820077_ENFORCEMENT_20171231

ENFORCEMENT
NORTH CAROLINA
Department of Environmental Qual

November 7, 2003
FILE MEMO
Mag IV Farm, Facility No. 82-77
Two phone conversations with Don Joe, EPA Region IV, involving the Mag IV facility.
Mr. Joe wanted to discuss the compliance history of the facility during the period of
October 2002 thru October 2003. I informed Mr. Joe of the information detailed in the
memorandums to Keith Larick dated February 13, 2003 and November 7, 2003 (three
memos dates November 7, 2003). These memorandums concern the review of quarterly
reports from the facility from 4`h quarter 2002 thru 3ra quarter 2003. At the end of the
conversation, Mr. Joe requested the freeboard levels for July 2003 and August 2003 and
the written notification/POA for high freeboard submitted in July 2003. These items
were faxed to Mr. Joe on the same day (fax confirmation in file).
M. Paul Sherman

F WArF
�0 RQ Michael F. Easley, Governor
William G. Ross Jr., Secretary
North Carolina Department of Environment and Natural Resources
Alan W. Klimek, P,E., Director
Division of Water Quality
June 2, 2003
DM Farms of Rose Hill LLC JUN 52003 f
Mag 4, Melville I & 11, DELL, DM Section"I Site 4 i
PO Box 1076
Rose Hill NC 28458
Subject: Application No. NCO086614
Request to change WUP
Mag 4, Melville I & 11, DELL, DM Section 1
Site 4
Animal Waste Operation
Sampson County
Dear Mr, Linton:
The Non -Discharge Permitting Unit has completed a review of the request to change this facilities WUP.
It is the decision of the Division that the request be granted to change Tract # Mag IV, field 10 to a
Matua/Soybean rotation, Tract # Melville, fields 27, 28, 31 and 32 to a MatualSoybean rotation, Tract # S1 S4,
fileds 50-53 to a MatualSoybean rotation and Tract Mag 4, field 54b and 55 to a MatualSoybean rotation.
Bermuda/Matua to Bermuda/Smallgrain.
If you have any Questions regarding this request, please call me at [phone], extension 544.
Sincerely,
Michelle McKay
Environmental Engineer
Non -Discharge Permitting Unit
cc:[Fay.etteville-Regio_nai3Office,--Watter'Quality_I
Permit File
►
Non -Discharge Permitting Unit Internet http,//h2o.enr.nc.state.us/ndpu WMENOR
1617 Mail Service Center, Raleigh, NC 27699-1617 Telephone [phone] Fax [phone]
DENR Customer Service Center Telephone [phone]
An Equal Opportunity Action Employer 50% recycled/10% post -consumer paper

FROM : DM FARMS OF ROSE HILL
Jun OR Oa []9 : 41 A nHF
r VIv. G. C -t J)6..J t<J. c:1=1'1l'i
PHONE NO. : 910 289 9449
910 288 6434 p
'YAC--;....Y� � Y..��...-•`�:•R;':: ............«...... . � . � .�.�.�.....�.... .. ...�............T...� � �. ���.,...����...« •• ................ ....
WA STI=_UTILILATI_ON PLAN AG[,�
Name of Farm: Mag IV, Melville I & Il, Oeil. OM Section 1 Site 4
O wryer / Manager Agreement
I (we) understand and will follow arld implement the spoCiricitions and the operation
and maintenance procedures Qstablished in the approves animal wane utilization plan
for, the farm named above. I (we) know that any expansion to the existing deslgn
capaelty of the waste treatment and storage systern or construction of new facilities will
require a new certification to be Submittea to the Division of Environment Management
(DEM) before the new animals are stocked. I (w®) also understand that there must be
no discharge of animal waste from this system to surface waters of the state from a
storm event less severe than the 25 -year, 24 -Hour storm, The approved plan will be
fik:d on-site at the farm office and ;it the office of the local Soil and Water Conservation
District and will to available for review by DEM upon request.
Name of Facility Owii r: DM Farms of Rose Frill LLO.
(please print)
Signature: date:
Name of Manager (If umerent from owner): David Hulbort_ -- -
Signature: Date::
Name of Technical Specialist: (plea9sc print) : AJ Linton
Affiliation: DM Farms of Rose Hi1L LIC.
Address (Agency): P.O. 13ox 1 076
RoteHil(, NC 213458
Signature;: D9tr',
NUP PatJc 9
6 -a - o-3
1

oiY'S`:.w.,t,!a:;.day.CY."ra,'}`.�n;:r, ,'n.,;..};.'rtS.r.,,...:.{.:,...4..w.,r.{..;.;.•.v:.,;,v,.,y�,.n,-,.;w „rn.,a.,.,,.yvpvNn;v.+.�,vY:...,^-.'!;^a:^ci:..."+^'h'.:r„";ki�.:;' s':.:7:�;::�G::.'•.;,.:`. h•:f9.¢'d•.'^:uc h'ii�tY..:io,
:t'91:::?y,i'+•`.'L'4Y'4:i�:'r."S�YG, :. ,:w..w. w:.e..,,... r6 it o;..N",�'.x''Y..NhR.nh.�..'�r,`-'$:�%Ni.: -;4'#::f :c:5:::i:.<n�x��
'S` . ..i:r.. .. �:.{::ri}vtr :.y'•iix:S:w'J$'�0:,'.in:$i:iii :+i'i.'+.•i::4'i� •,'•iii:•'4?:. �Y. -
�!'�'...
''. ,..•]..5:.,, ..a.nr..$:Linn..n.n.:nx...n,.,..,,.:.,..,.a.n..a.,.�,n....,...,:vi�S:v�:�•a�V(:)�.1£�k•.Ar..b.�..w..G..�`.....��b,.w..:}: x+}'ayni: �'�n•..4:.: `"
PRODUCER: MAG 1V, MELVILLE I & II, DELL, DM SECTION 1 SITE 4
Facility
LOCATION: 4750 WAYCROSS RD, DUPLIN COUNTY
TELEPHONE: {910}289-6439 ext. 4541
TYPE OPERATION: FARROW - FINISH
NUMBER OF ANIMALS: 32,080
400 - WEAN -FEEDER, 27,280 FEEDER -FINISH, .4,400 FARROW -WEAN
The waste from your animal facility must be land applied at a specified rate to prevent
pollution of surface and/or groundwater. The plant nutrients in the animal waste should
be used to reduce the amount of commercial fertilizer required for the crops in the fields
where the waste is to be applied. This waste utilization plan uses nitrogen as the
limiting nutrient. Waste should be analyzed before each application cycle. Annual soil
tests are strongly encouraged so that all plant nutrients can be balanced for realistic
yields of the crop to be grown.
Several factors are important in implementing your waste utilization plan in order to
maximize -the fertilizer value of the waste and to ensure that it is applied in an
environmentally safe manner, Always apply waste based on the needs of the crop to
be grown and the nutrient content of the waste. Do not apply more nitrogen than the
crop can utilize. Soil types are important as they have different infiltration rates,
leaching potentials, cation exchange capacities, and available water holding capacities.
Normally waste shall not be applied to land eroding at greater than 5 tons per acre per
year. With special precautions, waste may be applied to land eroding at up to 10 tons
per acre per year. Do not apply waste on saturated soils, when it is raining, or when
the surface is frozen. Either of these conditions may result in runoff to surface Waters
which is not allowed under DEM regulations. Wind conditions should also be
considered to avoid drift and downwind odor problems. To maximize the value of
nutrients for crop production and to reduce the potential for pollution, the waste should
be applied to a growing crop or applied to bare ground not more than 30 days prior to
planting. Injecting the waste or disking will conserve nutrients and reduce odor
problems.
The estimated acres needed to apply the animal waste is based on typical nutrient
content for this type of facility. Acreage requirements should be based on the waste
analysis report from your waste management facility. Attached you will find information
on proper sampling techniques, preparation, and transfer of waste samples to the lab
for analysis.
This waste utilization plan, if carried out, meets the requirements for compliance with
15A NCAC 2H.0217 adopted by the Environmental Management Commission.
NUP Page 1

Amount of Waste Produced Per Year (gallons, ft, tons -etc.)
4,400 6.1 26,840
27,280 animals X 1.9 (tons) waste/animal/year = 51,832 (amt.) waste/year.
400 0.42 168
78,840 TONS
Amount of Plant Available Nitrogen (PAN) Produced Per Year
4,400 5.4 9,504
26,280 animals X 2.3 lbs. PAN/animal/year = 60,444 lbs. PAN/year. (PAN from N.C. Tech.
1,000 2.3 920 Guide Std. 633)
400 0.48 77
70,945 8096 ped tan in PAN for 2 -stage lagoon
# PANNEAR
Applying the above amount of waste is a big job. You should plan time and have
appropriate equipment to apply the waste in a timely manner.
The following acreage will be needed for waste application based on the crop to be grown
and surface application:
See page 3 and 3a for Table 1 acres owned by producer.
*The 60% feduction'Is at,tha MAG'IV lagoon only and in actuality it is a 77%a,,reductlon,basedFori'his#orical
waste analysls'y= .... �.. , . _. _ _..
'This N is from animal waste only. If nutrients from other sources such as commercial
fertilizer are applied, they must be accounted for. N must be based on realistic yield
expectation.,
NOTE: The applicator is cautioned that P and K may be over applied while meeting the N
requirements. Beginning in 1996 the Coastal Zone Management Act will require farmers in
some eastern counties of North Carolina to have a nutrient management plan that addresses
all nutrients. This plan only addresses Nitrogen.
NUP Page 2

.......... ffl g....W
Table 1. ACRES OWNED BY PRODUCER
Tract Field Sol] Crop Lbs. N Acres Lbs. N Month of
#
No.
Type
Per Acre
Utilized
Application
MAO IV
I
ChA
Matua
230
6'.2
1,4351
Oct -May
MAG IV
I
ChA
Soybeans
80
0.2
499
May -Sep 15
MAO IV
2
ChA
Matua
230
8.8
2,024
Oct -May
MAO IV
2
ChA
Soybeans
80
8.8
704
May -Sep 15
MAO IV
3
ChA
Matua
230
8.8
2,024
Oct -May
MAO IV
3
ChA
Soybeans
80
8.8
704
May -Sep 15
MAO IV
a
ChA
Matua
230
2.1
483
Oct -May
MAO IV
8
ChA
Soybeans
80
2.1
lGa
May -Sop 15
MAO IV
9
WaB
Bermuda
275
13.6
3,740
Mar -Aug
M
3 4
: -W
;;', 6:
,
M;kd IV
Py
i".";
........ . IN,
P., V'A
MAO N
I I
WaB
Bermuda
275
5.4
1,485
Mar -Aug
Melville
16
Au
Bermuda
275
2.3
633
Mar -Aug
Melville
17
BoB,MaC
Bermuda
263
2.5
658
Mar -Aug
Melville
18a
BoB,Au
Matua
230
4.2
966
Oct -May
Melville
18a
BoB,Au
Soybeans
110
4.2
462
May -Sep 15
Melville
lab
BoB,MaC
Matua
243
3.0
729
Oct -May
Melville
lab
BoB,MaC
Soybeans
120
3.0
360
May -Sep 15
Melville
19a
BoB,Au
Matua
230
5.3
1,219
Oct -May
Melville
19a
BoB,Au
Soybeans
110
5,3
5a3
May -Sep 15
Melville
19b
BoB,MaC
Matua
243
4.0
972
Oct -May
Melville
19b
BoB,MaC
Soybeans
120
4.0
480
May -Sep 15
Melville
20
BoB,MaC
Matua
243
4.2
1,021
Oct -May
Melville
20
BOB,MaC
Soybeans
120
4.2
504
May -Sep 15
Melville
21
BoB,MaC
Matua
243
2.2
535
Oct -May
Melville
21
BoB,MaC
Soybeans
120
2.2
264
May -Sep 15
Melville
22a
BOB
Matua
200
4.4
880
Oct -May
Melville
22a
BOB
Soybeans
100
4.4
440
May -Sep 15
Melville
22b
BoB,MaC
Matua
243
3,1
753
Oct -May
Melville
22-b.
BoB,MaC
Soybeans
120
3,1
372
May -Sep 15
Melville
23a
BOB
Matua
200
3,8
760
Oct -May
Melville
23a
BOB
Soybeans
11010
3,13
380
May -Sep 15
Melville
23b
BoB,MaC
Matua
243
1.3
316
Oct -May
Melville
23b
BoB,MaC
Soybeans
120
1.3
156
May -Sep 15
Metville
24
BOB
Bermuda
225
2.7
608
Mar -Aug
Melville
25a
BOB
Bermuda
225
2.7
608
Mar -Aug
Melville
25b
BOB
Bermuda
225
4.8
1,080
Mar -Aug
Melville
26
BOB
Bermuda
225
2.9
653
Mar -Aug
at
33
.. ............ .. .. ......
IM .. .
4 4
.. .... .. ....
..... .
,.,M" . epj
Melville
29
BOB
Bermuda
205
4.2
861
Mar -Aug
Melville
30
BOB
Bermuda
225
7.3
1,643
Mar -Aug
.4
.... .... .. ...
i1V
.... .... W.,
ep!15.
2.::,..:..Oct
............
Melville
33
BoB
Bermuda
225
6.1
1,373
Mar -Aug
JMelville
34a
BOB
Bermuda
225
4.6
1,035
Mar -Aug
IMelville
34b
BoB,Au
Bermuda
250
6.3
1,575
Mar -Aug
TOTAL
155.3
46.032
NUP Page 3

