to facility records, the north lagoon (#1) was pumped
down by 6" (approximately of 88,451 gallons) on March 18, 2008. According to Mr. Nelms, the north
lagoon solely supplied wastewater for the above -described event. Visual evidence of ponding was
consistent with the fact that applying 88,451 gallons would have exceeded the standard loading rate
suggested by the Waste Utilization Plan for this field (35,810 gallons/acre vs. 27,154 gallons/acre). In
addition, the March 20, 2008 DWQ investigation revealed that loose fittings in the irrigation supply line
discharged wastewater from this line into a farm drainage ditch. Although the waste was recovered
without it leaving the facility, it was estimated that 1,200 gallons of water were seen standing in the ditch
prior to clean up efforts beginning. No telephonic notification was made to the Washington Regional
Office within twenty-four (24) hours of becoming aware of the March 18, 2008 discharge; furthermore,
no explanation was given by Mr. Nelms on March 20, 2008 as to how the overload and discharge
occurred.
Please find a table with the sample results below.
The Finding and Decisions and Assessment Factors are attached for review.
5

Conclusion:
Mr. Julian Nelms and Mr. Harvey L. Whitley, Jr., owners and operators of N & W Pig Farms, are in
violation of their pennit and North Carolina General Statue 143-215.1(a) for discharging hog waste to surface
waters; failing to properly operate and maintain land application equipment and fields; failing to apply
wastewater such that ponding and runoff were avoided, and; failing to notify DWQ of the non compliance
event.
Recommendations:
It is recommended that the appropriate civil penaltie e a3�sesys�d gait ' f t is subject facility, N & W Pig
Farms, located in Wayne County, owned and oper ec#q,, ,1J 'liar Ne Vim and Mr. Harvey L. Whitley, Jr.
The Washington Regional Office recommefct?tlyat $4000 be assessed for the discharge, $500 be assessed for
the high freeboard level in the structural zone in the middle lagoon, $500 for ponded wastewater between the
solids trap and middle lagoon, and $500 for failing to notify DWQ of the freeboard violations and $500 for
failing to notify DWQ of the discharge l \ 1:. ,V',
,

DIVISION OF WATER QUALITY
ANIMAL OPERATIONS
ENFORCEMENT CASE REPORT
ENFORCEMENT # NOV-2008-PC-0225
Section 1: General Information
1. Facility Name: N & W Pi Fg arms
2. Facility or Permit No.: AWS960046
3. Parties named in assessment: Mr. Ju
4. (Mailing) Address: 601 East Main "e&!'Fre`
5. Telephone No.: 919-242-6327`�;1
6. Location of Facility: At t ii tt " fF��
7. Type of Operation: 7 000 ';e ~ `' e
8. Registered Agent (if applica)'
9. Registered Agent Address if able : N/A
g g ( � )
10. Date(s) of noted violations: March 20, 2008
11. Receiving Stream and Classification (if applicable): N/A
12. Regional Office: Washington Regional Office
13. Report Prepared By: M. Eric Newsome
Section 11: Findings
Case Narrative: On March 20 2008 at 11:30 A.M., the North Carolina Division of Water Quality
(DWQ) received an initial report of wastewater discharge to a drainage ditch from Mr. Martin
McLawhorn, Environmental Specialist of the Division of Soil and Water Conservation. On March
20 2008 Eric Newsome of the DWQ investigated and determined that hydraulic overload occurred on
a 2 47-acre pull of a wheat field due to excessive spray irrigation. The extent of the overload caused
wastewater to run onto two lower terraces northwest of the wheat field. According to facility records,
the north lagoon (#1) was pumped down by 6" (approximately of 88,451 gallons) on March 18, 2008.
According to Mr. Nelms, the north lagoon solely supplied wastewater for the above -described event.
Visual evidence of pending was consistent with the fact that applying 88,451 gallons would have
exceeded the standard loading rate suggested by the Waste Utilization Plan for this field (35,810
gallons/acre vs 27,154 gallons/acre) In addition, the March 20, 2008 DWQ investigation revealed
that loose fittings in the irrigation supply line discharged wastewater from this line into a farm
drainage ditch Although the waste was recovered without it leaving the facility, it was estimated that
1,200 gallons of water were seen standing in the ditch for to clean up efforts beginning. No
telephonic notification was made to the Washington Regional Office within twenty-four (24) hours of
becoming aware of the March 18, 2008 discharge; furthermore, no explanation was given by Mr.
Nelms on March 20, 2008 as to how the overload and discharge occurred.
2. Farm and/or company compliance History: A database and file review indicates that no violations or
penalties have been assessed against this farm in the past.
3. Amount of Waste discharged (if applicable). 1,200 gallons into a farm drainage ditch.
4. Sample Results (if applicable) with locations of samples taken noted in relation to discharge point:
One sample was taken of the water that was ponded in the eastern edge of the wheat field for nitrogen
and phosphorus analyses. Lab results showed significant levels of ammonia (390 mg/L) and total

5
6
7
kieldahl nitrogen (420 mg/L) present. Also the amount of total phosphorus found (50 mg/L) was
elevated compared to wastewater results typically seen at other sprayfield operations 0 2 mg/L).
Sample
Sampling Date
Ammonia
TKN
Nitrates,
Phosphorus,
Location
NH3 as N
(mg/L)
Nitrites
P (mg/L)
(mg/L)
(NO3, NOZ)
n J/L
East end of
3/20/2008
390
420
"'
50
wheat field
(F-1)
ND -Not Detected
Violator's degree of
Damage? Y/N If yes, include report from WRC: No
Mitigating Circumstances: None
W'
prevent or restore) recalcitrance: Mr. Nelms and
8. Recommendations made to the owner/operator: Mr. Nelms was advised on March 20, 2008 to do the
followine: 1) Dumn the wastewater from the drainage ditch into a tank and transfer the contents back
into the north lagoon (lagoon #02) Collect the ponded areas and pump this wastewater back into the
north lagoon (lagoon 41) and• 3) Seal the "washout" drain on the northern edge of the wheat field
with compacted soil or clay to prevent further runoff to the lower terraced fields.
9. Costs to the State for the enforcement procedures (Show Breakdown):
Total Staff Time (14 hours)
$ 392.75
Central Office
$ 100.00
Travel Cost (38.29 miles x 4 @ 0.445)
$ 52.51
Laboratory Cost
$ 65.05
TOTAL
$ 610.31
10. Recommendations for further DWQ Action: Continue to focus on facility records and field
conditions during annual compliance inspections.
11. Other Comments: N/A
Section III: Assessment Factors required to be considered by G.S. 143B-282.I(b):
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: Animal waste has the potential to deplete dissolved oxygen in
the affected water bodv to a Doint which is harmful to aquatic life. Waste water also contains
nutrients which have the potential to spawn algal growth to the point which is harmful to aquatic life
Surface waters --the drainage ditch --did receive wastewater.
2. The duration and gravity of the violation: The violations occurred March 18 through March 20, 2008.
0

3. The effect on ground or surface quantity or quality: The two northwest (terraced) fields served as a
vegetative filter, preventing wheat field runoff from entering the nearby Nahunta Swamp. The farm
drainage ditch was sloped such that wastewater was contained onsite until water was removed. One
waste sample was collected in an eastern area of the wheat field where ponding was observed. The
results are illustrated in the following table:
Sample
Sampling
Ammonia
TKN
Nitrates,
Phosphorus,
Location
Date
NH3 as N
(n L)
itrites
P (mg/L)
( g/)
NOS, NOz)
East end of
3/20/2008
390 y;r;,
2 '�'�ar;;'i'',;�°
50
wheat field
(F-1)
�
ND -Not Detected
4. The cost of rectifying the
preventative (monitoringthe he spray operations) than the time they spent cleaning up the area--48 to 72
hours. Ruts created by the excessive irrigation and farm equipment have damaged part of the wheat
crop.
5. The amount of money saved by noncompliance: Money is saved when better management skills are
implemented to improve overall management of the facility, environmentallyproductively.
6. Whether the violation was committed willfully or intentional: Mr. Nelms and Mr. Whitley both have
an active Tvoe A operator's license. Althoueh it cannot be proven whether either of them was onsite
during the March 18 2008 event each is responsible for the consequence of the action. Therefore,
either: a) the decision to let the active violation occur, or b) the decision to leave someone in charkte
who was incapable of properly operatingthe he system was willful.
7. The prior record of the violator(s) in complying or failing to comply with programs over which the
Environmental Management Commission has regulatory authority: N & W Pig Farms has not been
cited for any permit violations prior to this event.
8. The cost to the State of the enforcement procedures:
Total Staff Time (14 hours) $ 392.75
Central Office $ 100.00
Travel Cost (38.29 miles x 4 @ 0.445) $ 52.51
Laboratory Cost $ 65.05
TOTAL $ 610.31

x
STATE OF NORTH CAROLINA NORTH CAROLINA
DE13AIZ ' T OF ENVIRONMENT AND
WN - RAL RESOURCES
COUNTY OF PITT
Fi oN 2007-PC-0521
IN THE MATTER OF a
RANDY RIGGS �=
FINDINGS AND DECISION
FOR VIOLATIONS OF _ "� =- ) AND ASSESSMENTS OF
NPDES PERMIT NCA20 0 , = ) CIVIL PENALTIES
PURSUANT TO NORTH C A )
GENERAL STATUE 143-2
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, 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. Randy Riggs owns and operates Sand Ridge Farms, a permitted/certified swine animal
feeding operation in Craven County.
B. Randy Riggs was issued Certificate of Coverage NCA225051 under NPDES Permit
NCA200000 for Sand Ridge Farm on April S, 2005, effective upon issuance, with an
expiration date of July 1, 2007. Randy Riggs was issued a Certificate of Coverage
AWS250051 under State General Permit AWG100000 on July 1, 2007, effective upon
issuance, with an expiration date of September 9, 2009.
C. Condition No. 1. 1. of the "Performance Standards" of the General NPDES Permit states in
part that "Any discharge of waste which reaches surface waters or wetlands is prohibited
except as otherwise provided in this permit. Waste shall not reach surface waters by runoff,
drift, manmade conveyance, direct application, direct discharge or through ditches not
otherwise classified as State waters. Any discharge or application of waste to a ditch that
drains to surface waters or wetlands is prohibited except as follows: (a) discharges from the
ditches are controlled by best management practices (BMPs) designed in accordance with
NRCS standards; (b) the BMPs have been submitted to and approved by the Division; (c) the
BMPs were implemented as designed to prevent a discharge to surface waters or wetlands;
(d) the waste was removed immediately from the ditch upon discovery; and (e) the event was
documented and reported in accordance with Condition III.1 1. of this Permit. Nothing in this
exception shall excuse a discharge to surface waters or wetlands except as may result because
of rainfall from a storm event more severe than the 25-year, 24-hour storm.
D. On March 13, 2007, the Division of Water Quality received a complaint that the Sand Ridge
Facility (#25-51) was irrigating over ditches and discharging to waters of the State. "The
source of the complaint provided DWQ with aerial pictures showing irrigation over a ditch.

II.
The drainage features were designed to be vegetated waterways, however, the drainage
features did not comply with design standards. DWQ visited the facility on March 13, 2007.
Although irrigation was not occurring at the time, evidence of recent irrigation events was
present as the fields were wet and wastewater was puddled in areas of the drainage system
(ditching). Based on spray patterns of irrigation nozzles o Ced adjacent to the drainage
systems at the time of inspection, wastewater was ap"1,ie - ver the drainage feature
(ditching). Samples collected from the ditch n arc R �s 7 confirmed the presence of
wastewater within the ditch. /\
E. Best Management Practices red -cdn%ro "s a , ' �.om- ` ditches had not been
submitted to and aooroxed h twt i
F. The drainage/fie-twork e: "ll ' Ph application area drains to surface waters or
wetlands.
G. Mr. Riggs doesTi Lx)y -Permit for the above -described activity.
H. The cost to the St" e.o he enforcement procedures in this matter totaled $529.00.
Based upon the above Findings of Facts, I make the following:
CONCLUSIONS OF LAW:
A. Randy Riggs is a "person" within the meaning of G. S. 143-215.6A pursuant to G. S. 143-
212(4).
B. Wastewater was applied to a ditch violating Condition No. I. 1. of the General NPDES
Permit.
C. Mr. Randy Riggs 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 act in accordance with the terms, conditions, or requirements of a permit required by G.S.
143-215.1.
D. The State's enforcement costs in this matter may be assessed against Mr. Randy Riggs
pursuant to G. S. 143-215.3(a)(9) and G. S. 143B-282.I(b)(8).
E. 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 Facts and Conclusions of Law, I make the following:
DECISION:
Accordingly, Mr. Randy Riggs, owner of Sand Ridge Farms, is hereby assessed a civil penalty of:
7

For violating Condition No. I. 1. of the General NPDES Permit by
applying wastewater to a ditch without a permit as required by G.S. 143-
215.1.
TOTAL CNIL PENALTY
Enforcement costs
TOTAL
As required by G. S. 143
the factors listed ia--6, S.
...+....ter
g the -a " nt of the penalty I have considered
(1) The degree a",' t i n?;. 1 . >fa'l resources of the State, to the public health, or to
private proper -resul ' fr— o tion;
(2) The duration and a - heiolation;
(3) The effect on gr " `ti' ace quantity or quality;
(4) The cost of rectifyi `" e damage;
(5) The amount of money save by noncompliance;
(6) Whether the violation was committed willfully or intentional;
(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.
(Date) Theodore L. Bush, Jr. Chief
'Aquifer Protection Section
Division of Water Quality
3