Table is
Tract Field Soil Crop
ACRES OWNED BY PRODUCER
Lbs. N Acres Lbs. N Month of
#
No.
Type
Per Acre
Utilized
Application
Dail
35
AuB
Bermuda
275
5.7
1,568
Mar -Aug
Dell
36
AuB
Bermuda
275
0.8
220
Mar -Aug
Dell
37a
WaB,Ly
Bermuda
225
1.9
428
Mar -Aug
Dell
37b
WaB,Ly
Bermuda
225
2.8
630
Mar -Aug
Dell
38
WaB,MaC
Wheat
76
1.3
99
Sop - Apr
Dell
38
WaB,Mac
Soybeans
126
1.3
164
Apr - Sep
Dell
39
WaB
Wheat
76
3.3
251
Se - Apr
Dell
39
WaB
Soybeans
112
3.3
370
Apr - Sep
Dell
40
WaB
Wheat
76
2.1
160
Sep - Apr
Dell
40
WaS
Soybeans
112
2.1
235
Apr - Sep
Dail
41
WaB
Wheal
76
2.1
160
Sep - Apr
Dell
41
WaB
Soybeans
112
2.1
235
Apr - Sep
Dell
42
WaB,MaC
Wheat
76
3.6
274
Sep - Apr
Dell
42
WaB,MaC
Soybeans
126
3.6
454
Apr - Sep
Dell
43
WaB,MaC
Wheat
76
2.1
160
Sep - Apr
Dell
43
WaB,MaC
Soybeans
126
2.1
265
Apr - Sep
Dell
44a
WaB,MaC
Wheat
76
2.0
152
Sep - Apr
Dell
44a
WaB,MaC
Soybeans
126
2.0
252
Apr - Sep
Dell
44b
WaB
Wheat
76
2.0
152
Sep - Apr
Dell
44b
WaB
Soybeans
112
2.0
224
Apr - Sep
S iS4
45
WsB
Wheat
76
3.5
266
Sep - Apr
S1S4
45
WaB
Soybeans112
3.5
392
Apr - Sep
S1S4
46a
BoB,WaB,MaC
Wheat
72
5.6
403
Sep - Apr
S1S4
46a
BoB,WaB,MaC
Soybeans
117
5.6
655
Apr - Sep
S1S4
46b
BoB,Ly
Wheat
64
1.4
90
Sep - Apr
S1S4
46b
BoB,Ly
Soybeans
102
1.4
143
Apr - Sep
S1S4
47a
BoB,WaB,MaC
Wheat
72
6.5
468
Sep - Apr
S1S4
47a
BoB,WaB,MaC
Soybeans
117
6,5
761
Apr - Se
S1S4
47b
BoB,Ly
Wheat
64
4.1
262
Sep -_Apr
S1S4
47b
BoB,Ly
Soybeans
102
4.1
418
Apr - Sep
S 1 S4
48
WaB,Ly
Wheat
70
5.2
364
Sep - Apr
S1S4
48
WaB,Ly
Soybeans
108
5.2
562
Apr - Sep
S1 S4
49
WaB,Mac
Wheat
76
3,2
243
Sep - Apr
S1 S4
49
WaB,MaC
Soybeans
126
3.2
403
Apr - Sep
S S4
RfllaC
.. .
StSa.
50 .::?'MBC
13aF3
� ....
.::.
5154
51
Bob ;..
:Matlta'.:..
205 ,
3� ...; : S 15
:. QGt MflY
$S4
6i :::
Bo8 Soybeans
E00
30
0:46.
:May'',15
5154
52A
515
....:.::.
.... .... Soy beans.'s
24...:::
240
May Sep 15:ti
M%atttO .::........:23Cf.....
.::: 4.1.....;
, 9
S1S4
54a
BH,MaC,WaS
Bermuda
250
6.91,725
Mar -Aug
5454
546,;;;
BH,MaC;C
3154
,> 5411.:.
BM,MG;ky :;:
S'.
cybeans:: 104 ........
19 ....:: ; ....... 198
. ,;,Mart;t5; .
WaF3
Mattja.............255.....
,-,..2 .. ,:.
......... s76.
.
' .Oci-Nta ,.:
:: Ma
"'""-'
".....
....................
Small Grain
100
83.5
8,350
Sep -Mar
TOTAL
82.2 27,214
Total page 3 155.34
Total Farm Acres 237.5
ALL BERMUDA FIELDS WILL BE 0VERSF4§;§qXITH SMALL GRAIN IN THE WINTER.

ZTfON P 141:11
Table 2: ACRES WITH AGREEMENT OR LONG TERM LEASE
(Agreement with adjacent landowner must be attached)
(Required only if operator does not own
adequate land [see Required Specification 21)
Tract Field Soil Crop Lbs. N Acres Lbs. N Month of
See footnote for Table 1.
Totals from above Tables
Acres Lbs. N
Utilized
Table 1 237.5 73,245.5
Table 2 0 -
Total 237.5 73,245.5
Amount of N Produced 70,944.8
Surplus or Deficit (2,301)
NOTE: The Waste Utilization Plan must contain provisions for periodic land
application of sludge at agronomic rates. The sludge will be nutrient rich and will
require precautionary measures to prevent over application of nutrient or other
elements.
NUP Page 4

rv: :'.;sc..;rYc:. ••.•a•t � � .?y., r.c.'r• ;: Sfii:::3$•.:: 'o -x:.
....a:�:v:.., i"v'oS.`'.irr:•risY:r.Y:i.::iinry:�:':..::.:.':<�Y�?
'f'f:?? o:dx`�::%-:?:;').::Si:+• :3 •�� .fv:^�:'.x4:�;r r'i:$:•i:
ry
.rzv
Y'... :.:..r':.: 'S: 3 Sr:rtr v'{:::r v.r•nJ}'iri•{:r.. :.:. : v ..,.. ...,: v... nv n.,..:
w�E,.�wr: A:A..GRS.:,I s,.•,.:,.a::f^ .wG:�:,L.v:$r..,.::.: �i,':4 n.:nv}'}n.h.,isryy:r�. •..:•,}. ?. Y . n. +7-. + 'u.Svis �•a'r:•'a:`mii:n.":-,vYri�w:iw4iiiii.4%,.:�\o;::%::{�n'�''$'f.•
. r.•r... x:xrxr� ''if+}-ii$iiG'i ..
See attached map showing the fields to be used for the utilization of waste water.
Application of Waste by Irrigation
Field Soil Type Crop Application Application
No. Rate In/Hr Amount In.
1 t ru 3
-ChA
MatualSoybear
0.5
1
8
ChA
Matua/goybear
0.5
1
9,11
WaS
Berm/SG0.6
1
10WaB
Matua/Soyhear
0.6
1
16
uBerm/SG
0.6
1
BOB.Mac
Berm/SO
0.5
1
18a, 19a
BoB,Au
atu Soybean
0.6
1
18 ,19 -21,22 ,23F
BoB,MaC
atu So ear
0.5
1
22a,23a
BOBatu
So ear
0.75
1
24-26Tag-Berm
SG
0.76
1
27
BoB,Au
atu Soy ear
0.6
1
28
BOB
Matu ay ear
0.75
1
29-30
BOB
m S
0.75
1
31-32
13013
Matua/Soybear
0.75
1
33,34a
ROD
Berm/SG0.75
1
34b -
BoB,Au
BermISG
0.6
1
35.36
Au
Berm/SG
0.6
1
37a,37b
WaB,LyBerm/SG
0.6
1
38,42-44a
Wag,Mac
WheatlSaybeant
0.5
1
39-41,44b
WaBeaUSoy
eant
0.6
1
45
WaBea
oy eanf
0.6
1
46a,47a
BoB,WaI3 MaC
ea Say ean:
0,5
1
46b,47b
BOB.Ly
ea Soy eanE
0.65
1
48
WaB,Ly
ea Soy ean:
0.6
1
49
WaB,Mar,
WReaugoyGeani
0.5
1
o
Mac,1308atu
Soy ear
0.5
1
51.59
BOB
PMOSM-y-bea--F
0.75
1
3
BoB,WaBatu
Soy eat
0.6
1
4a
BH,MaC,WaBBerm
SG
0.5
1
54b
BH,MaC,Ly
atu Soy ear
0,5
1
55
WaB
Matua/Soybean
0.6
1
THIS TABLE IS NOT NEEDED IF WASTE IS NOT BEING APPLIED BY IRRIGATION,
HOWEVER A SIMILAR TABLE WILL BE NEEDED FOR DRY LITTER OR SLURRY.
•t 6 Lagoons
Your facility is designed for _180 -days of temporary storage and the temporary
storage must be removed on the average of once every _6 -Months. In no
instance should the volume of waste being stored in your structure exceed
Elevation 'see lagoon design.
Call the local Natural Resources Conservation Service (formerly Soil
Conservation Service) or Soil and Water Conservation District office after you
receive the waste analysis report for assistance in determining the amount per
acre to apply and the proper application rate prior to applying the waste.
NUP Page 5

•:i' . 9i5:?<s:<:.aSiiyl; ;s::,.:asySx.: a:�. ' •b^;•5'Y,sy., :..>
"•''+l. :'?k �' .',ysu. . i�ioy;:d:.;u:;.. `3 . a... ur•:y: , -�.�:
r yyddr�: ,.,?:{H: ,..c?:f• N:;{..: .{?{: • ye; �.;,' a.: 't: v �:r
.C. .'Y..,a:.'^:...o..d .:i.?:U:?•i: {:{.;i4i'i.Si::4 :Y:ini$..:......... >. rS,•,r n `a
�?.:..,v v':f, ^:a•or�`�:i::.
•
�ax:.•�it?i. S.; .,...,5.... .... �'S.L..a...6:dS2::....c£.,:s.aS., :.hS::Nv.'?:S."?:':: � :3 �'`:f. '� �� � :.:�.n.x;�.:G.:w.. i. x.,...�...,...•,-..-}.., :...�....:;::J�:S,.rv:.
;�G:uS�b::w^:r:',S�G7 rif'iS.ai.'d'/.:,`;.G;,.':siw'ii�9.v:ib:"w^;rrs;^;Si:;ac;.aw»:r.:v.e.:.....,f,..v:e..s.i.:::•���.'c'••,�.. •`,�...s«:.nscs.,.. m"nv�•r:•iW'!A:'.`•S.w».,5:•.'Sud,S��S✓::;.'k:�:k::;:':{:;,iR`:.,..n:.:�::.:
Narrative of operation:
This NUP reflects wettable acres and is written by pulls.
On the matua/soybean rotation the PAN for the matua has been reduced by 20# for the residual following soybeans.
Information for this rotation may be found in Forages the Science of Grassiand Agriculture 4th edition.
The book was -printed -by the Iowa State University Press copyright 1985. A copy of the article is attached to this
waste plan.
This plan utilizes the 100# small grain overseed option. The last application of No_n the bermuda must be prior to
August 31 at. There may be a total of 50# of N put out Sep -Oct with the remaining 50# put out in Feb -Mar.
There will be no application of N during the months of Nov.Dec,Jan and the overseed must be removed by April 7th
or before heading which ever comes first.
On the fields with wheattso bean rotation the 20# residual nitro en from the soybeans was deducted
from the following wheat crop
These farms use a hard hose traveler and center pivot systems for irrigation. The method
of nutrient removal is throucih having and row crop methods.
NUP Page 5a

1111`117110
+n'h.yn.,F�n.<d.'�::F.:>.�;,o.z::�.��.....#%t.-:�'>.v::+N..�.c..:sAS'�AY?:.,F'.2�.v:,^Rxsoaxyr.y.du,:.ulYn.ur,'�:yv.,:0c:.v:Y.:;�4�::.::t^.�.v.':^..s.::2i:,i?:,;:�7k�4`.�5;i.!.v.k•:,.'.::+:'.2..;r•visai:.d:c:v.h':,.;:v^-l,i0;,;'�:-;F:�c�nY^?.i:ry':X'•S•'.;:�•J,' o+•.;..:Ai••:..:.m.:c;:•;%S:;�::7L.Rr� F:►��Tf♦.:.�..��w'MAy�!�... � c���:�:.%t.�A N,::.» .�:7��i�..;.,•.: �7,.,,:<.:�.Mr' :?•.:,.s�.�1�. � i. .;�a:;^S^n:v?•'?;yY.�b':,7y:.:,CG.%:,•5.�f.s.�::a�r'b"�3. .�`v. .c:fiam,+:.'{+,,o+C,.•'�»:+,%r':,,#f'J:'.Cv. •'�#r. .::,:,•.cfi.n;,:•'.nf n,':
.i..:
:
REQUIRED SPECIFICATIONS
1 Animal waste shall not reach surface waters of the state by runoff, drift, manmade
conveyances, direct application, or direct discharge during operation or land
application. Any discharge of waste which reaches surface water is prohibited.
2 There must be documentation in the design folder that the producer either owns or
has an agreement for use of adequate land on which to properly dispose of waste,
he/she shall provide a copy of an agreement with a landowner who is within a
reasonable proximity, allowing him/her the use of the land for waste application. It
is the responsibility of the owner of the facility to secure an update of the Waste
Utilization Plan when there is a change in the operation, increase in the number of
animals, method of utilization, or available land.
3 Animal waste shall be applied to meet, but not exceed, the nitrogen needs for
realistic crop yields based on soil type, available moisture, historical data, climatic
conditions, and level of management, unless there are regulations that restrict the
rate of application for other nutrients.
4 Animal waste shall be applied to land eroding less than 5 tons per acre per year.
Waste may be applied to land that is eroding at 5 or more tons, but less than 10
tons per acre per year providing grass filter strips are installed where runoff leaves
the field. (See FOTG Standard 393 - Filter Strip).
5 Odors can be reduced by injecting the waste or disking after waste application.
Waste should -not be applied when there is danger of drift from the irrigation field.
6 When animal waste is to be applied on acres subject to flooding, it will be soil
incorporated on conventionally tilled cropland. When applied to conservation tilled
crops or grassland, the waste may be broadcast provided the application does not
occur during a season prone to flooding. (See "Weather and Climate in North
Carolina" for guidance.)
7 liquid waste shall be applied at rates not to exceed the soil infiltration rate such that
runoff does not occur offsite or to surface waters and in a method which does not
cause drift from the site during application. No ponding should occur in order to
control odor or flies.
8 Animal waste shall not be applied to saturated soils, during rainfall events, or when
the surface is frozen.
NUP Page 6