Memorandum
To:
Todd Bennett, Animal Feeding Operations Permitting and Compliance Unit Supervisor
Animal Feeding Operation Permitting Compliance Unit
Through:
David May, Water Quality Supervisor
Washington Regional Office
From:
Megan H. Stilley, Envir n yet al ci list
Washington Regional A c
Subject:
Enforcen Pac a ,
Sand Ridm "^ m
Date:
Introduction:
Sand Ridge Farms is owned and operated by Mr. Randy Riggs. This facility, located at 1690 Gray Road in
northeast Craven County, began operation in 2006. The facility has the capacity to raise 2993 Farrow to Wean
swine and the overall design for this facility is 1,295,969 steady state live weight.
Report:
On March 13, 2007, the Division of Water Quality received a complaint that the Sand Ridge Facility (#25-51)
was irrigating over a ditch and discharging to waters of the State. The source of the complaint provided DWQ
with aerial pictures showing irrigation over a ditch. The ditch was designed to be a vegetated waterway, but
failed to meet design standards to be considered such. DWQ visited the facility on March 13, 2007 and found
no signs of discharge and irrigation was not occurring. DWQ did note that the designed vegetated waterway
lacked vegetation. DWQ returned to the facility on March J4, 2007 for further investigation. The water in the
ditches had the appearance of rainwater, but DWQ pulled samples to determine if there was any sign of
wastewater. DWQ received another complaint about the facility discharging by means of irrigation on !larch
16, 2007. DWQ conducted another site visit and took an additional round of samples. Irrigation activities
were not documented on March 16, 2007. Samples collected on March 16, 2007 were taken immediately
following and during a precipitation event. Samples collected March 14, 2007 indicate the presence of
wastewater in the subject ditch.
Please find a table with the sample results below.
The Finding and Decisions and Assessment Factors are attached for review.
Conclusion:
Mr. Randy Riggs, owner and operator of Sand Ridge Faris, is in violation of pennit and North Carolina
General Statue 143-215.1(a) for discharging hog waste to waters of the State.
Recommendations:
It is recommended that the appropriate civil penalties be assessed against this subject facility, Sand Ridge
Faris, located in Craven County, owned and operated by Mr. Randy Riggs. The Washington Regional Office
recommends that a penalty be assessed for the application of wastewater to a ditch.
4

DIVISION OF WATER QUALITY
ANIMAL OPERATIONS
ENFORCEMENT CASE REPORT
ENFORCEMENT # NOV-2007- P 1
Section I: General Information
0 1. FacilityName: Sand Ridge Farms
2. Facility or Permit No.: NCA22 OS
3. Party named in assessment: an ` `s
4. Address: 1116 Lee's)2havel
5. Telephone No.: 252 2 " '9. 5 _~
6. Location of Facility: cl raw cl» w. � rave
7. Type of Operation: 2 arr o ea ="
8. Registered Agent (if appli a e
9. Registered Agent Addre ti. rq able): N/A
10. Date(s) of noted violations rch 13, 2007
11. Receiving Stream and Classification (if applicable): NA
12. Regional Office: Washington Regional Office
13. Report Prepared By: Megan H. Stilley
Section II: Findings
Case Narrative: On March 13. 2007. the Division of Water Oualitv received a complaint that the
Sand Ridge Facility (#25-51) was irrigating over a ditch and dischargirug to waters of the State. The
source of the complaint provided DWO with aerial pictures showing irrigation over a ditch. The ditch
was designed to be a vegetated waterway, but failed to meet design standards to be considered such.
DWO visited the facility on March 13 2007 and found no signs of discharge and irrigation was not
occurring. DWO did note that the desi ng ed vegetated waterway lacked vegetation. DWO returned to
the facility on March 14, 2007 for further investigation. The water in the ditches had the appearance
of rainwater, but DWO pulled samples to determine if there was any sign of wastewater. Sample
results did not indicate a discharge occurred. DWO received another complaint about the facility
discharging by means of irrigation on March 16, 2007. DWO conducted another site visit and took an
additional round of samples. Irrigation activities were not documented on March 16, 2007. Samples
collected on March 16, 2007 were collected immediately following and during a precipitation event.
Sample results from the initial sampling event did confirm the presence of wastewater within a ditch.
The interior drainage system at the farm was not classified as "waters of the State" during subsequent
facility insuections. Irrigation nozzles were located adjacent to the drainage system and the sprav
attern covered the drainage feature
2. Farm and/or company compliance History: A database and file review does not indicate that '
penalties have been assessed against this farm in the past. Note that the facility is newly constructed
and began operation in 2006.
3. Amount of Waste discharged (if applicable). The volume of hog waste irrigated into the spray field
drainage feature on March 13 and 14, 2007.
4. Sample Results (if applicable) with locations of samples taken noted in relation to discharge point:
The samples did show signs of significant levels of wastewater at the point of discharte and
downstream. The results did show that the samples had lower levels of contamination as the

ditch showed results consistent with wastewater (FC 2,000,000, NH3 94, TKN 130). Samples
collected from either end of the subject ditch did not indicate a dischar e. V
h ✓ ✓
Sample ID
Date
Fecal
BOD
NH3 ==
NO2+NO3
Phosphorus
Coliform
m /L
AWL '•
m l/L
m /L
Downstream
3/16/07
4,800
2
' '
1.7
.33
Furthest
3/14/07
Downstream (F-1
_
,
"' r5
r6
BDL
.18
DS)
W4.9
F3/F4
3/16/07
5, M
2. w:-
1
.54
b/w riser and road
i
M
F-4 Road Ditch
7 "'
=...7
1.1
2.2
BDL
.17
F3 ditch before riser
1
8.4
11
8.6
.45
WIN-:
"
Ditch F-3
3/1 ,
" r(1 0,60
94
130
BDL
9.3
Puddle F-3
3/14 79
1
4.3
.06
1.6
BDL
26
Woods B
3/14/07
200
2.9
BDL
.61
BDL
.06
5. Violator's degree of cooperation (including efforts to prevent or restore) recalcitrance: Mr. Riggs ha
been very cooperative and has done evervthing DWO has asked to alleviate the problem. The facilit,
C
7
9. Costs to the State for the enforcement procedures (Show Breakdown):
Total Staff Time (14 hours)
�/`Central Office
1✓ ,l Aravel Cost (17 miles x 3 @ 0.445) 10;2 1
Laboratory Cost
TOTAL
Ih s�\
$ 3911.00 \
$ 100.00
�23 Afl •Z ="rips
44064W—
$ 529.00 b
�z x 3-9'^: x o • YYf
10. Recommendations for further DWQ Action: Conduct annual compliance inspections and a follow-up
inspection.
11. Other Comments: N/A
t Section III: Assessment Factors required to be considered by G.S. 14313-282.1(b):
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: Animal waste has the potential to deplete dissolved oxygen in
�aQd
has changed irrigation patterns from 360 to 180 degrees to prevent application and runoff into interior
drainage features. Mr. Riggs has recently spent $18,000 in earthmoving activities to help fix the
drainage problems at the facility. The facility is also taking efforts to get their slam gates Flashboard
risers, and Best Management Practices certified by DWQ.
Damage? Y/N If yes, include report from WRC: No
Mitigating Circumstances: None
Recommendations made to the owner/operator: Mr. Riggs was advised to do the following: 1) make
certain risers rotate 180 degrees instead of 360 degrees 2) establish vegetation in waterways, and 3)
use slam gates durinjz irrigation events to prevent any discharge to water of the State.
rwMnd

the affected water body to a point which is harmful to aquatic life. Waste water also contains
nutrients which have the potential to spawn algal growth to the point which is harmful to aquatic life.
Sample results do not indicate a discharge to surface waters for the March 13, 2007 event.
2. The duration and gravity of the violation:
3. The effect on ground or surface quantity or quality:
illustrated in the followingtable:
able:
Sample ID
Date
ec "lam `*;;'w
NO2+NO3
Phosphorus
m / �
/L
m /L
m /L
Downstream
;_ 7
8 =. »
. w.
CE
1.2
29
1.7
.33
Furthest
Downstream (F-1
4.5
5.6
BDL
18
DS)--;-
F3/F4
3/1
=5 0
12
2.8
4.9
1
.54
b/w riser and road
y c
F-4 Road Ditch
3/14/0
220
3.7
1.1
2.2
BDL
.17
F3 ditch before riser
3/16/07
18,000
14
8.4
11
8.6
.45
Ditch F-3
3/14/07
2,000,000
94
130
BDL
9.3
Puddle F-3
3/14/07
1
4.3
.06
1.6
BDL
.26
Woods B
3/14/07
200
2.9
BDL
.61
BDL
.06
4. The cost of rectifying the damage: The facility could have been more aware of what constitutes a
vegetated waterway and not irrigated over a drainage feature considered a ditch or an eroded
vegetated waterway lacking vegetation.
5. The amount of money saved by noncompliance: Money is saved when better management skills are
implemented to improve overall management of the facility, environmentally and productive],/.
Whether the violation was committed willfully or intentional: No, Mr. Riggs was not aware that the
facility could not Dum0 over the drainage feature. The develooer of the irrigation design created a
vegetated waterway and it failed. The facility was aware that the drainage feature lacked the
appropriate vegetation. Mr. Riggs was under the impression that irrigation could occur over a
vegetated waterway. However, the drainage system is classified as a ditch, since it doesn't meet
design standards for a vegetated waterway. The subject irrigation event was reportedly the first that
occurred in the field containing the ditch
The prior record of the violator in complying or failing to comply with programs over which the
Environmental Management Commission has regulatory authority: Mr. Randy Ri � >s has not been
cited and assessed for discharging in the past.
8. The cost to the State of the enforcement procedures:
Total Staff Time
Central Office
Travel Cost (38.29 miles @ 0.445)
Laboratory Cost
TOTAL
$ 300.00
$ 100.00
$ 23.00
$ 106.00
$ 529.00

K
STATE OF NORTH CAROLINA NORTH CAROLINA
DEPARTMENT OF ENVIRONMENT AND
NATIJIIOiL. RESOURCES
COUNTY OF PITT
�iI o W'200X-PC-xxxx
IN THE MATTER OF �,��� ,�y' '1 ",y
H.F. Strickland Jr.
FINDINGS AND DECISION
FOR VIOLATIONS OF SWIM ° AND ASSESSMENTS OF
NPDES PERMIT NCA20000'r.,,j,r' �':�������' '`) CIVIL PENALTIES
PURSUANT TO NORTH CARD"
GENERAL STATUE 143-215.1
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:
FINDINGS OF FACT:
A. H.F. Strickland owns and operates I-I.F. Strickland Farm, a permitted/certified swine animal
feeding operation in Pitt County.
B. H.F. Strickland Jr. owns and operates H.F. Strickland Farm, a permitted/certified swine
animal feeding operation in Pitt County. Mr. Strickland was issued Certificate of Coverage
NCA274031 under NPDES Permit NCA200000 for H.F. Strickland Farm on April 9, 2003,
effective upon issuance, with an expiration date of July 1, 2007.
C. Condition No. I. 1. of the "Performance Standards" of the General NPDES Permit states in
part that "Any discharge of waste which reaches surface waters or wetlands is prohibited
except as otherwise provided in this permit. Waste shall not reach surface waters by runoff,
drift, manmade conveyance, direct application, direct discharge or through ditches not
otherwise classified as state waters."
D. Condition No. V. 3. of the "General Conditions" of the General NPDES Permit states in part
that "The maximum waste level in lagoons/storage ponds shall not exceed that specified in
the Certified Animal Waste Management Plan (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."
E. Condition No. III. 11.a.. of the "Monitoring and Reporting Requirements" of the General
NPDES Permit requires that if there is a discharge from the waste collection, treatment,
storage and application systems, to surface waters or wetlands, the Permittee is required to
make notification in accordance with Condition III. 11.

II
F. Condition No. III. 1 Le. of the "Monitoring and Reporting Requirements" of the General
NPDES 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 failure to maintain storage capacity in a lagoon/storage pond
greater than or equal to that required in Condition V. 3. of the issued permit.
G. Condition No. II. 1 of the "Operation and Maintenance i Pt of the General NPDES
permit states that "The collection, treatment, and s o tte, ,and the land application
equipment and fields shall be properly operated ai to e altimes."
H. On April 18, 2007, Division of Soil a e con nual review and found that a
discharge had occurred on April 0 e, 'x of hog house #2, which drained to
a ditch that lead to waters of ` t w la' o'in d`that the water level was high in three
of the four lagoons and t of i" afro hog house, which ran onto the ground
next to a drainage p� '�d '� f ers of the state. Soil and Water referred the
discharge, high w er l'` e °i, WQ. Once notified, DWQ performed an onsite
investigation at the a 'l'i twice, h, i'the violations and to sample areas affected by the
discharge. During the i 'u� , ti ' ton, the representative indicated that he intentionally broke
open a clogged pipe, alto " i 'g wastewater to run into a ditch to surface waters of the state.
Standing water between the middle lagoon and the solids trap was sampled and the results
confirmed that it was consistent with wastewater.
I. Mr. Strickland has had a previous violation for discharging on a sprayfield in 2003.
J. Mr. H.F. Strickland Jr. does not have a valid permit for the above -described activity.
K. The cost to the State of the enforcement procedures in this matter totaled $815.79.
Based upon the above Findings of Facts, I make the following:
CONCLUSIONS OF LAW:
A. H.F. Strickland Jr. is a "person" within the meaning of G. S. 143-215.6A pursuant to G. S.
143-212(4).
B. The affected unnamed tributary constitutes 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. A permit for an animal waste management system is required by G.S. 143-215.1.
E. The above cited discharge to waters of the state violated Condition No. 1. 1. of the General
NPDES Permit.
F. The above cited high freeboard in the structural zone at 12 inches in the middle lagoon
violated Condition No. V. 3. of the General NPDES Permit.
G. The above cited failure to notify DWQ of non compliance violated Condition No. III. 11 e. of
the General NPDES Permit.
2

H. The above cited failure to notify DWQ of a discharge violated Condition No. 111. 1 1 a. of the
General NPDES Permit.
I. The above cited failure to maintain a transfers pipe between the middle lagoon and solids hap
violated Condition No. II. 1. of the General NPDES Permit ,l, 4° r,„ ,
J. Mr. H.F. Strickland Jr. may be assessed civil penalti s'ml hi 'm tt'er pursuant to G. S. 143-
215.6A(a)(2), which provides that a civil penalty "' t o e t a • ty-five thousand
dollars ($25,000.00) per violation may be esse st er who is required but fails
to act in accordance with the terms, c _ n or t" it" e of a permit required by G. S.
143-215.1.
K. The State's enforcement ,s e ay e assessed against Mr. H.F. Strickland Jr.
pursuant to G. S. 14 3B-282. 1 (b)(8).
L. The Chief of the Aquife "u ,. ,ot 6n Sectiont, Division of Water Quality, pursuant to
delegation provided by th ecretary 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 Facts and Conclusions of Law, I make the following:
III. DECISION:
Accordingly, Mr. H.F. Strickland Jr., owner of H.P. Strickland Farm, is hereby assessed a civil
penalty of:
$ For violating Condition No. I. 1. of the General NPDES Permit for
discharging hog waste to waters of the state and for making an outlet to
the waters of the State without a permit as required by G.S. 143-215.1.
$ For violating Condition No. V. 3. of the General NPDES Permit by
failing to maintain the liquid level in the middle lagoon at the level
specified in the CAWMP.
For violating Condition No. III. 11. e. of the General NPDES Permit by
failing to 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 failure to maintain storage capacity in a
lagoon/storage pond greater than or equal to that required in Condition
No. V. 3 as required by G. S. 143-215.1.
For violating Condition No. III. 11. a. of the General NPDES Permit by
failing to 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 discharge to surface waters or wetlands.
$ For violating Condition No. 1I. 1. of the General NPDES Permit by
failing to maintain transfer pipe between middle lagoon and solids trap,
which in turn caused ponded wastewater.
3