s'l.:v?::a;Y:�r;rn:rc?•-%Suv �,..s:^`;:ru..��".�,35; . �yro� �+ :}c; •.�:..,�;'�".f,,,wr?,.,�. .�....�.-,y, w,,.,..:t++.+,w _hw,•s.k�,.q'...C,'aY :. ro: .�a�.'•SJ?F:3;U�{.;�:�3f.;vns�?c'-S;y'-
...{.r•Fx r:.4r�.{.?$:�-''r�i+r:: Lf' 'w'E _'�:R'�rr rC+-r : 1. J:i y .:`�•,:•',�.w'%n,�i.,4'4i/Y�$'�''i'y,'Y:!4J:ii'Yij.'�'v'r4
'�:it .,s;:., n.�,;..6rn rry.tar�,.3K .o;.^x t' `�% > #�� ti � •'2:..d / dY i;. .W� .:•� :;t s;?"'
_.env iii'.�'�, n.'} J.; �.�t �;�?. }•.. � ':9 rur - :!'. •::•.
r.:
:..s r r .r:.;r%s�6?:d..:kfrw' a i} S.R} ...:sY �r ...: ,#',-}� ,... s•r:�l+�.,�.,.:.G.�.....».:,,^��•^�S.a.:,.,#.,,..,M,,...,w..o�SHr �yry,.�'-�,dn;:N::�''�rwsaf'S��b
REQUIRED SPECIFICATIONS
(continued)
9 Animal waste shall be applied on actively growing crops in such a manner that the
crop is not covered with waste to a depth that would inhibit growth. The potential
for salt damage from animal waste should also be considered.
10 Waste nutrients shall not be applied in fail or winter for spring planted crops on soils
with a high potential for leaching. Waste nutrient loading rates on these soils
should be held to a minimum and a suitable winter cover crop planted to take up
released nutrients. Waste shall not be applied more than 30 days prior to planting
of the crop or forages breaking dormancy.
11 Any new swine facility sited on or after October 1, 1995 shall comply with the
following: The outer perimeter of the land area onto which waste is applied from a
lagoon that is a component of a swine farm shall be at least 50 feet from any
residential property boundary and from any perennial stream or river (other than an
irrigation ditch or canal. Animal waste other than swine waste from facilities sited
on or after October 1, 1995), shall not be applied closer than 25 feet to perennial
waters. (See Standard 393 - Filter Strips).
12 Animal waste shall not be applied closer than 100 feet to wells.
13 Animal waste shall not be applied closer than 200 feet of dwellings other than those
owned by the landowner.
14 Waste shall be applied in a manner not to reach other property and public right -of
ways.
15 Animal waste shall not be discharged into surface waters, drainageways, or
wetlands by a discharge or by over -spraying, Animal waste may be applied to prior
converted wetlands provided they have been approved as a land application site by
a "technical specialist". Animal waste shall not be applied on grassed waterways
that discharge directly into water courses, and on other grassed waterways, waste
shall be applied at agronomic rates in a manner that causes no runoff or drift from
the site.
16 Domestic and industrial waste from washdown facilities, showers, toilets, sinks, etc.,
shall not be discharged into the animal waste management system.
17 If animal production at the facility is to be suspended or terminated, the owner is
responsible for obtaining and implementing a "closure plan" which will eliminate the
possibility of an illegal discharge, pollution and erosion.
NUP Page 7

• � �Aw.: ...;.;5.}: w:{':,n'n �: �$�`v"'..:,,..,.:..,.�•,.,.•.i.y,.� wvO+wt:}:ik ++Sh}'i�� u76i'`K;i
Y'ih: ^3S. vv: :C: :J.�:...... {'.- y. .:.•i`.'ry"J
:: ti'-. '.Y :R•+ } ..Y•: f.'i:}i$' LT �'. r$fi%`.t
4•,'r,:,q'hr:{::::rr, V:::tY��' .: i.:....h.:.r....:w.•: C,'7... ^':C..#... r. i ��lr::-r,�n-.'r'M'>v.! ::'w'
dpi; ..",ii!oiv ?:k'`'" . l .a"-�,. •: � ::,_.:fi. w"v'f'!Su;. >:;n.'G,"�S4 uf.
1 B Waste handling structures, piping, pumps, reels, etc., should be inspected on a
regular basis to prevent breakdowns, leaks, and spills. A regular maintenance
checklist should be kept on site.
19 Animal waste can be used in a rotation that includes vegetables and other crops for
direct human consumption. However, if animal waste is used on crops for direct
human consumption it should only be applied preplant with no further applications
of animal waste during the crop season.
20 Highly visible markers shall be installed to mark the top and bottom elevations of
the temporary storage (pumping volume) of all waste treatment lagoons. Pumping
shall be managed to maintain the liquid level between markers. A marker will be
required to mark the maximum storage volume for waste storage ponds.
21 Waste shall be tested within 60 days of utilization and soil shall be tested at least
annually at crop sites where waste products are applied. Nitrogen shall be the rate -
determining element. Zinc and copper levels in the soils shall be monitored and
alternative crop sites shall be used when these metals approach excessive levels.
pH shall be adjusted for optimum crop production and maintained. Soil and waste
analysis records shall be kept for five years. Poultry dry waste application records
shall be maintained for three (3) years. Waste application records for all other
waste shall be maintained for five (5) years.
22 Dead animals will be disposed of in a manner that meets North Carolina
regulations.
NUP Page 8

P.O. Box 1076 * Rose Hill, N.C. 28458
FARMS(910) 289-2111
11 5 2003
September 12, 2003 1 ----
Chief,
_ _
Chief, Environmental Enforcement Section Re: DOJ Case No. 90-5-T-1-4436 - --
Environment & Natural Resources Division
U.S. Department of Justice
P.O. Box 7611
Washington, DC 20044
Chief, Water Programs Enforcement Branch
Water Management Division
U.S. E.P.A., Region IV
Atlanta Federal Center
61 Forsyth Street
Atlanta, GA 30303
Mr. Dennis R. Ramsey
NCDENR - Division of Water Quality
1617 Mail Service Center
Raleigh, NC 27699-1617
Mr. Paul Rawls
L/ NCDENR - Division of Water Quality
225 Green Street, Suite 714
Fayetteville, NC 28301-5043
Dear Madam/Sir:
Re: American Canoe Association, Inc., et al.
& U.S.A. v. Murphy Farms, Inc.
E.D.N.C. Civil Action Nos.
7 -98 -CV -4-F(1)
7 -98 -CV -19-F(1)
5 -98 -CV -209-F(1)
Re: NPDES Permit No: NC0086614
Facility # 82-77 .
Re: NPDES Permit No: NC0086614
Facility # 82-77
The enclosed revised Waste Utilization Plan is sent to you in accordance with the above
referenced items and the Consent Decree resulting from the litigation. The plan has been
changed to reflect additional sprayfield acreage.
Please call me if you have any questions.
Sincerely, �n
David Hulbert
DM Farms of Rose Hill, LLC
Enclosure

PRODUCER: MAG IV, MELVILLE I & II, DELL, DM SECTION 1 SITE 4 Facility # 82-77
LOCATION: 4750 WAYCROSS RD, DUPLIN COUNTY
TELEPHONE: [phone] ext. 4541
TYPE OPERATION: FARROW - FINISH
NUMBER OF ANIMALS: 32,080
400 - WEAN -FEEDER, 27,280 FEEDER -FINISH, 4,400 FARROW -WEAN
The waste from your animal facility must be land applied at a specified rate to prevent
pollution of surface and/or groundwater. The plant nutrients in the animal waste should
be used to reduce the amount of commercial fertilizer required for the crops in the fields
where the waste Is to be applied. This waste utilization plan uses nitrogen as the
limiting nutrient. Waste should be analyzed before each application cycle. Annual soil
tests are strongly encouraged so that all plant nutrients can be balanced for realistic
yields of the crop to be grown.
Several factors are important in implementing your waste utilization plan in order to
maximize the fertilizer value of the waste and to ensure that it is applied In an
environmentally safe manner. Always apply waste based on the needs of the crop to
be grown and the nutrient content of the waste. Do not apply more nitrogen than the
crop can utilize. Soil types are Important as they have different infiltration rates,
leaching potentials, cation exchange capacities, and available water holding capacities.
Normally waste shall not be applied to land eroding at greater than 5 tons per acre per
year. With special precautions, waste may be applied to land eroding at up to 10 tons
per acre per year. Do not apply waste on saturated soils, when it is raining, or when
the surface is frozen. Either of these conditions may result in runoff to surface waters
which is not allowed under DEM regulations. Wind conditions should also be
considered to avoid drift and downwind odor problems. To maximize the value of
nutrients for crop production and to reduce the potential for pollution, the waste should
be applied to a growing crop or applied to bare ground not more than 30 days prior to
planting. Injecting the waste or disking will conserve nutrients and reduce odor
problems.
The estimated acres needed to apply the animal waste is based on typical nutrient
content for this type of facility. Acreage requirements should be based on the waste
analysis report from your waste management facility. Attached you will find information
on proper sampling techniques, preparation, and transfer of waste samples to the lab
for analysis.
This waste utilization plan, if carried out, meets the requirements for compliance with
15A NCAC 2H.0217 adopted by the Environmental Management Commission.
Page 1

Amount of Waste Produced -Per Year (gallons, ft. tons, etc.)
4,400 6.1 26,840
27,280 animals X 1.9 (tons) wastelanimallyear = 51,832 (amt.) waste/year.
400 0.42 168
Amount of Plant Available Nitrogen (PAN) Produced Per Year
4,400 5.4
26,280 animals X 2.3 lbs. PAN/animal/year =
1,000 2.3
400 0.48
78,840 TONS
9,504
60,444 lbs. PAN/year. (PAN from N.C. Tech.
920 Guide Std. 633)
77
70,945 e0% reduction in PAN for 2 -stage lagoon
# PAWYEAR
Applying the above amount of waste is a big Job. You should plan time and have
appropriate equipment to apply the waste In a timely manner.
The following acreage will be needed for waste application based on the crop to be grown
and surface application:
"The 60% reduction is at the MAG IV lagoon only and in actuality it is a 77% reduction based on historical
waste analysis.
"This N is from animal waste only. If nutrients from other sources such as commercial
fertilizer are applied, they must be accounted for. N must be based on realistic yield_
expectation.
NOTE: The applicator is cautioned that P and K may be over applied while meeting the N
requirements. Beginning in 1996 the Coastal Zone Management Act will require farmers in
some eastern counties of North Carolina to have a nutrient management plan that addresses
all nutrients. This plan only addresses Nitrogen.
Page 2

Expected RYE
Field Soil Corn Wheat Soybean Millet Fescue Bermuda Small Grain
No. Type Lbs of N per Acre
1
CKA
75
84
80
248
100
250
50
2
ChA
75
84
60
248
100
250
50
3
ChA
75
84
80
248
100
250
50
8
ChA
75
84
80
248
100
250
50
9
WaB
94
96
112
275
75
275
50
10
WaB
94
96
112
275
75
275
50
11
WaB
94
96
112
275
75
275
50
16
BOB
75
64
100
225
75
225
50
17
BOB
75
84
100
225
75
225
50
18a
BOB
75
84
100
225
75
225
50
18b
BOB
75
84
100
225
75
225
50
19a
BOB
75
84
100
225
75
225
50
19b
BOB
75
84
-100
225
75
225
50
20
BOB
75
84
100
225
75
225
50
21
BOB
75
84
100
225
75
225
50
22a
BOB
75
84
100
225
75
225
50
22b
BOB
75
84
100
225
75
225
50
23a
BOB
75
64
100
225
75
225
50
23b
BOB
75
84
100
225
75
225
50
24
BOB
75
84
100
225
75
225
50
25a
BOB
75
84
100
225
75
225
50
25b
BOB
75
84
100
225
75
225
50
26
BOB
75
84
100
225
75
225
50
27
BOB
75
84
100
225
75
225
50
28
BOB
75
84
100
225
75
225
50
29
BOB
75
84
100
225
75
225
50
30
BOB
75
64
100
225
75
225
50
31
BOB
75
84
100
225
75
225
50
32
BOB
75
84
100
225
75
225
50
33
BOB
75
84
100
225
75
225
50
34a
BOB
75
84
100
225
75
225
50
34b
BOB
75
84
100
225
75
225
50
crops 1

Expected RYE
Field Soil Com Wheat Soybean Millet Fescue Bermuda Small Grain
No. Type Lbs of N per Acre
35
AuB
106
108
120
275
75
275
50
36
AuB
106
108
120
275
75
275
50
37a
WaB
94
96
112
275
75
275
50
37b
WaB
94
96
112-
275
75
275
50
36
WaB
94
96
112
275
75
275
50
39
WaB
94
96
112
275
75
275
50
40
WaB
94
96
112
275
75
275
50
41
WaS
94
96
112
275
75
275
50
42
WaB
94
96
112
275
75
275
50
43
WaB
94
96
112
275
75
275
50
44a
WaB
94
96
112
275
75
275
50
44b
W aS
94
96
112
275
75
275
5o
45
WaB
94
96
112
275
75
275
50
46a
BOB
75
84
100
225
75
225
50
46b
BOB
75
84
100
225
75
225
50
47a
BOB
75
84
100
225
75
225
50
47b
BOB
75
84
100
225
75
225
50
48
WaB
94
96
112
275
75
275
50
49
WaB
94
96
112
275
75
275
50
50
BOB
75
84
100
225
75
225
50
51
BOB
75
84
100
225
75
225
50
52
BOB
75
84
100
225
75
225
50
53
BOB
75
84
100
225
75
225
50
54a
BH
138
108
152
165
200
175
50
54b
SH
138
108
152
165
200
175
50
55
WaB
94
96
112
275
75
275
50
crops 2

Crops Produced
Reef Aerway Total Comment
Field Corn Wheat Soybean Millet Fescue Bermuda Small Grain Acres Acres - Wetted Acres
No. Lbs.of N Utilized
F 9811
Totals 7978 8749 10370 23793 5090 23568 5015 155 97.2 253 1
--_--
• 1 4
1 1
®®
'
KOM 1
MOM
®�
1
F 9811
Totals 7978 8749 10370 23793 5090 23568 5015 155 97.2 253 1

Crops Produced
Reel Aerway Total Comment
Field Corn Wheat Soybean Millet Fescue Bermuda Small Grain Acres Acres Wetted Acres
No. Lbs.of N Utilized
Totals 11222 10804 13313 26901 0 5718 1185 82 52.85 135
50-53,54b

ACRES WITH AGREEMENT OR LONG TERM LEASE
(Agreement with adjacent landowner must be attached)
(Required only if operator does not own
adequate land [see Required Specification 21)
Expected RYE
Field Soil Com Wheat Soybean Millet Fescue Matua Bermuda Small Grain
No. Type Lbs of N per Acre
1 WaB 94 96 112 275 75 100 275 50
5 WaB 94 96 112 275 75 100 275 50
6 WaB 94 96 112 275 75 100 275 50
leased crops

Table 2: ACRES WITH AGREEMENT OR LONG TERM LEASE
(Agreement with adjacent landowner must be attached)
(Required only if operator does not own
adequate land [see Required Specification 21)
Crops Produced
Reel Aerway Tota[ Comment
Field Corn Wheat Soybean Millet Acres Acres Wetted Acres
No. Lbs.of N Utilized
1
3760
3840
4480
16225
0 a0.0
40.0
5
376
1
384
448
16225
0 4.0
4.o
8
1410
1440
1680
16225
0 15.o"
15.0
Totals
5546
5664
6608
48675
0 59.0
59
* See footnote for Table 1.
NOTE: The Waste Utilization Plan must contain provisions for periodic land
application of sludge at agronomic rates. The sludge will be nutrient rich and will
require precautionary measures to prevent over application of nutrient or other
elements.

ILIMUM.
art
See attached map showing the fields to be used for the utilization of waste water.
Application of Waste by Irrigation
Field Soil Type Crop Application Application
No. Rata (In/1-11r) Amount (In.1
1-3
C hA
Fescue
0.75
1
8
C hA
Fescue
0.75
1
9,11
Was
Berm/S(3
0.6
1
10
Was
CWB
0.6
1
16
Au
Berm(SG
0.6
1
17
BOB
BernVSG
0.75
1
18a-21
BOB
CWB
0.75
1
22a -23b
BOB
CWB
0.75
1
24-26
BOB
BennlSG
0.75
1
27
BOB
CWB
0.75
1
28
BOB
CWB
0.75
1
29-30
BOB
Berm1SG
0.75
1
31-32
BOB
CWB
0.75
1
33-34b
BOB
Berrn(SG
0.75
1
35-36
Au
BemVSG
0.6
1
37a -37b
WaB
CWB
0.6
1
38-44b
Was
CWB
0.6
1
45
Was
CWB
0.6
1
46a -47b
Was
CWB
0.6
1
48
Was.
CWB
0.6
1
49
W aB
CWB
0.6
1
50-53,54b
BOB
CWB
0.75
1
54a
lWaB
BOMVSG
0.6 1
1
55
lWaB
ICvvB 1
0.6 1
1
ACRES WITH AGREEMENT OR LONG TERM LEA5E
1
Wa8
ICWB
0.6
1
5
Wa6
ICWB
0.6
1
6
Was.
JCWB
0.6
1
** 6 Lagoons
Your facility is designed for _180„days of temporary storage and the temporary
storage must be removed on the average of once every-6—Months. In no
instance should the volume of waste being stored in your structure exceed
Elevation *see lagoon design.
Call the local Natural Resources Conservation Service (formerly Soil
Conservation Service) or Soil and Water Conservation District office after you
receive the waste analysis report for assistance in determining the amount per
acre to apply and the proper application rate prior to applying the waste.
Narrative of operation:
On The fields with wheat/soybean rotation the 20# residual nitrogen from the soybeans was deducted__
from (he following wheat crop.
These farms use a hard hospiraveler.center givotand dry hydrant system for irrigation. T e method
of lent removgl Is through haying and row crop a ho s,
Page 5

REQUIRED SPECIFICATIONS
Animal waste shall not reach surface waters of the state by runoff, drift, manmade
conveyances, direct application, or direct discharge during operation or land
application. Any discharge of waste which reaches surface water is prohibited.
2 There must be documentation in the design folder that the producer either owns or
has an agreement for use of adequate land on which to properly dispose of waste,
he/she shall provide a copy of an agreement with a landowner who is within a
reasonable proximity, allowing him/her the use of the land for waste application. It
is the responsibility of the owner of the facility to secure an update of the Waste
Utilization Plan when there is a change in the operation, increase in the number of
animals, method of utilization, or available land.
3 Animal waste shall be applied to meet, but not exceed, the nitrogen needs for
realistic crop yields based on soil type, available moisture, historical data, climatic
conditions, and level of management, unless there are regulations that restrict the
rate of application for other nutrients.
4 Animal waste shall be applied to land eroding less than 5 tons per acre.per year.
Waste may be applied to land that is eroding at 5 or more tons, but less than 10
tons per acre per year providing grass filter strips are Installed where runoff leaves
the field. (See FOTG Standard 393 - Filter Strip).
5 Odors can be reduced by Injecting the waste or disking after waste application.
Waste should not be applied when there is danger of drift from the irrigation field.
6 When animal waste is to be applied on acres subject to flooding, it will be soil
Incorporated on conventionally tilled cropland. When applied to conservation tilled
crops or grassland, the waste may be broadcast provided the application does not
occur during a season prone to flooding. (See "Weather and Climate in North
Carolina" for guidance.)
Liquid waste shall be applied at rates not to exceed the soil infiltration rate such that
runoff does not occur offsite or to surface waters and in a method which does not
cause drift from the site during application. No ponding should occur in order to
control odor or flies.
B Animal waste shall not be applied to saturated soils, during rainfall events, or when
the surface is frozen.
NUP Page 6

it ,.� ➢a .tawtap;'.�.. h a� siMS..eti., e - _ .� w .:s�+iFA s!.sS��iF
REQUIRED SPECIFICATIONS
(continued)
9 Animal waste shall be applied on actively growing crops in such a manner that the
crop Is not covered with waste to a depth that would inhibit growth. The potential
for salt damage from animal waste should also be considered.
10 Waste nutrients shall not be applied in fall or winter for spring planted crops on soils
with a high potential for leaching. Waste nutrient loading rates on these soils
should be held to a minimum and a suitable winter cover crop planted to take up
released nutrients. Waste shall not be applied more than 30 days prior to planting
of the crop or forages breaking dormancy.
11 Any new swine facility sited on or after October 1, 1995 shall comply with the
following: The outer perimeter of the land area onto which waste Is applied from a
lagoon that is a component of a swine farm shall be at least 50 feet from any
residential property boundary and from any perennial stream or river (other than an
irrigation ditch or canal. Animal waste other than swine waste from facilities sited
on or after October 1, 1995), shall not be applied closer than 25 feet to perennial
waters. (See Standard 393 - Filter Strips).
12 Animal waste shall not be applied closer than 100 feet to wells.
13 Animal waste shall not be applied closer than 200 feet of dwellings other than those
owned by the landowner.
14 Waste shall be applied in a manner not to reach other property and public right -of
ways.
15 Animal waste shall not be discharged into surface waters, drainageways, or
wetlands by a discharge or by over -spraying. Animal waste may be applied to prior
converted wetlands provided they have been approved as a land application site by
a "technical specialist". Animal waste shall not be applied on grassed waterways
that discharge directly Into water courses, and on other grassed waterways, waste
shall be applied at agronomic rates in a manner that causes no runoff or drift from
the site.
16 Domestic and industrial waste from washdown facilities, showers, toilets, sinks, etc.,
shall not be discharged Into the animal waste management system.
17 If animal production at the facility is to be suspended or terminated, the owner is
responsible for obtaining and implementing a "closure plan" which will eliminate the
possibility of an illegal discharge, pollution and erosion.
Page 7

18 Waste handling structures, piping, pumps, reels, etc., should be inspected on a
regular basis to prevent breakdowns, leaks, and spills. A regular maintenance
checklist should be kept on site.
19 Animal waste can be used in a rotation that includes vegetables and other crops for
direct human consumption. However, If animal waste Is used on crops for direct
human consumption it should only be applied preplant with no further applications
of animal waste during the crop season.
20 Highly visible markers shall be installed to mark the top and bottom elevations of
the temporary storage (pumping volume) of all waste treatment lagoons. Pumping
shall be managed to maintain the liquid level between markers. A marker will be
required to mark the maximum storage volume for waste storage ponds.
21 Waste shall be tested within 60 days of utilization and soil shall be tested at least
annually at crop sites where waste products are applied. Nitrogen shall be the rate -
determining element. Zinc and copper levels in the soils shall be monitored and
alternative crop sites shall be used when these metals approach excessive levels.
pH shall be adjusted for optimum crop production and maintained. Soil and waste
analysis records shall be kept for five years. Poultry dry waste application records
shall be maintained for three (3) years. Waste application records for all other
waste shall be maintained for five (5) years.
22 Dead animals will be disposed of in a manner that meets North Carolina
regulations.
Page 8

WASTEUT LI! ZATI0N PLAU AGBEEbdE SIT
Name of Farm: Mag IV, Melville I & 11, Dell, DM Section 1 Site 4
Owner / Manager Agreement
I (we) understand and will follow and implement the specifications and the operation
and maintenance procedures established in the approved animal waste utilization plan
for the farm named above. I (we) know that any expansion to the existing design
capacity of the waste treatment and storage system or construction of new facilities will
require a new certification to be submitted to the Division of Environment Management
(DEM) before the new animals are stocked. I (we) also understand that there must be
no discharge of animal waste from this system to surface waters of the state from a
storm event less severe than the 25 -year, 24 -Hour storm. The approved plan will be
flied on-site at the farm office and at the office of the local Soil and Water Conservation
District and will be available for review by DEM upon request.
Name of Facility Owner: DM Farms of Rose Hill LLC.
(please print)
Signature: ��1 Date: Za 3
Name of Manager (If different from owner
Signature:. _Date:/2zo 3
Name of Technical Specialist: ( please print):JA Linton
Affiliation: DM Far s of Rose LLC -
Address
(Agency): P.O. Pox 1_076
Signature: Date: 7 51 402-3
Page 9

I _ ..� .. R
� ;
�'$�R
ANIMAL WASTE UTILIZATION AGRE:,ENE,N_L
(Needed only X add8onal land has to be leased, etc.)
I, P-5 Al Ass «;g�ev, � L c- , hereby give DA1 F4, -As of„Atw6 A-11, 4,4 c -
permission to apply animal waste from his Waste utilization System on -T-7 acres
of my land for the duration of time shown below.
I understand that this waste contains nitrogen, phosphorous, potassium, and other
trace elements and when properly applied should not harm my land or crops. I also
understand that the use of waste will reduce my needed for commercial fertilizer.
Ps,” A.A. r -
Adjacent Landowner: Date:
Qr+AIJOat. '11� 4 G
Waste Producer: Date: Q3
Technical Representative: cA0 Date: ! "
SWCD Representative: Date:
Term of Agreement: 9X913 ," RC*3 to f/91/0-3
(Minimum of Ten Years on Cost Shared Items)
(See Required Specidcatlon No. 2)
Page 10

,rl�'l� °: � ° � rr'i''rr I, , � r i, s r.t.; ,!`;'s'':.l.t >,r°Fi�'� `'!I,_/,J, /.f�1., 13E' •r�
Fe ._ is 1 -t � > ., ;fie' .,•rlr.'-. ., '�
' '� a ••f 1 �{. °*'3 '� I: �{ Ir � { l;'! ,' �I.f J+'.5. �' „ t ,rrfl t � �`°�.�;,"L (/
ss >>
' `�"err. .•Z: � „ _ ��r ' '
/ *ww"
li{'r i>` ,., �. ii':c.1 19 :7��•1 `yj ^�� .t •�' ' ti 4�' f'a11#''i
I
Ir

PRODUCER: MAG IV, MELVILLE I & II, DELL, DM SECTION 1 SITE 4 Facility # 82-77
LOCATION: 4750 WAYCROSS RD, DUPLIN COUNTY
TELEPHONE: [phone] ext. 4541
TYPE OPERATION: FARROW - FINISH
NUMBER OF ANIMALS: 32,080
400 - WEAN -FEEDER, 27,280 FEEDER -FINISH, 4,400 FARROW -WEAN
The waste from your animal facility must be land applied at a specified rate to prevent
pollution of surface and/or groundwater. The plant nutrients in the animal waste should
be used to reduce the amount of commercial fertilizer required for the crops in the fields
where the waste is to be applied. This waste utilization plan uses nitrogen as the
limiting nutrient. Waste should be analyzed before each application cycle. Annual soil
tests are strongly encouraged so that all,plant nutrients can be balanced for realistic
yields of.the crop to be grown.
Several factors are important in implementing your waste utilization plan in order to
maximize the fertilizer value of the waste and to ensure that it is applied in an
environmentally safe manner. Always apply waste based on the needs of the crop to
be grown and the nutrient content of the waste. Do not apply more nitrogen than the
crop can utilize. Soil types are important as they have different infiltration rates,
leaching potentials, cation exchange capacities, and available water holding capacities.
Normally waste shall not be applied to land eroding at greater than 5 tons per acre per
year. With special precautions, waste may be applied to land eroding at up to 10 tons
per acre per year. Do not apply waste on saturated soils, when it is raining, or when
the surface is frozen. Either of these conditions may result in runoff to surface waters
which is not allowed under DEM regulations. Wind conditions should also be
considered to avoid drift and downwind odor problems. To maximize the value of
nutrients for crop production and to reduce the potential for pollution, the waste should
be applied to a growing crop or applied to bare ground not more than 30 days prior to
planting. Injecting the waste or disking will conserve nutrients and reduce odor
problems.
The estimated acres needed to apply the animal waste is based on typical nutrient
content for this type of facility. Acreage requirements should be based on the waste
analysis report from your waste management facility. Attached you will find information
on proper sampling techniques, preparation, and transfer of waste samples to the lab
for analysis.
This waste utilization plan, if carried out, meets the requirements for compliance with
15A NCAC 2H.0217 adopted by the Environmental Management Commission.
NUP Page 1