$
Enforcement costs
TOTAL AMOUNT DUE
As required by G. S. 143-215.6A(c), in d
the factors listed in G. S. 14313-282.1(b),
(1) The degree and extent of harm to the
private property resulting from the vi
(2) The duration and gravity of the v'
(3) The effect on ground or surfa c.
(4) The cost of rectifying th a
(5) The amount of mono,,it+ ,�e;.,,^Ir
(6) Whether the viola 6n'+ as o, i e
1.
'r; ;
(7) The prior record of �y la`' rap
the Environmental Man �`d e ' on
(8) The cost to the State of th nforcem
lty I have considered
he public health, or to
programs over which
(Date) Theodore L. Bush, Jr. Chief
Aquifer Protection Section
Division of Water Quality
a]

Memorandum
To: Todd Bennett, Animal Feeding Operations Permitting and Compliance Unit Supervisor
Animal Feeding Operation Permitting Compliance Unit
Through:
From:
Subject:
Date:
Introduction:
David May, Water Quality Supervisor
Washington Regional Office
Megan H. Stilley, En,
Washington Regional
Enforcement
H.F. Strickla
Permit No.
Pitt Couruvy ,,,
June 22,
H.P. Strickland farm is owned and operated by Mr. H.F. Strickland Jr. This facility, located on Dr. Jones Road
off Highway 13 in Pitt County, began operation in 1978. The facility has the capacity to raise 3024 feeder to
finish swine and the overall design for this facility is 408,240 steady state live weight.
Report:
On April 18, 2007, Division of Soil and Water conducted an annual review and found that a discharge had
occurred on April 17, 2007 at the flush box of hog house #2, which drained to a ditch that lead to waters of the
state. It was also noted that the water level was high in three of the four lagoons and that there was a leak at
the comer of one hog house, which ran onto the ground immediately adjacent toe house to the ditch to the
surface water body. Soil and Water referred the discharge, high water levels, and leak to DWQ. DWQ visited
the facility on April 18, 2007 to confirm the violations and to sample areas affected by the discharge. While
conducting the emergency inspection, DWQ learned that the discharge occurred because the farm manager
deliberately broke open a clogged PVC pipe that ran between the hog house and the lagoon. The opened pipe
allowed wastewater contained in the hog house to nut straight into drainage ditch, that flows directly to waters
of the state. During the onsite investigation the farm manager stated that the wastewater ran from the house to
the ditch to the surface water body. DWQ also investigated an area between the solids trap and the middle
lagoon that had ponded wastewater, which was later confirmed with lab results. The ponded wastewater
occurred from a leak in the transfer pipe between the two lagoons. DWQ confirmed that three of the four
lagoons were not in compliance. The middle lagoon was in the structural zone at twelve (12) inches, the small
primary lagoon was at fourteen (14) inches, and the solids trap was at eight (8) inches.
Please find a table with the sample results below.
The Finding and Decisions and Assessment Factors are attached for review.
Conclusion:
Mr. H.F. Strickland Jr., owner and operator of H.F. Strickland Farm, is in violation of permit and North
Carolina General Statue 143-215.1(a) for discharging hog waste to waters of the state, high freeboard levels in
the structural and design zone, not properly operating the wastewater system (ponded water from leaking
pipes), and failing to notify DWQ of non compliance.
5

Recommendations:
It is recommended that the appropriate civil penalties be assessed against this subject facility, H.F. Strickland
Farm, located in Pitt County, owned and operated by Mr. H.F. Strickland Jr. The Washington Regional Office
recommends that-$4000"be assessed for the discharge. $500 be assessedor the 15ich £re`eb-oard-level-.inthe
gtrkrct5r—al zone in the middle lagoon, $500 for ponded wastewater between the solids trap and middle lagoo
and $500 for failing to notify DWQ of the freeboard violations and $500 for failing to notify DWQ of the
discharge.

DIVISION OF WATER QUALITY
ANIMAL OPERATIONS
ENFORCEMENT CASE REPORT
ENFORCEMENT # NOV-2007-PC-0318
Section I: General Information
1. Facility Name: H.F. Strickland Farm
2. Facility or Permit No.: NCA274031
3. Party named in assessment: H.F. Stri
4. Address: 4303 W. Wilson Street, Far
5. Telephone No.: 252-753-4804 ar
6. Location of Facility: At the 7 f
7. Type of Operation: 3024 Red` "'t ",:E
8. Registered Agent (if applica '1''•
kI¢
9. Registered Agent Address (if ap' li, al
10
11
12
13
Date(s) of noted violations: ApriINO,1 & 18, 2007
Receiving Stream and Classification (if applicable):
Regional Office: Washington Regional Office
Report Prepared By: Megan H. Stilley
Section II: Findings
NA
Case Narrative: On April 18 2007 Division of Soil and Water conducted an annual review and
found that a discharge had occurred on April 17, 2007 at the flush box of hog house #2, which
drained to a ditch that lead to waters of the state. It was also noted that the water level was high in
three of the four lagoons and that there was a leak which ran onto the ground immediately adjacent to
a drainage pipe leading to surface waters of the state. Soil and Water referred the discharge, high
water levels and leak to DWQ. DWQ visited the facility on April 18, 2007 to confirm the violations
and to sample areas affected by the discharge. While conducting the emergency inspection, DWQ
discovered that the discharge occurred because the farm manager deliberately broke ope a clogged
PVC pipe between the hog house and lagoon. The opened pipe allowed wastewater inside the hog
house to run straight into drainage ditch, that flows directly to waters of the state. During the site
investigation the farm representative stated that he broke open the clogged pipe and wastewater
contained in the hog house ran to the ditch at tributary. DWQ also investieated an area between the
solids trap and the middle lagoon that had ponded wastewater, which was later confirmed with lab
results (see attached summary table). The ponded wastewater occurred from a leak in the transfer
pipe between the two lagoons. DWQ confirmed that three of the four lagoons were not in
compliance. The middle lagoon was in the structural zone at twelve (12) inches, the small primary
boon was at fourteen (14) inches and the solids trap was at eight (8) inches. No violations had been
previously reported.
2. Farm and/or company compliance History: A database and file review does not indicate that
penalties have been assessed aeainst this farm in the nast. However, on January 27, 2003 the facilit
received a Notice of Violation (NOV) for discharging wastewater that caused pondin > of n a sprayfield
and incomplete record keeping. The facility received another NOV on October 17, 2005 for not
maintaining a proper cover crop and not maintaining lagoon embankment.
3. Amount of Waste discharged (if applicable). The volume of the facility's flush tank