Amount of Waste Produced ,Per „Year (gallons, ft, tons. etc.)
4,400 6.1
27,280 animals X 1.9 (tons) waste/animal/year =
400 0.42
Amount of Plant Available Nitrogen (PAN) Produced Per Year
4,400 5.4
26,280 animals X 2.3 lbs. PAN/animal/year =
1,000 2.3
400 0.48
26,840
51,832 (amt.) waste/year.
168
78,840 TONS
11,880
60,444 lbs. PAN/year. (PAN from N.C. Tech.
1,160 Guide Std. 633)
96
73,570 50% reduction in PAN for 2 -stage lagoon
# PANNEAR
Applying the above amount of waste is a big job. You should plan time and have
appropriate equipment to apply the waste in a timely manner.
The following acreage will be needed for waste application based on the crop to be grown
and surface application:
See page 3 and 3a for Table 1 acres owned by producer.
"*The 50% reduction is at the MAG IV lagoon only and in actuality it is a 67% reduction based on historical
waste analysis.
'This N is from animal waste only. If nutrients from other sources such as commercial
fertilizer are applied, they must be accounted for. N must be based on realistic yield
expectation.
NOTE: The applicator is cautioned that P and K may be over applied while meeting the N
requirements. Beginning in 1996 the Coastal Zone Management Act will require farmers in
some eastern counties of North Carolina to have a nutrient management plan that addresses
all nutrients. This plan only addresses Nitrogen.
NUP Page 2

Table 1: ACRES OWNED BY PRODUCER
Tract Field Soil Crop Lbs. N Acres Lbs. N Month of
# No. Tvne Per Acre Utilized Application
MAG IV
1
ChA
Matua
250
6.2
1,560
Sept -June
MAG IV
2
ChA
Matua
250
8.8
2,200
Sept -June
MAG IV
3
ChA
Matua
250
8.8
2,200
Sept -June
MAG IV
8
ChA
Matua
250
2.1
525
Sept -June
MAG IV
9
WaB
Bermuda/Matua
440
13.6
5,964 Jan -Dec
MAG IV
10
WaB
Bermuda/Matua
440
13.6
5,984 Jan -Dec
MAG IV
11
WaB
Bermuda/Matua
440
5.4
2,376
Jan -Dec
Melville
16
Au
Bermuda/Matua
440
2.3
1,012
Jan -Dec
Melville
17
BoB,MaC
Bermuda/Matua
420
2.5
1,050
Jan -Dec
Melville
18a
BoB,Au
Matua
250
4.2
1,050
Sept -June
Melville
18b
BoB,MaC
Matua
263
3.01
789
Sept -June
Melville
19a
BoB,Au
Matua
250
5.3
1,325
Sept -June
Melville
19b
BoB,MaC
Matua
263
4.0
1,052
Sept -June
Melville
20
Bo8,MaC
Matua
263
4.2
1,105
Sept -June
Melville
21
BoB,MaC
Matua
263
2.2
579
Sept -June
Melville
22a
BOB
Matua
225
4.4
990
Sep4-June
Melville
22b
BoB,MaC
Matua
263.
3.1
615
Sept -June
Melville
23a
BOB
Matua
225
3.8
855
Sept -June
Melville
23b
BoB,MaC
Matua
263
1.3
342
Sept -June
Melville
24
BOB
Bermuda/Matua
360
2.7
972
Jan -Dec
Melville
25a
BOB
Bermuda/Matua
360
2.7
972
Jan -Dec
Melville
25b
BOB
Bermuda/Matua
360
4.8
1,728
Jan -Dec
Melville
26
BoB
Bermuda/Matua
360
2.9
1,044
Jan -Dec
Melville
27
BoB,Au
Bermuda/Matua
400
3.3
1,320
Jan -Dec
Melville
28
BoB
Bermuda/Matua
360
4.4
1,584
Jan -Dec
Melville
29
BOB
Bermuda/Matua
360
4.2
1,512
Jan -Dec
Melville
30
BOB
Bermuda/Matua
360
7.3
2,628
Jan -Dec
Melville
31
BOB
Bermuda/Matua
360
4.3
1,548
Jan -Dec
Melville
32
BOB
Bermuda/Matua
360
2.9
1,044
Jan -Dec
Melville
33
BoB
Bermuda/Matua
360
6.1
2,196 Jan -Dec
Melville I
34a
113oB
Bermuda/Matua
360
4.6
1,656
Jan -Dec
Melville I
34b
I BoB,Au
I Bermuda/Matua
400
6.3
2,520
Jan -Dec
Pj 1
Suw%
fV4j"0.
wao --
ac.03
1 E
tion _
ase
160
3ioo-
aa5
135
3�q-- a I S W
TOTAL 155.3 52,516
NUP Page 3

Table 1. ACRES OWNED BY PRODUCER
Tract Field Soil Crop Lbs. N Acres Lbs. N Month of
# No. TVDe Per Acre Utilized ADDiication
Dell
35
AuB
Bermuda ! Matua
440
5.7
2,508 Jan -Dec
Deli
36
AuS
Bermuda / Matua
440
0,8
352 Jan -Dec
Dell
37a
WaB,Ly
Bermuda l Matua
360
1.9
684 Jan -Dec
Dell
37b
WaB,Ly
Bermuda l Matua
360
2.8
1,008 Jan -Dec
Dell
38
WaB,MaC
Wheat
76
1.3
99 Sep - Apr
Dell
38
WaB,MaC
Soybeans
126
1.3
164 Apr - Se
Dell
39
WaB
Wheat
76
3.3
251 Sep - Apr
Dell
39
WaB
Soybeans
112
3.3
370 Apr - Sep
Dell
40
WaB
Wheat
76
2.1
160 Sep - A r
Dell
40
WaB
Soybeans
112
2.1
235 Apr - Se
Dell
41
WaB
Wheat
76
2.1
160 Sep - Apr
Dell
41
WaB
Soybeans
112
2.1
235 Apr - Sep
Dell
42
WaB,MaC
Wheat
76
3.6
274 Se - A r
Dell
42
WaB,MaC
Soybeans
126
3.6
454 Apr: Sep
Dell
43
WaB,MaC
Wheat
76
2.11
160 Sep - Apr
Dell
43
WaB,MaC
Soybeans
126
2.1
265 Apr - Sep
Dell
44a
WaB,MaC
Wheat
76
2.0
152 Sep - Apr,
Deli
44a'
WaB,MaC
Soybeans
126
2.0
252 Apr -,Sep
Dell
44b
WaB
Wheat
76
2.o
152 Sep - Apr
Dell
44b
WaB
Soybeans
112
2.0
224 Apr - Sep
S1 S4
45
WaB
Wheat
76
3.5
266 Sep - Apr
S1 S4
45
WaB
Soybeans
112
3.5
392 Apr - Sep
S1 S4
46a
BoB,WaB,MaC
Wheat
72
5.6
403 Sep - Apr
S1 S4
46a
BoB,WaB,MaC
Soybeans
117
5.6
655 Apr - Sep
S1 S4
46b
BoB,Ly
Wheat
64
1.4
90 Sep - Apr
S1S4
46b
BoB,Ly
Soybeans
102
1.4
143 Apr - Sep
S1 S4
47a
BoB,WaB,MaC
Wheat
72
6.5
468 Sep - Apr
S1S4
47a
BoB,WaB,MaC
Soybeans
117
6.5
761 Apr - Se
S1 S4
47b
BoB,Ly
Wheat
64
4.1
262 Se - Apr
S1 S4
47b
BoB,Ly
Soybeans
102
4.i
418 Apr - Sep
S1 S4
48
WaB,Ly
Wheat
70
5.21
364 Sep - Apr
S1 S4
48
WaB,Ly
Soybeans
108
5.2
562 Apr - Sep
S1S4
49
WaB,MaC
Wheat
76
3.2
243 Sep - Apr
S1 S4
49
WaB,MaC
Soybeans
126
3.2
403 Apr - Sep
S1 S4
50
MaC,BoB
Bermuda 1 Matua
420
2.0
840 Jan - Dec
S1 S4
51
BoB
Bermuda ! Matua
360
3.0
1,080 Jan- Dec
S1 S4
52
BoB
Bermuda ! Matua
360
2.41
864 Jan - Dec
S1 S4
53
BoB,WaB
Bermuda / Matua
400
4.11
1,640 Jan - Dec
S1 S4
54a
BH,MaC,WaB
Bermuda / Matua
400
6.91
2,760 Jan - Dec
S1 S4
54b
SH,MaC,Ly
Bermuda 1 Matua
344
1.9
654 Jan- Dec
MAG IV
55
WaB
Bermuda ! Matua
440
2,71
1,166 Jan - Dec
TOTAL 82.2 22,590
Total page 3 155.34
Total Farm Acres 237.5
IUP Page 3a
ae
S-10
�LAO
ass
lc�s
qao
ami
15'�
H00
a50
15"
31oo
Z5
135
311-1
0?f5
lag

Table 2: ACRES WITH AGREEMENT OR LONG TERM LEASE
(Agreement with adjacent landowner must be attached)
(Required only it operator does not own
adequate land [see Required Specification 2])
Tract Field Soil Crop Lbs. N Acres Lbs. N Month of
CIO. Type Per Acre Itilized ApplicatiorL
* See footnote for Table 1.
Totals from above Tables
Acres Lbs. N
Utilized
Table 1 237.5 75,105.9
Table 2 0 -
Total 237.5 75,105.9
Amount of N Produced 73,570.0
Surplus or Deficit 1,536
NOTE: The Waste Utilization Plan must contain provisions for periodic land
application of sludge at agronomic rates. The sludge will be nutrient rich and will
require precautionary measures to prevent over application of nutrient or other
elements.
NUP Page 4

.�:{-:i•: ??i:i 4:U:ti ti'vW;Li•Y i?v\'+.{b: 6:U.tb: '{N{Si:W:•:u h:{ht•Y:S:+iL{L'{.A{K4]u�:{hY}Ytih`bvb:!l':v,L{b?{•• Y{i '.Y`{{'.` :•i{+ •;th:v '::3:{r iii::::{i{::{ ��:0:{i' kip:{{i.:i,4'i ?{ii<. ?!i+v:4::+
+i4 v 1
..�za. : ��{: . ?t:^�^ � ���; ;:z ;;:ze"•:r;:xt::z 4':..o:¢e:: z::::x: r;xa:: e::r: ...:{:..s:zu•
:a�'t• i' rY
:x:•. i`xt.:Si":�i<' .:{:::>:::r:� �.:�:x:�:,...x,..:•,.u?p:'ai?��::::..•k;;:k •ia�z� ::hx•�+:..::,:.
:.,:.,:w.,w.:,..::::;ziirs.:,._:v,.,: ,,:.,K,,:.w,:u , :,,�......:. ...:.<.:.,.., ,u vv,.,:v v,:v.i,~.. •z.:.{.Y:,...ztaa:.z.:,z:,...�:,.:.,,.z;:.:a.::v<:,,.�..a:,,..::azo,�z,�.,w.L�.a..,,,..:...:.aLv.;;.ii;..:...
See attached map showing the fields to be used for the utilization of waste water.
Application of Waste by Irrigation
Field Soil Type Crop Application Application
No. Rate (In/Hr) Amount (in.)
1 thru 3
ChA
Matua
0.5
1
8
ChA
Matua
0.5
1
9,10,11
was
germ/Mat
0.6
1
16
Au
Berm/Mat
0.6
1
17
BOB,MaC
Berm/Mat
0.
1
18a,19a
BoB,Au
Malua
0.6
1
18 ,19b-21,22b,23b
BoB,MaC
Matua
0.
1
22a,23a
BOB
Vatua
0.75
1
24-26
'90 -B
Berm! at
0. 5
1
27
BoB,Au
Berm/Mat
0.6
1
28-30
BOB
Berm/Mat
0.75
31-32
BOB
Berm/Mat
0.75
1
33,34a
BOB
Berm/Mat
0.75
1
34boB,Au
Berm at
0.6
1
35,36
Au
Berrn/Mat Berm/Mat
0.6
1
3 a,37b
aB, y
Berm/Mat
0.6
1
38,42-44a
WaB,Mac
Wheat/Soybeans
0.5
1
39-41,44
Wa8
heat/Soybeans
0.6
1
4
a
ea o eans
0.6
4Ba,47a
BoB,WaB.MaC
Wheat/Soybeans
0.
1'
46b,47b
BOB, y
WheaVSoybeans
0,65
1
48
WaB,Ly
Wheat/Soybeans
0.6
1
49
WaB,Mac
Wheat/Soybeans
O's
1
50
MaC,BoBBerm/Mat
0,5
1
1,52BOB
Berm! at
6.79
1
53
BOB,WaB
BermlMat
0.6
1
54a
BH,MaC, aB
erm/Mat
0.
1
4b
8H.MaC.Ly
Berm/ al
0.
1
55
WaB
Berm/Mat
0.6
1
THIS TABLE IS NOT NEEDED IF WASTE IS NOT BEING APPLIED BY IRRIGATION,
HOWEVER A SIMILAR TABLE WILL BE NEEDED FOR DRY LITTER OR SLURRY.
" 6 Lagoons
Your facility is designed for _1 80—days of temporary storage and the temporary
storage must be removed on the average of once every _6_Months. In no
instance should the volume of waste being stored in your structure exceed
Elevation *see lagoon design.
Call the local Natural Resources Conservation Service (formerly Soil
Conservation Service) or Soil and Water Conservation District office after you
receive the waste analysis report for assistance in determining the amount per
acre to apply and the proper application rate prior to applying the waste.
NUP Page 5

;v'i{{: .:-.:....:iifi..:'{ii'.:ti v:i':.. ..:: x:.:v:r. • ...: -: ::.... :..v..x..:.
r.4Y., : %.: .J.: ,.i�<'=}:2•' :ihi:i: :;4:"v ;v\} �: kLY:h-}:t:ih•:i?�C•%•:{;24"=:%iu' ;ihui i:.itt•A
`+ori.}.. :.r.: •.riE
c};R:: :.Y:b ,`Yi::fi'tk;ii.^,i}kY:;;i :.ti%k%` _ ':kY:: %kkki• kkb..
.::+:iyjv� :•:Y:.^in
�. 't2C kid{;;aS:::,:::::•.Y,'is2C.:..:..::..,:.:....:�`i:.c::i?:"tt",`':2iS`�..... x:::
"L<L,.:..}'t_s:YY;::Y.;;.u2,}::.::iG:'..:::::::+-.::a•:g';:kuk•:ri-:.,:.,-:<-::.:.,. �., : ,•.:.,:,v.,,.•. -:..:v. vx v,:L-,,:,v.::k-..-. :
#f
�Y:�Y'•.:�`•3R.�'���..t'o.�.:+r' .;Y;Y.:'
::::w.:.,•,:.,..::,.:,,.:..::....:.,.:r<::�,�,:,-.•.,,.•.i:;'t:::,..:v.,•,::,,.,...:r, ��:•.:ah��•..:.:,:.•.,,u., hki•,' w.•,i..•.,....r.,.a.....,ea:.2:.i,..,::•.::.,::.•..ur.•...Y...•.:.r:�wv.fili�o::....,......r.:,,;.:x:<•..:'.`.rk.,:.,:.....::..:r.-...•.::r.....,:.•.
Narrative of operation:
This NUP reflects wettable acres and is written by pulls. There may be a total of 50# of nitrogen placed
on the pure stand Matua fields during the time period of July - August. The operator is cautioned not to
exceed the total PAN for the season. On the Bermuda/Matua inter -seed dudnQ the months of Mar -Oct
the operator is not to exceed 275# of PAN,and during the months of Oct -Mar is not to exceed 165# PAN
on hydrants with a PAN rate of 440.
On the Bermuda 1 Matua inter -seed during the months of Mar -Oct the operator is not to exceed 215# of
PAN, and during_the months of Sep -Mar is not to exceed 129# of PAN on hydrants with a PAN rate of 344#.
On the Bermuda 1 Matua inter -seed during the months of Mar -Oct the operator is not to exceed 225# of
PAN, and during the months of Sep -Mar is not to exceed 135# of PAN on hydrants with a PAN rate of 360#.
On the Bermuda I Matua inter -seed during the months of Mar -Oct the operator is not to exceed 263# of
PANS and during the months of Sep -Maris not to exceed 157# of PAN on hydrants with a PAN rate of 420#.
On the Bermuda 1 Matua inter -seed during the months of Mar -Oct the o erator is not to exceed 250# of
PAN and dudnq the months of Sep -Mar is not to exceed 150# of PAN on hydrants with a PAN rate of 400#.
On hydrants 8 -11,24 -26,31 -34b,35 -37b,55 matua will be established in the fall of 2001.
On hydrants 9 -11,28.31 -32,35 -37b.50 -54b bermuda was sprigged in the spring of 2001.
On the fields with wheat/soybean rotation the 20# residual nitrogen from the soybeans was deducted
from the following wheat crop
These farms use a hard hose traveler center pivot and dry hydrant system for irrigation. The method
of nutrient removal is through haying and row,ciop'methods.-'
NUP Page 5a

REQUIRED SPECIFICATIONS
1 Animal waste shall not reach surface waters of the state by runoff, drift, manmade
conveyances, direct application, or direct discharge during operation or land
application. Any discharge of waste which reaches surface water is prohibited.
2 There must be documentation in the design folder that the producer either owns or
has an agreement for use of adequate land on which to properly dispose of waste,
he/she shall provide a copy of an agreement with a landowner who is within a
reasonable proximity, allowing him/her the use of the land for waste application. It
is the responsibility of the owner of the facility to secure an update of the Waste
Utilization Plan when there is a change in the operation, increase in the number of
animals, method of utilization, or available land.
3 Animal waste shall be applied to meet, but not exceed, the nitrogen needs for
realistic crop yields based on soil type, available moisture, historical data, climatic
conditions, and level of management,, unless there -are regulations that restrict the
rate of application for other nutrients.
4 Animal waste shall be applied to land eroding less than 5 tons per acre per year.
Waste may be applied to land that is eroding at 5 or more tons, but less than 10
tons per acre per year providing grass filter strips are installed where runoff leaves
the field. (See FOTG Standard 393 - Filter Strip).
5 Odors can be reduced by injecting the waste or disking after waste application.
Waste should not be applied when there is danger of drift from the irrigation field.
6 When animal waste is to be applied on acres subject to flooding, it will be soil
incorporated on conventionally tilled cropland. When applied to conservation tilled
crops or grassland, the waste may be broadcast provided the application does not
occur during a season prone to flooding. (See "Weather and Climate in North
Carolina" for guidance.)
7 liquid waste shall be applied at rates not to exceed the soil infiltration rate such that
runoff does not occur offsite or to surface waters and in a method which does not
cause drift from the site during application. No ponding should occur in order to
control odor or flies.
8 Animal waste shall not be applied to saturated soils, during rainfall events, or when
the surface is frozen.
NUP Page 6

REQUIRED SPECIFICATIONS
(continued)
9 Animal waste shall be applied on actively growing crops in such a manner that the
crop is not covered with waste to a depth that would inhibit growth. The potential
for salt damage from animal waste should also be considered.
10 Waste nutrients shall not be applied in fall or winter for spring planted crops on soils
with a high potential for leaching. Waste nutrient loading rates on these soils
should be held to a minimum and a suitable winter cover crop planted to take up
released nutrients. Waste shall not be applied more than 30 days prior to planting
of the crop or forages breaking dormancy.
11 Any new swine facility sited on or after October 1, 1995 shall comply with the
following: The outer perimeter of the land area onto which waste is applied from a
lagoon that is a component of a swine farm shall be at least 50 feet from any
residential property boundary and from any perennial stream or river (other than an
irrigation ditch or canal. Animal waste other than swine waste from facilities sited
on or after -October 1, 1995), shall not be.,applied closer than 25 feet -to perennial
waters. (See Standard 393 - Filter Strips).
12 Animal waste shall not be applied closer than 100 feet to wells.
13 Animal waste shall not be applied closer than 200 feet of dwellings other than those
owned by the landowner.
14 Waste shall be applied in a manner not to reach other property and public right -of
ways.
15 Animal waste shall not be discharged into surface waters, drainageways, or
wetlands by a discharge or by over -spraying. Animal waste may be applied to prior
converted wetlands provided they have been approved as a land application site by
a "technical specialist". Animal waste shall not be applied on grassed waterways
that discharge directly into water courses, and on other grassed waterways, waste
shall be applied at agronomic rates in a manner that causes no runoff or drift from
the site.
16 Domestic and industrial waste from washdown facilities, showers, toilets, sinks, etc.,
shall not be discharged into the animal waste management system. .
17 If animal production at the facility is to be suspended or terminated, the owner is
responsible for obtaining and implementing a "closure plan" which will eliminate the
possibility of an illegal discharge, pollution and erosion.
NUP Page 7

�.xttzk :-:uwt�•�. ,zt�x�u;.: ;;�.;, exxur¢;:r;:...•;x;�;v.:z:.N.k:; .rkh;� ;.rr= �::tz;zz>.;r�z;.:rrt.^- ;rz: • ,xz•z ;��a �z;r L:z�r :r :¢�;
iz?z'iii� : ;£::.. .?.. „;: � � '.>4r;tk; . ���i ..?� .x:� ;?�?:.:•:�: 4ii5,r::x ,:? .. n;;,#;
w..a\ .v.:}cx::x?xu "`;;v .. :'•�r.vv;�2., .''t'r:::iz tic' :;Y:` r>'y°'.' •'2` ...T:.;?:.c:.2..:
yu . :;, .�..C?: :..i�kk,x:: :,5, '2::t2}v:4 k..vru;t<v.'" � 2'q• 'it.A � .`ti}, .a.�b�?`.�trt'�-•:.ftkt:<
1�..ra�Zr^�:`t�a? :.'� :.::.:,:�.:x.. ,..:.,,.,.;>.#;..z,�Z.:,? ..... '• r •: ?� ���� .: t? � � z? ,;. 'a•..:?t:,?:z:,tzx•., ..,..,::.. x.., ,}v,v_:o?:i::
.,e:..,,a.,,ty..�vhhtw}:;.}:,;•.;.z.„:..::.::.t::::?:::}..::..:?z.a::..zt?r�;;�:c;; , .riF:. .�.�::?:�:.zt,�� ,}?...
Y r:.<r?:rr}g;y.}�ci.*}k: �'i:��b."Ukr}}: Yi::�.}4�Y k.V}.i5vTkv�9k�i}S'i.1v.1C}4}h\h Th T}h>T:%: }}}>ix?.;•\V•>Wn���.`�Y"AT`Y: Yrh `iv}tiN YNYih��i}:NNi•YWnT'?C.l`N:J}Yh`N}Y: }h`GJ.W}: }}x}}X•:L\: }h+h`. }:vsVW:4h�}{y�; 2}:i:}}u::?}}it:
18 Waste handling structures, piping, pumps, reels, etc., should be inspected on a
regular basis to prevent breakdowns, leaks, and spills. A regular maintenance
checklist should be kept on site.
19 Animal waste can be used in a rotation that includes vegetables and other crops for
direct human consumption. However, if animal waste is used on crops for direct
human consumption it should only be applied preplant with no further applications
of animal waste during the crop season.
20 Highly visible markers shall be installed to mark the top and bottom elevations of
the temporary storage (pumping volume) of all waste treatment lagoons. Pumping
shall be managed to maintain the liquid level between markers. A marker will be
required to mark the maximum storage volume for waste storage ponds.
21 Waste shall be tested within 60 days of utilization and soil shall be tested at least
annually at crop sites where waste products are applied. Nitrogen shall be the rate -
determining element. Zinc and copper levels in the soils shall be monitored and
alternative crop sites shall be used when these metals approach excessive levels.
pH shall be adjusted for optimum crop production and maintained. Soil and waste
analysis records shall be kept for five years. Poultry dry waste application records
shall be maintained for three (3) years. Waste application records for all other
waste shall be maintained for five (5) years.
22 Dead animals will be disposed of in a manner that meets North Carolina
regulations.
NUP Page 8

WASTE UTILIZATION PLAN AGREEMENT
Name of Farm: Mag IV, Melville I & II, Dell, DM Section 1 Site 4
Owner / Manager Agreement
I (we) understand and will follow and implement the specifications and the operation
and maintenance procedures established in the approved animal waste utilization plan
for the farm named above. I (we) know that any expansion to the existing design
capacity of the waste treatment and storage system or construction of new facilities will
require a new certification to be submitted to the Division of Environment Management
(DEM) before the new animals are stocked. I (we) also understand that there must be
no discharge of animal waste from this system to surface waters of the state from a
storm event less severe than the 25 -year, 24 -Hour storm. The approved plan will be
filed on-site at the farm office and at the office of the local Soil and Water Conservation
District and will be available for review by DEM upon request.
Name of Facility Owner: DM Farms of Rose Hill LLC.
(please print)
Signature: —1-1� Date: l� � � S� Q i—
Name of Manager (If different from owner): _ Terry Tate �^ _
Signature: Date:
Name of Technical Specialist: (please print) : AJ Linton
Affiliation: DM Farms of Rose Hill LLC.
Address (Agency): P.O. Box 1076
Rose Hill, NC 28458
i
Signature: rL+ Date:
NUP Page 9

To: DWQ, DSWC
From: AJ Linton
Date: 10/25/02
DM Farmsms oo 111 LLC.
P.O. Box 1076
Rose Hill, N.C. 28458
MEMOi
,OC'J 2 8 2002
L -I-
Re: Changes to WUP for Facility#82-77
We have made the following changes to the waste plan to better utilize our land. On fields 1-3
,8,18a -23b the matua was changed to a matua/soybean rotation. On fields 9-11,16,17,24-37b,50-
55 the Bermuda/Matua was changed to Bermuda/Small grain. These changes were made in an
effort to enable us to irrigate in the summer months. Because of the regulation change on Matua
there was no economical benefit to having it in the rotation. We believe that this new rotation
will allow us to better irrigate and control lagoon levels.
Sincerely ,
ox, �X-4 �-
Linton

PRODUCER: MAG IV, MELVILLE I & II, DELL, DM SECTION 1 SITE 4
Facility # 82-77
LOCATION: 4750 WAYCROSS RD, DUPLIN COUNTY
TELEPHONE: [phone] ext. 4541
TYPE OPERATION: FARROW - FINISH
NUMBER OF ANIMALS: 32,080
400 - WEAN -FEEDER, 27,280 FEEDER -FINISH, 4,400 FARROW -WEAN
The waste from your animal facility must be land applied at a specified rate to prevent
pollution of surface and/or groundwater. The plant nutrients in the animal waste should
be used to reduce the amount of commercial fertilizer required for the crops in the fields
where the waste is to be applied. This waste utilization plan uses nitrogen as the
limiting nutrient. Waste should be analyzed before each application cycle. Annual soil
tests are strongly encouraged so that all plant nutrients can be balanced for realistic
yields of the crop to be grown.
Several factors are important in implementing your waste utilization plan in order to
maximize the fertilizer value of the waste and to ensure that it is applied in an
environmentally safe manner. Always apply waste based on the needs of the crop to
be grown and the nutrient content of the waste. Do not apply more nitrogen than the
crop can utilize. Soil types are important as they have different infiltration rates,
leaching potentials, cation exchange capacities, and available water holding capacities.
Normally waste shall not be applied to land eroding at greater than 5 tons per acre per
year. With special precautions, waste may be applied to land eroding at up to 10 tons
per acre per year. Do not apply waste on saturated soils, when it is raining, or when
the surface is frozen. Either of these conditions may result in runoff to surface waters
which is not allowed under DEM regulations. Wind conditions should also be
considered to avoid drift and downwind odor problems. To maximize the value of
nutrients for crop production and to reduce the potential for pollution, the waste should
be applied to a growing crop or applied to bare ground not more than 30 days prior to
planting. Injecting the waste or disking will conserve nutrients and reduce odor
problems.
The estimated acres needed to apply the animal waste is based on typical nutrient
content for this type of facility. Acreage requirements should be based on the waste
analysis report from your waste management facility. Attached you will find information
on proper sampling techniques, preparation, and transfer of waste samples to the lab
for analysis.
This waste utilization plan, if carried out, meets the requirements for compliance with
15A NCAC 2H.0217 adopted by the Environmental Management Commission.
NUP Page 1