0
Sample Results (if applicable) with locations of samples taken noted in relation to discharge point:
The samples did not show any significant levels of wastewater at the point of discharge, upstream,
and downstream The discharge occurred more than 24 hours prior to discovery. Please note, both
the ditch and tributary had very high flow rates and likely "flushed" the wastewater away quickly.
March 27, 2003
Ammonia
TKN
Nitrate
Pho ` s
;� 'o gical
Fecal Coliform
NH3 as N
Demand
Upstream (A -up)
.29 mg/1
1.0 <
�, '� 1' ��
0 ;i -�'"�
3.1 mg/l
200
„
colonies/100 ml
Point of Discharge
.32 mg/ ,
,,
':
14 mg/1
2 mg/l
3200 colonies
(adjacent to the
{
�y��i,j,'
1 `i1...�'..,
._ �l°'ti.
Q
"�'y�'
/100 rrml
aluminum pipe)
(Ditch)
Downstream
.32 mg/l
2.0 mg/1
.09 mg/1
2 mg/l
580 colonies
(adjacent to the
mg/1
/100 ml
spray field)
C-down
Area between
260 mg/1
290
.10 mg/1
50 mg/1
190 mg/1
4100
middle lagoon and
mg/1
colonies/100 nil
solids trap Grass
Violator's degree of cooperation (including efforts to prevent or restore) recalcitrance: Mr. Strickland
has been cooperative. however it aDDears that he is having a hard time understanding, the rules and
regulations of DWQ. The high freeboard incident was discovered on April 18, 2007 and the Division
of Water Quality has not yet received a POA even though a POA was requested several times. The
facility did make an effort to control the freeboard level in the solids trap by cleaning out the sludgy
The facility has also worked to correct each violation that DWO noted. My feeling is the facility is
trving to comely. but does not always understand the process which DWO requires. The broken pipe
was fixed and the leaking house was repaired
6. Damage? Y/N If yes, include report from WRC: No
7. Mitigating Circumstances: None
8. Recommendations made to the owner/operator: Mr. Strickland was advised to do the following:
Fix the broken PVC Dipe at the flush box where the discharge occurred, 2) Seal the leak at the hog
house by the solids trap 3) To irrigate when weather permits to drop lagoon levels, 4) To submit a
POA for the hieh freeboard levels. and 5) To fix nine between middle lagoon and solids trap that is
causing the pending of wastewater.
9. Costs to the State for the enforcement procedures (Show Breakdown):
Total Staff Time (14 hours)
$ 300.00
Central Office
$ 100.00
Travel Cost (38.29 miles x 4 @ 0.445)
$ 68.00
Laboratory Cost
$ 348.00
TOTAL
$ 816.00

10. Recommendations for further DWQ Action: Re -visit facility on a quarterly basis at the minimum to
conduct follow-up inspections.
11. Other Comments: N/A
Section III: Assessment Factors required to be considered by G.S. 43;;(b):
1. The degree and extent of harm to the natural resources o t$. tad" oe`(ullJic health, or to private
property resulting from the violation: Animal wa has t��` ten�� a to fete dissolved oxygen it
the affected water body to a point which is ha o uA''c:, ife:,. ste water also contains
nutrients which have the potential to s aw " 'r . t),LtaAerDoYiii which is harmful to aquatic life
Surface waters did receive wastewate t ",li ",co" `a niNn-'a;lla,, e'vels.
2. The duration and gravity oft of ns occurred April 17 through 20 2007.
' r'" ✓
3. The effect on ground or sur ac ',' Na t - jo ality: Samples were collected upstream from the
March 27, 2003
Ammonia
TKN
Nitrates
Phosphorus
Biological
Fecal Coliform
NH3 as N
Oxygen
Demand
Upstream (A -up)
.29 mg/l
1.0
2.1 mg/l
.07 mg/I
3.1 mg/l
200
m>/I
colonies/100 ml
Point of Discharge
.32 mg/l
1.0
.71 mg/l
.14 mg/l
2 mg/l
3200 colonies
(adjacent to the
mg/l
/100 ml
aluminum pipe)
itch
Downstream
.32 mg/l
.98
2.0 mg/i
.09 mg/1
2 mg/l
580 colonies
(adjacent to the
mg/l
/100 ml
spray field)
C-down
Area between
260 mg/1
290
.10 mg/l
50 mg/1
190 mg/l
4100
middle lagoon and
mg/l
colonies/100 ml
solids trap Grass
4. The cost of rectifying the damage: The farm manager could have spent more time unclogging the
PVC pipe and making sure to contain any discharge that occurred during the process. The owner
could have been better prepared by pumping lagoon down over the dry summer months and by
utilizing all the spray fields more efficiently.
5. The amount of money saved by noncompliance: Money is saved when better management skills are
implemented to improve overall management of the facility, environmentally and productively. The
clogged pipe could have been repaired without allowing the discharge at what is considered an
insignificant cost.
6. Whether the violation was committed willfully or intentional: Yes, Mr. Strickland was aware of the
discharge ponding and High freeboard levels. Mr. Strickland's son manages the farm and
intentionally broke a hole in the PVC discharge pipe.

The prior record of the violator in complying or failing to comply with programs over which the
Environmental Management Commission has regulatory authority: Mr. H.F. Strickland has not been
cited and assessed for discharging, but a violation for discharging that caused ponding occurred in
8. The cost to the State of the enforcement procedures:
Total Staff Time
Central Office
Travel Cost (38.29 miles @ 0.445)
Laboratory Cost
10

STATE OF NORTH CAROLINA
COUNTY OF WAYNE
IN THE MATTER OF
N & W Pig Farms
FOR VIOLATIONS OF SWINE WASTE
GENERAL PERMIT AWG100000
PURSUANT TO NORTH CAROLINA
GENERAL STATUE 143-215.1
NORTI-I CAROLINA
DEPARTMENT OF ENVIRONMENT AND
NATURAL RESOURCES
File No.
FINDINGS AND DECISION
AND ASSESSMENTS 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. Mr. Julian Nelms and Mr. Harvey L. Whitley, Jr. own and operate N & W Pig Farms, a
permitted/certified swine animal feeding operation in Wayne County.
B. Mr. Nelms and Mr. Whitley were issued a Certificate of Coverage AWS960046 under State
General Permit AWG100000 on October 1, 2004, effective upon issuance, with an expiration
date of September 30, 2009.
C. Condition No. I. 1. of the "Performance Standards" of the State General Permit states in part
that, "Any discharge of waste which reaches surface waters or wetlands is prohibited except
as otherwise provided in this permit. Waste shall not reach surface waters by runoff, drift,
manmade conveyance, direct application, direct discharge or through ditches not otherwise
classified as state waters ... Any discharge or application of waste to a ditch that drains to
surface waters or wetlands is prohibited except as follows: (a) discharges from the ditches
are controlled by best management practices (BMPs) designed in accordance with NRCS
standards; (b) the BMPs have been submitted to and approved by the Division of Water
Quality (Division); (c) the BMPs were implemented as designed to prevent a discharge to
surface waters or wetlands; (d) the waste was removed immediately from the ditch upon
discovery; and (e) the event was documented and reported in accordance with Part I1I.13. of
this General Permit. Nothing in this exception shall excuse a discharge to surface waters or
wetlands except as may result because of rainfall from a storm event more severe than the 25-
year, 24-hour storm."
D. Condition No. IL 1. of the "Operation and Maintenance Requirements" of the State General
Permit states that "The collection, treatment, and storage facilities, and the land application
equipment and fields shall be properly operated and maintained at all times."