�ztzzas�zttrzti:x ttt� to:•a•ra..xa�srtxttxaxxz::z•::tsr•ztvt,r�x,>.zwzsa�,szrti:rsxaz�xz::zz::zz::.vzt::>,.w:er..vatNaax.?zzrzxaxz:x>a�sr::x•¢rxa�z�zawta:zxtva:xz:: a:x,n:xz;u:?t.:w.a.:x?>•?xtt.;e.,{k•,�.v,�. zx .;z�,?>= .,•,..>..;•z?•?x•. ?:••>.xr•. ?•t»t
e;a�•�<azz;.�,�zz�.�Z:i��z�.n�ea�c.�,;azz,�o.4.�.4�.;.?;...rt��;:�zo•,z��c�;•r.: • .�}: � �?xk<,zv'�x,,a•��{vztZazar:,Yz-�,,.��y,��•:?'�ys�.»iKo#�#u:�t:.�,�,z�..atrr��z;�#+{
� �::r.z?zte�C:atw; •., ... r,µ�,:�.uti r t � <�$:#?> � ,zz. #?z#£:tr°,>y , r :�:z�c<:� �x?x#., r�wh#;xi�r$.u##�#�.xyitowu�.<yo, ��•? f Sy{$ .S•�ra, azz ..q. t£
ubx;sl'•�w.�cwg?-w)rrr7r;.?:�:wK:sr\t?#s,rrarav.::,.wa:�v�{vi>3`:ci;#.?asrr:s:xa:�rrr::arrr:7.'•r:3.arr::•aw:rrrr:�r..�::3nr:.rwr.:r3:crx•a�or:syrWtiy:4.��,r`�'3rRtir:)::�a'�.`ti•>rit#r..?�'��SS'.::?`kyr�r"'�i`3rr""3iwi?rrr:�#sS#`r�r`riS55�.�i.��
Amount of Waste -Produced Per Year (gallons, ft, tons, etc.)
4,400 6.1 26,840
27,280 animals X 1.9 (tons) waste/animal/year = 51,832 (amt.) waste/year.
400 0.42 168
78,840 TONS
Amount of Plant Available Nitrogen (PAN) Produced Per Year
4,400
5.4
11,880
26,280 animals X
2.3 lbs. PAN/animal/year =
60,444
lbs. PAN/year. (PAN from N.C. Tech.
1,000
2.3
1,150
Guide Std. 633)
400
0.48
96
73,570
50% reduction in PAN for 2 -stage lagoon
# PAWYEAR
Applying the above amount of waste is a big job. You should plan time and have
appropriate equipment to apply the waste in a timely manner.
The following acreage will be needed for waste application based on the crop to be grown
and surface application:
See page 3 and 3a for Table 1 acres owned by producer.
"The 50% reduction is at the MAG IV lagoon only and in actuality it is a 67% reduction based ori historical
waste analysis.
"This N is from animal waste only. If nutrients from other sources such as commercial
fertilizer are applied, they must be accounted for. N must be based on realistic yield
expectation.
NOTE: The applicator is cautioned that P and K may be over applied while meeting the N
requirements. Beginning in 1996 the Coastal Zone Management Act will require farmers in
some eastern counties of North Carolina to have a nutrient management plan that addresses
all nutrients. This plan only addresses Nitrogen.
NUI' Page 2

Table 1:
Tract Field Soil Crop
# No. Type
ACRES OWNED BY PRODUCER
Lbs. N Acres Lbs. N Month of
Per Acre Utilized Application
MAG IV
1
ChA
Matua
230
6.2
1,435
Oct -May
MAG IV
1
ChA
Soybeans
80
6.2
499
May -Sep 15
MAG IV
2
ChA
Matua
230
8.8
2,024
Oct -Ma
MAG IV
2
ChA
Soybeans
80
8.8
704
May -Sep 15
MAG IV
3
ChA
Matua
230
8.8
2,024
Oct -May
MAG IV
3
ChA
Soybeans
s0
6.8
704
May -Sep 15
MAG IV
8
ChA
Matua
230
2.1
483
Oct -May
MAG IV
8
ChA
Soybeans
80
2.1
168
May -Sep 15
MAG IV
9
WaB
Bermuda
275
13.6
3,740
Mar -Aug
MAG IV
10
WaB
Bermuda
275
13.6
3,740
Mar -Aug
MAG IV
11
WaB
Bermuda
275
5.4
1,485
Mar -Aug
Melville
16
Au
Bermuda
275
2.3
633
Mar -Aug
Melville
17
8o8,MaC
Bermuda
263
2.5
658
Mar -Aug
Melville
18a
BoB,Au
Matua
230
4.2
966
Oct -Ma
Melville
18a
BoB,Au
Soybeans
110
4.2
462
May -Sep 15
Melville
18b
BoB,MaC
Matua
243
3.0
729
Oct -Ma
Melville
18b
BoB,MaC
Soybeans
120
3.0
360
May -Sep 15
Melville
19a
BoB,Au
Matua
230
5.3
1,219
Oct -May
Melville
19a
BoB,Au
Soybeans
110
5.3
583
May -Sep 15
Melville
19b
BoB,MaC
Matua
243
4.0
972
Oct -Ma
Melville
19b
BoB,MaC
Soybeans
120
4.0
480
May -Sep 15
Melville
20
BoB,MaC
Matua
243
4.2
1,021
Oct -May
Melville
20
BoB,MaC
Soybeans
120
4.2
504
May -Sep 15
Melville
21
BoB,MaC
Matua
243
2.2
535
Oct -May
Melville
21
Bo8,MaC
Soybeans
120
2.2
264
May -Sep 15
Melville
22a
BoB
Matua
200
4,4
880
Oct -May
Melville
22a
BoB
Soybeans
100
4.4
440
May -Sep 15
Melville
22b
BoB,MaC
Matua
243
3.1
753
Oct -May
Melville
22b
BoB,MaC
Soybeans
120
3.1
372
May -Sep 15
Melville
23a
BoB
Matua
200
3.8
760
Oct -May
Melville
23a
BoB
Soybeans
100
3,8
380
May -Sep 15
Melville
23b
BoB,MaC
Matua
243
1.3
316
Oct -May
Melville
23b
BoB,MaC
Soybeans
120
1.3
156
May -Sep 15
Melville
24
BoB
Bermuda
225
2.7
608
Mar -Aug
Melville
25a
BoB
Bermuda
225
2.7
608
Mar -Aug
Melville
25b
BoB
Bermuda
225
4,8
1,080
Mar -Aug
Melville
26
BoB
Bermuda
225
2.9
653
Mar -Aug
Melville
27
BoB,Au
Bermuda
250
3.3
825
Mar -Aug
Melville
28
BoB
Bermuda
225
4.4
990
Mar -Aug
Melville
29
BoB
Bermuda
225
4.2
945
Mar -Aug
Melville
30
BoB
Bermuda
225
7.3
1,643
Mar -Aug
Melville
31
BoB
Bermuda
225
4.3
968
Mar -Aug
Melvilie
32
BoB
Bermuda
225
2.9
653
Mar -Aug
Melville
33
BoB
Bermuda
225
6.1
1,373
Mar -Aug
Melville
34a
BoB
Bermuda
225
4.6
1,035
Mar -Aug
Melville I
34b
jBoB,Au
Bermuda
1 250
6,3
1,575
Mar -Aug
TOTAL 155.3 43,400
NUP Page 3

•Y'{{+'W:Srr •{�GE4:[.%Oti•yi•�•:n:: 01. ::..K,,:.'v^:•vi, v.;{'.;::+. -:.?:r rii'i•Y: •iih . '{{•�:0.'MiY:SiT:r 't\:{{.W.,:?t0. ::?{P}. .�.XS'+. ••\^:i^4.•:5...irir:; •.}, •:ry:{6:{fir:`Si{.:i{: 4•: C��is��• :;.;7.y, •i,Y�F:{4 {:�C{:.�{JYM,SM.. v{t X{ 4 .
fi#vA4:::2°r�#:<::n? r:. a .:. :.`..;,,:.:.x.:.. .xa"^:��i:s.cx,:;.. ,;.: Y. , :.2'^t: , v;. "+� .> :._'�"%. '. AL.k... :. �,..L...:>.r�,..,.K,.;{t::.Y:`.v �>:' :.ib�Y. 'ftZ .,•;.c::�.'?Ya'4`�.a'2•"�u:$`�>.��;�.6�
�v:13in� i. v $vv ivkv: .i.vi,,.�rr, }� }•�''{'J}i:4v .t �� '}:hr T`iv:4 :• Qh:: 4. s 7Yv:i .::�,v.v4 ':.S":.: t� }ice{•'7}`•3:.,vi:'?iii
4::].. „ v:' YY.'k:-.v:,YYi.n r „ :� �: -.. +n::•fii t • : h. ti{`,Ov::,:1i}.:�v. • ••.};• {��.5�
} } .{ K `f" r ...:{i 'J :, >.v.ii•m„ �.i n : r:r`v... .. v., 'i•} .....n ,'+1�iu+Y+i. Y.:u:
.::,.,.R�}?kiY:CC�r'tiy�:r;w,x.:::;:.>.$.... ;::..::.;;::it::•,:, ::,i•:it?bn:,-.-. ;3Y,�:;�Yv� :. s.:a�.;�vy.... : :.�.<,,;2
„,:Y:�:�a:Ya::.,.,x;,,...`,•,....,.�t�:�.;�wi,�{�Ya�,{{;.,a.,::{, �,..;,,,,.,:�:wYz<Y'....:,::z�:;::;.:�,:,�.,.,,...;V;:.�•„Kz�:w....,,�,'x:xz;.;�.Yi,.z�.�:z
Table t: ACRES OWNED BY PRODUCER
Tract Field Soil Crop Lbs. N Acres Lbs. N Month of
# No. Tvne Per Acre Utilized Amlication
Dell
35
AuB
Bermuda
275
5.7
1,568
Mar -Aug
Dell
36
AuB
Bermuda
275
0.8
220
Mar -Aug
Deli
37a
WaB,Ly
Bermuda
225
1.9
428
Mar -Aug
Dell
37b
WaB,Ly
Bermuda
225
2.8
630
Mar -Aug
Dell
38
WaB,MaC
Wheat
76
1.3
99
Se -Apr
Dell
38
WaB,MaC
Soybeans
126
1.3
164
Apr - Sep
Dell
39
WaB
Wheat
76
3.3
251
Se - A r
Dell
39
WaB
Soybeans
112
3.3
370
Apr - Se
Dell
40
WaB
Wheat
76
2.1
160
Se - Apr
Dell
40
WaB
Soybeans
112
2.1
235
Apr - Sep
Dell
41
WaB
Wheat
76
2.1
160
Se - Apr
Dell
41
Wa6
Soybeans
112
2.1
235
Apr - Sep
Dell
42
WaB,MaC
Wheat
76
3.6
274
Sep - Apr
Dell
42
WaB,MaC
Soybeans
126
3.6
454
Apr - Sep
Dell
43
WaB,MaC
Wheat
76
2.1
160
Se -Ap!_
Dell
43
WaB,MaC
Soybeans
126
2.1
265
Apr - Sep
Dell
44a
WaB,MaC
Wheat
76
2.0
152
Se - Apr
Dell
44a
WaB,MaC
Soybeans
126
2.0
252
Apr - Sep
Dell
44b
WaB
Wheat
76
2.0
152
Se - Apr
Dell
44b
WaB
Soybeans
112
2.0
224
Apr - Sep
S1S4
45
WaB
Wheat
76
3.5
266
Se -Apr
S1S4
45
WaB
Soybeans
112
3.5
392
Apr - Se
S1S4
46a
BoB,WaB,MaC
Wheat
72
5.6
403
Sep - Apr
S1 S4
46a
BoB,WaB,MaC
Soybeans
117
5.6
655
Apr - Sep
S1S4
46b
BoB,Ly
Wheat
64
1.4
90
Se - A r
SlIS4
46b
BoB,Ly
Soybeans
102
1.4
143
Apr - Sep
S1S4
47a
BoB,WaB,MaC
Wheat
72
6.5
468
Se -Apr
S1 S4
47a
BoB,WaB,MaC
Soybeans
117
6.5
761
Apr -Sep
S1S4
47b
BoB,Ly
Wheat
64
4.1
262
Se - A r
S1S4
47b
BoB,Ly
Soybeans
102
4.1
418
Apr - Se
S1S4
48
WaB,Ly
Wheat
70
5.2
364
Sep_- Apr
S1 S4
48
WaB,Ly
Soybeans
108
5.2
562
Apr - Sep
S1S4
49
WaB,MaC
Wheat
76
3.2
243
Sep - A r
S1S4
49
WaB,MaC
Soybeans
126
3.2
403
Apr - Sep
S1S4
50
MaC,BoB
Bermuda
275
2.0
550
Mar -Aug
S1S4
51
BoB
Bermuda
225
3.0
675
Mar -Aug
S184
52
BoB
Bermuda
225
2.4
540
Mar -Aug
S1S4
53
BoB,WaB
Bermuda
250
4.1
1,025
Mar -Aug
S1S4
54a
BH,MaC,WaB
Bermuda
250
6.9
1,725
Mar -Aug
S1S4
54b
BH,MaC,Ly
Bermuda
1217
1.9
412
Mar -Aug
S1S4
55
WaB
Bermuda
275
2.7
729
Mar -Aug
.........
.......
..............+..+..
Small Grain
100
128.0
12,800
Sep -Mar
TOTAL 82.2 30,335
Total page 3 155.34
Total Farm Acres 237.6
******** ALL BERMUDA FIELDS WILL BE OVERSEEDED WITH SMALL GRAIN IN THE WINTER.
NUP Page 3a