E. Condition No. 11. 4, of the "Operation and Maintenance Requirements" of the State General
Permit states that "Land application rates shall be in accordance with the CAWMP. in no
case shall land application rates exceed the agronomic rate of the nutrient of concern for the
receiving crop. In no case shall land application rates result in excessive ponding or any
runoff during any given application event".
F. Condition No. II. 16. of the "Operation and Maintenance Requirements" of the State General
Permit states in part that the "Operator in Charge (OIC) or a designated back-up OIC of a
Type A Animal Waste Management System shall inspect, or a person under the supervision'
of an OIC or designated back-up OIC shall inspect, the land application site as often as
necessary to insure that the animal waste is land applied in accordance with the CAWMP".
G. Condition No. III. 13. of the "Monitoring and Reporting Requirements" of the State General
Permit requires in part 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
following: a) Any discharge to ditches, surface waters, or wetlands; d) Over applying waste
either in excess of the limits set out in the CAWMP or where runoff enters surface waters or
wetlands or; e) Failure of any component of the animal waste collection, treatment, storage
and land application system resulting in a discharge to surface waters or wetlands.
1-I. On March 20, 2008, The Division of Soil and Water Conservation conducted an annual
review and found that a discharge occurred into a drainage ditch at the N&W Pig Farms.
Also, visual evidence was found to indicate that the March 18, 2008 irrigation event caused
wastewater to pond in several places on a wheat field. The Division of Soil and Water
Conservation referred the discharge and ponding instances to DWQ. Once notified, DWQ
performed an onsite investigation at the facility to confirm the violations and to sample a
ponded area of the excessive irrigation. During the investigation, a facility records review
supported visual evidence that excess wastewater (no fewer than 88,451 gallons) was pumped
onto 2.47 acres of the wheat crop. Furthermore, wastewater runoff traveled from the wheat
field onto two lower fields, northwest of the wheat field. Finally, the irrigation supply line
was found lying submerged in wastewater within the aforementioned drainage ditch; the
supply line was loosely connected at several fittings. No explanation was given by Mr.
Nelms during the March 20, 2008 DWQ investigation as to how the hydraulic overloading
(35,810 gallons/acre) or discharge into the ditch occurred.
I. N&W Pig Farms have had no previous violations in their compliance history.
J. The cost to the State of the enforcement procedures in this matter totaled $663.34.
Based upon the above Findings of Facts, I make the following:
11. CONCLUSIONS OF LAW:
A. Mr. Julian Nelms and Mr. Harvey L. Whitley, Jr. are each 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. The above -cited discharge to a ditch violated Condition No. 1. 1. of the State General Permit.
2

D. The above -cited failure to properly operate and maintain the land application equipment and
fields violated Condition No. 11. 1. of the State General Permit,
E. The above -cited failures to apply waste at land application rates in accordance with the'
CAWMP and to avoid excessive ponding or runoff violated Condition No. 11. 4. of the State
General Permit.
F. The above -cited failure of the Operator In Charge (or their surrogate) to inspect the land
application site such that animal waste was applied in accordance with the CAWMP violated
Condition No. IL 16. of the State General Permit.
G. The above -cited failure to notify DWQ of a discharge violated Conditions No. III. 13 a, d,
and e of the State General Permit.
1-I. Mr. Julian Nelms and Mr. Harvey L. Whitley, Jr. 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
that twenty-five thousand dollars ($25,000.00) per violation may be assessed against a person
who is required but fails to act in accordance with the terms, conditions, or requirements of a
permit required by G. S. 143-215.1.
I. The State's enforcement costs in this matter may be assessed against Mr. Julian Nelms and
Mr. Harvey L. Whitley, Jr., pursuant to G. S. 143-215.3(a)(9) and G. S. 143B-282. I (b)(8).
J. 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 Facts and Conclusions of Law, I make the following:
Ill. DECISION:
Accordingly, Mr. Julian Nelms and Mr. Harvey L. Whitley, Jr., owners of N & W Pig Farms, are
hereby assessed a civil penalty of:
$ For violating Condition No. 1. 1. of the State General Permit for
discharging hog waste to a ditch that drains to surface waters without the
proper use of Best Management Practices and DWQ notification.
For violating Condition No. IL 4. of the State General Permit by failing
to apply waste at a rate in accordance with the CAWMP. The facility did
not land apply such that excessive ponding or runoff was avoided.
$ For violating Condition No. II. 16. of the State General Permit by the
Operator In Charge (or their surrogate) failing to inspect the land
application site such that animal waste was applied per the CAWMP.
$ For violating Conditions No. 111. 13. a., d., and e. of the State General
Permit by failing to report by telephone to the appropriate Regional
Office as soon as possible, but in no case more than 24 hours following
first knowledge of: a) the occurrence of a discharge to ditches, surface
3

waters, or wetlands; d) the occurrence of waste over -application, and e)
the failure of the land application system that led to the discharge.
$ 663.34 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. 143 B-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 quantity or quality;
(4) The cost of rectifying the damage;
(5) The amount of money save by noncompliance;
(6) Whether the violation was committed willfully or intentional;
(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.
(Date) Theodore L. Bush, Jr. Chief
Aquifer Protection Section
Division of Water Quality
M

Memorandum
To: Keith Larick, Animal Feeding Operations Permitting and Compliance Unit Supervisor
Animal Feeding Operation Permitting Compliance Unit
Through: David May, Water Quality Supervisor
Washington Regional Office
From: Mark E. Newsome, Environmental Engineer I
Washington Regional Office
Subject: Enforcement Package
N & W Pig Farms
Permit No. AWS960046
Wayne County
Date: April 9, 2008
Introduction:
N & W Pig Farms is owned and operated by Mr. Julian Nelms and Mr. Harvey L. Whitley, Jr. This facility,
located on Highway 11 1 South in Wayne County, began operation in 1994. The facility has the capacity to
raise 7,000 wean to feeder swine and the overall design for this facility is 210,000 steady state live weight.
Report:
On March 20, 2008 at 11:30 A.M., the North Carolina Division of Water Quality (DWQ) received an
initial report of wastewater discharge to a drainage ditch from Mr. Martin McLawhorn, Environmental
Specialist of the Division of Soil and Water Conservation. On March 20, 2008 Eric Newsome of the
DWQ investigated and determined that hydraulic overload occurred on a 2.47-acre pull of a wheat field
due to excessive spray irrigation. The extent of the overload caused wastewater to run onto two lower
terraces northwest of the wheat field. According to facility records, the north lagoon (#1) was pumped
down by 6" (approximately of 88,451 gallons) on March 18, 2008. According to Mr. Nelms, the north
lagoon solely supplied wastewater for the above -described event. Visual evidence of ponding was
consistent with the fact that applying 88,451 gallons would have exceeded the standard loading rate
suggested by the Waste Utilization Plan for this field (35,810 gallons/acre vs. 27,154 gallons/acre). In
addition, the March 20, 2008 DWQ investigation revealed that loose fittings in the irrigation supply line
discharged wastewater from this line into a farm drainage ditch. Although the waste was recovered
without it leaving the facility, it was estimated that 1,200 gallons of water were seen standing in the ditch
prior to clean up efforts beginning. No telephonic notification was made to the Washington Regional
Office within twenty-four (24) hours of becoming aware of the March 18, 2008 discharge; furthermore,
no explanation was given by Mr. Nelms on March 20, 2008 as to how the overload and discharge
occurred.
Please find a table with the sample results below.
The Finding and Decisions and Assessment Factors are attached for review
5

Conclusion:
Mr. Julian Nelms and Mr. Harvey L. Whitley, Jr., owners and operators of N & W Pig Farms, are in
violation of their permit and North Carolina General Statue 143-215.1(a) for discharging hog waste to surface
waters and/or a ditch; failing to properly operate and maintain land application equipment and fields; failing to
apply wastewater such that ponding and runoff were avoided, and; failing to notify DWQ of the non
compliance event.
Recommendations:
It is recommended that the appropriate civil penalties be assessed against this subject facility, N & W Pig
Farms, located in Wayne County, owned and operated by Mr. Julian Nelms and Mr. Harvey L. Whitley, Jr.
The Washington Regional Office recommends that penalties be assessed for the four violations described
in the Conclusion.
6

DIVISION OF WATER QUALITY
ANIMAL OPERATIONS
ENFORCEMENT CASE REPORT
ENFORCEMENT # NOV-2008-PC-0225
Section I: General Information
1. Facility Name: N & W Pig Farms
2. Facility or Permit No.: AWS960046
3. Parties named in assessment: Mr. Julian Nelms and Mr. Harvey L. Whitley, Jr.
4. (Mailing) Address: 601 East Main Street, Fremont, NC 27830
5. Telephone No.: 919-242-6327
6. Location of Facility: At the junction of Hwy 222 and Hwy 111
7. Type of Operation: 7,000 Wean to Feeder
8. Registered Agent (if applicable): N/A
9. Registered Agent Address (if applicable): N/A
10. Date(s) of noted violations: March 20, 2008
11. Receiving Stream and Classification (if applicable): N/A
12. Regional Office: Washin tog n Regional Office
13. Report Prepared By: M. Eric Newsome
Section IL• Findings
Case Narrative: On March 20 2008 at 1 1.30 A.M., the North Carolina Division of Water Quality
(DWQ) received an initial report of wastewater discharge to a drainage ditch from Mr. Martin
McLawhorn Environmental Specialist of the Division of Soil and Water Conservation. On March
20 2008 Eric Newsome of the DWQ investigated and determined that hydraulic overload occurred on
a 2 47-acre pull of a wheat field due to excessive spray irrigation The extent of the overload caused
wastewater to run onto two lower terraces northwest of the wheat field. According to facility records,
the north lagoon (#1) was pumped down by 6" (approximately of 88,451 gallons) on March 18 2008.
According to Mr. Nelms the north lagoon solely supplied wastewater for the above -described event.
Visual evidence of ponding was consistent with the fact that applying 88,451 gallons would have
exceeded the standard loadin . rate su"—ested by the Waste Utilization Plan for this Held (35,810
gallons/acre vs. 27,154 gallons/acre) In addition the March 20, 2008 DWQ investigation revealed
that loose fittings in the irrigation supply line discharged wastewater from this line into a farm
drainage ditch. Although the waste was recovered without it leaving the facility, it was estimated that
1,200 gallons of water were seen standing in the ditch prior to clean up efforts beginning. No
telephonic notification was made to the Washington Regional Office within twenty-four (24) hours of
becoming aware of the March 18 2008 discharge; furthermore, no explanation was given by Mr.
Nelms on March 20 2008 as to how the overload and discharge occurred.
2. Farm and/or company compliance History: A database and file review indicates that no violations or
penalties have been assessed against this farm in the past.
3. Amount of Waste discharged (if applicable). 1,200 gallons into a farm drainage ditch.
Sample Results (if applicable) with locations of samples taken noted in relation to discharge point:
One sample was taken of the ponded water on the eastern edge of the wheat field for nitrogen � and
phosphorus analyses Lab results showed significant levels of ammonia (390 mg/L), total kieldahl
nitrogen (420 mg/L), and phosphorus (50 mg/L) present.

Sample
Sampling Date
Ammonia
TKN
Nitrates,
Phosphorus,
Location
NH3 as N
(mg/L)
Nitrites
P (mg/L)
(mg/L)
(NO3, NOD
m Y L)
East end of
3/20/2008
390
420
ND
50
wheat field
(F-1)
ND -Not Detected
5. Violator's degree of cooperation (including efforts to prevent or restore) recalcitrance: Mr. Nelms and
Mr. Whitley have been cooperative; efforts to clean up the discharged and ponded wastewater began
during the March 20 2008 investigation and were completed by March 24, 2008.
6. Damage? Y/N If yes, include report from WRC: No
7. Mitigating Circumstances: None
8. Recommendations made to the owner/operator: Mr. Nelms was advised on March 20, 2008 to do the
following: 1) vumo the wastewater from the drainage ditch into a tank and transfer the contents back
into the north lagoon (lagoon #l)• 2) Collect the ponded areas and pump this wastewater back into the
north lagoon (lagoon #1) and• 3) Seal the "washout" drain on the northern edge of the wheat field
with compacted soil or clay to prevent further runoff to the lower terraced fields.
9. Costs to the State for the enforcement procedures (Show Breakdown):
Total Staff Time (14 hours) $ 392.75
Central Office $ 100.00
Travel Cost (118.6 miles x 2 @ 0.445) $ 105.54
Laboratory Cost $ 65.05
TOTAL $ 663.34
10. Recommendations for further DWQ Action: Continue to focus on facility records and field
conditions during annual compliance inspections.
11. Other Comments: N/A
Section III: Assessment Factors required to be considered by G.S. 14313-282. 1 (b):
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: Animal waste has the potential to deplete dissolved oxygen in
the affected water bodv to a point which is harmful to aauatic life. Waste water also contains
nutrients which have the otential to spawn algal growth to the point which is harmful to aquatic life.
Surface waters --the drainage ditch --did receive wastewater.
2. The duration and gravity of the violation: The violations occurred March 18 through March 20. 2008.
3. The effect on ground or surface quantity or quality: The two northwest (terraced) fields served as a
vegetative filter, preventing wheat field runoff from entering the nearby Nahunta Swamp. The farm
drainage ditch was sloped such that wastewater was contained onsite until water was removed. One

waste sample was collected in an eastern area of the wheat field where pondinr, was observed. The
results are illustrated in the followingtable:
able:
Sample
Sampling
Ammonia
TKN
Nitrates,
Phosphorus,
Location
Date
NH3 as N
(mg/L)
Nitrites
P (mg/L)
(mg/L)
(NO3, NOZ)
mg/L
East end of
3/20/2008
390
420
ND
50
wheat field
(F-1)
ND -Not Detected
The cost of rectifying the damage: The farm managers could have spent far fewer hours being
preventative (monitoringthe he spray operations) than the time they pent cleaning up the area--48 to 72
hours. Ruts created by the excessive irrigation and farm equipment have damaged part of the wheat
crop.
5. The amount of money saved by noncompliance: Money is saved when better management skills are
implemented to improve overall management of the facility, environmentally and productively.
Whether the violation was committed willfully or intentional: Mr. Nelms and Mr. Whitley both have
an active Type A operator's license. Although it cannot be proven whether either of them was onsite
during the March 18, 2008 event, each is responsible for the consequence of the action. Therefore,
either: a) the decision to let the active violation occur, b) the decision to leave someone in charge
who was incapable of properly operating the system, or c) the decision to leave the sorav gun running
unattended was willful
The prior record of the violator(s) in complying or failing to comply with programs over which the
Environmental Management Commission has regulatory authority: N & W Pig Farms has not been
cited for any permit violations prior to this event.
S. The cost to the State of the enforcement procedures:
Total Staff Time (14 hours) $ 392.75
Central Office $ 100.00
Travel Cost (118.6 miles x 2 @ 0.445) $ 105.54
Laboratory Cost $ 65.05
TOTAL $ 663.34