Table 2: ACRES WITH AGREEMENT OR LONG TERM LEASE
(Agreement with adjacent landowner must be attached)
{Required only if operator does not own
adequate land [see Required specification 21)
Tract Field Soil Crop Lbs. N Acres Lbs. N Month of
'1. Type Per Acre Utilized ApplicatioN
* See footnote for Table 1.
Totals from above Tables
Acres Lbs. N
Utilized
Table 1 237.5 73,735.3
Table 2 0 -
Total 237.5 73,735.3
Amount of N Produced 73,570.0
Surplus or Deficit 165
NOTE: The Waste Utilization Plan must contain provisions for periodic land
application of sludge at agronomic rates. The sludge will be nutrient rich and will
require precautionary measures to prevent over application of nutrient or other
elements.
NUP Page 4

See attached map showing the fields to be used for the utilization of waste water.
Application of Waste by Irrigation
Field Soil Type Crop Application Application
No. Rate In/Hr Amount In.
1 t ru 3
ChA
Matua/Soybean
8
ChA
Matua/Soybean
0.
1
9,10,11
WaB
Berm/SG
0.6
1
16
Au
Berm/SG
0.6
1
17
BOA.Mac
Berm/SG
0.5
1
1Ba,19a
BOB, u
atua/Soybean
0.6
1
11 8b,19b-21,22b,23b
BoB,MaC
Matua/Soybean
0.5
1
22a,23a
BOB
Matua/Soybean
0.75
1
24-26
BoB
Berm SG
0.75
1
27
Berm/SG
0.6
1
28-30
BOBBerm/SG
0.75
1
31-32
BOB
BermISG
0.75
1
33,34a
BOB
BermISG
0.75
1
34b
606,Au
Berm/SG
0.6
1
35.36
Au
Berm/SG
0.6
1
3 a,37b
WaB,Ly
Berm/SG
0.6
1
38,42-44a
WaB,MaC
heat/Soybeans
0.5
1
39-41,44b
WaB
Wheat/Soybeans
0.6
1
45
MIT-
ea --Soy Bans
0.6
1
46a,47a
BoB,WaB, aG
WheaUSoybeans
o's
1
46 ,47b
BoB,Ly
W eat/Soy eans
o.65
1
48
WaB,Ly
Wheat/Soybeans
0.6
1
49
Wa ac
Wheat/Soybeans
O.T
1
D
Mac, oB
Berm/SG
0.5
1
51,52
BOB
Berm/SG
0.75
1
3
BOB,WaB
Berm/SG
0.6
1
54a
B ac'WaB
BermISG
0.5
1
4b
AWaB
BH,MaC,Ly
Berm/SG 1
0.5
1
55
jBerrn1SG 1
0.6
1
THIS TABLE IS NOT NEEDED IF WASTE IS NOT BEING APPLIED BY IRRIGATION,
HOWEVER A SIMILAR TABLE WILL BE NEEDED FOR DRY LITTER OR SLURRY.
** 6 Lagoons
Your facility is designed for _180_days of temporary storage and the temporary
storage must be removed on the average of once every _6_Months. In no
instance should the volume of waste being stored in your structure exceed
Elevation *see lagoon design.
Call the local Natural Resources Conservation Service (formerly Soil
Conservation Service) or Soil and Water Conservation District office after you
receive the waste analysis report for assistance in determining the amount per
acre to apply and the proper application rate prior to applying the waste.
NUP Page 5

Narrative of opercsion:
This NUP reflects wettable acres and is written by pulls.
On the matualsoybean rotation the PAN for the matua has been reduced by 20# for the residual following soybeans.
Information for this rotation may be found in Foraqes the Science of Grassland Agriculture 4th edition.
The book was printed by the Iowa State University Press copyright 1985. A copy of the article is attached to this
waste plan.
This plan utilizes the 100# small grain overseed option. The last application of N on the bermuda must he prior to
August 31st. There may be a total of 50# of N put out Sep-Oct with the remaining 50# put out in Feb-Mar.
There will be no application of N during the months of Nov.Dec Jan and the overseed must be removed by April 7th
or before heading which ever comes first.
On the fields with wheat/soybean rotation the 20# residual nitrogen from the soybeans was deducted
from the following wheat crop.
These farms use a hard hose traveler and center systems for irrigation. The method
of nutrient_removal_is through having and row crop methods.
NUP Page 5a

iv ?:??: :{;.??:2?: `F,G:` ::\ :N?ViRV V .3?sit`: {.:2•\iN.2i. 22>i ?2>:kit :2L'.' .`>7F•t�R 'L;'.E>R"iv"
i�r�z'3x..x;�:.:�:�'izi::;ixi�:`<..:.:iz?z�::zz>:�:thi:...,..:..:?s:k?t,,... r.;:,.:v...;,.;=r;;>.,;. ;;.>.,�?xa�x. ;..ax:r• :z;;
•.,k v vvtruvYu, xukv..k.:.Y,'YR't:Ri'e.. .kvv: •s rtr-:.r .: �w y :�Y ' �% .:`�. 'i�u,• �`;?ki???':it::ik:?:.-�•?r'�riw::?>:v:.iiyys'v:: <'?�.
v',tt r> rkrr `.:: .' •A :. .::kx,.:.t .��\:; }: ,.-.?i•. :,4.:. c•.},2 :#ubv:v
'�`�7r:¢ ...�.vvvv :tk) v.:�i�.,,i,:"�`xo.,•.. ::•:s;.` 2 F .2'< .rtr-r -: '�""?sv„r,2„`."k"v}
?:• ::iG:.i2;::L:2: `ki`:. :2l��iY'wi'`��:MYl���.�� ..i.....-.:. xvd4v.:?L.:
{k\*�.`1n5�lk�i}yDb'il4•x+rYi�AVk1 Y'•itiYn?hY-::i2'r: 64w�:+1�{}:.:S.4:ti V7:Y:.::l.}ik'+hW:97J]: i7isk*`vkttYS.Vk hV.`Yh'k`:+i�`N: Nh`NiJniY:•:vii'vii-YiNl3'++itJS:.+fivSS:h5::43:Y.`}?}.in'�:�S.t`}:';`G:3v]+i: hzt� }>.1�' it+Vb: ��4�Si•�+1`vw
REQUIRED SPECIFICATIONS
1 Animal waste shall not reach surface waters of the state by runoff, drift, manmade
conveyances, direct application, or direct discharge during operation or land
application. Any discharge of waste which reaches surface water is prohibited.
2 There must be documentation in the design folder that the producer either owns or
has an agreement for use of adequate land on which to properly dispose of waste,
he/she shall provide a copy of an agreement with a landowner who is within a
reasonable proximity, allowing him/her the use of the land for waste application. It
is the responsibility of the owner of the facility to secure an update of the Waste
Utilization Plan when there is a change in the operation, increase in the number of
animals, method of utilization, or available land.
3 Animal waste shall be applied to meet, but not exceed, the nitrogen needs for
realistic crop yields based on soil type, available moisture, historical data, climatic
conditions, and level of management, unless there are regulations that restrict the
rate of application for other nutrients.
4 Animal waste shall be applied to land eroding less than 5 tons per acre per year.
Waste may be applied to land that is eroding at 5 or more tons, but less than 10
tons per acre per year providing grass filter strips are installed where runoff leaves
the field. (See FOTG Standard 393 - Filter Strip).
5 Odors can be reduced by injecting the waste or disking after waste application.
Waste should not be applied when there is danger of drift from the irrigation field.
6 When animal waste is to be applied on acres subject to flooding, it will be soil
incorporated on conventionally tilled cropland. When applied to conservation tilled
crops or grassland, the waste may be broadcast provided the application does not
occur during a season prone to flooding. (See "Weather and Climate in North
Carolina” for guidance.)
7 Liquid waste shall be applied at rates not to exceed the soil infiltration rate such that
runoff does not occur offsite or to surface waters and in a method which does not
cause drift from the site during application. No ponding should occur in order to
control odor or flies.
8 Animal waste shall not be applied to saturated soils, during rainfall events, or when
the surface is frozen.
NUP Page 6

REQUIRED SPECIFICATIONS
(continued)
9 Animal waste shall be applied on actively growing crops in such a manner that the
crop is not covered with waste to a depth that would inhibit growth. The potential
for salt damage from animal waste should also be considered.
10 Waste nutrients shall not be applied in fall or winter for spring planted crops on soils
with a high potential for leaching. Waste nutrient loading rates on these soils
should be held to a minimum and a suitable winter cover crop planted to take up
released nutrients. Waste shall not be applied more than 30 days prior to planting
of the crop or forages breaking dormancy.
11 Any new swine facility sited on or after October 1, 1995 shall comply with the
following: The outer perimeter of the land area onto which waste is applied from a
lagoon that is a component of a swine farm shall be at least 50 feet from any
residential property boundary and from any perennial stream or river (other than an
irrigation ditch or canal. Animal waste other than swine waste from facilities sited
on or after October 1, 1995), shall not be applied closer than 25 feet to perennial
waters. (See Standard 393 - Filter Strips).
12 Animal waste shall not be applied closer than 100 feet to wells.
13 Animal waste shall not be applied closer than 200 feet of dwellings other than those
owned by the landowner.
14 Waste shall be applied in a manner not to reach other property and public right -of
ways.
15 Animal waste shall not be discharged into surface waters, drainageways, or
wetlands by a discharge or by over -spraying. Animal waste may be applied to prior
converted wetlands provided they have been approved as a land application site by
a "technical specialist". Animal waste shall not be applied on grassed waterways
that discharge directly into water courses, and on other grassed waterways, waste
shall be applied at agronomic rates in a manner that causes no runoff or drift from
the site.
16 Domestic and industrial waste from washdown facilities, showers, toilets, sinks, etc.,
shall not be discharged into the animal waste management system.
17 If animal production at the facility is to be suspended or terminated, the owner is
responsible for obtaining and implementing a "closure plan" which will eliminate the
possibility of an illegal discharge, pollution and erosion.
NUP Page 7

18 Waste handling structures, piping, pumps, reels, etc., should be inspected on a
regular basis to prevent breakdowns, leaks, and spills. A regular maintenance
checklist should be kept on site.
19 Animal waste can be used in a rotation that includes vegetables and other crops for
direct human consumption. However, if animal waste is used on crops for direct
human consumption it should only be applied preplant with no further applications
of animal waste during the crop season.
20 Highly visible markers shall be installed to mark the top and bottom elevations of
the temporary storage (pumping volume) of all waste treatment lagoons. Pumping
shall be managed to maintain the liquid level between markers. A marker will be
required to mark the maximum storage volume for waste storage ponds.
21 Waste shall be tested within 60 days of utilization and soil shall be tested at least
annually at crop sites where waste products are applied. Nitrogen shall be the rate -
determining element. Zinc and copper levels in the soils shall be monitored and
alternative crop sites shall be used when these metals approach excessive levels.
pH shall be adjusted for optimum crop production and maintained. Soil and waste
analysis records shall be kept for five years. Poultry dry waste application records
shall be maintained for three (3) years. Waste application records for all other
waste shall be maintained for five (5) years.
22 Dead animals will be disposed of in a manner that meets North Carolina
regulations.
NUP Page 8

WASTE UTILIZATION PLAN AGREEMENT
Name of Farm: Mag IV, Melville I & 11, Dell, DM Section 1 Site 4
Owner/ Manager Agreement
I (we) understand and will follow and implement the specifications and the operation
and maintenance procedures established in the approved animal waste utilization plan
for the farm named above. I (we) know that any expansion to the existing design
capacity of the waste treatment and storage system or construction of new facilities will
require a new certification to be submitted to the Division of Environment Management
(DEM) before the new animals are stocked. I (we) also understand that there must be
no discharge of animal waste from this system to surface waters of the state from a
storm event less severe than the 25 -year, 24 -Hour storm. The approved plan will be
filed on-site at the farm office and at the office of the local Soil and Water Conservation
District and will be available for review by DEM upon request.
Name of Facility Owner: DM Farms of Rose Hill LLC.
(please print)
Signature: I� Date: / d Z2- f I Q 4
Name of Manager (Ifdiffer nt from owner): David Hulbert I
Signature: k � Date: �I I
Name of Technical Specialist: (please print): AJ Linton
Affiliation: DM Farms of Rose Hill LLC.
Address (Agency): P.O. Box 1076
Rose Hill, NC 28458
Signature: Date:
NUP Page 9

..w> :r• •}Li} iii` `? k?.: ti?i: ?}??> ????tt '.t., {{tt, nt{tJ,:.0 t±??: :ti>•s n2tLw ,t•.L nt•
::�ttti2ta... ,i.. 2iit•:2{LL 2. L h
42`•'fEY LY•:a. k;k?;;;:til{].,v <;'t2}'L•:2.k',},v, 4+�
,.La},-.:}Yt, ytk'; kkk'<k}:i•�;:t}:?c.0}�,. .}..,,.,.}}`., ..♦ -�,t .:,t.;iR:kS`.< •t:2�:aa`:k", 5
`tt 7., ta.,...., ,,:,4.\. .,o... , ,.,•2... �' Y2: 2. .,... k2k;:2L.,:,:},u. , .,. Z}}... h2', tit ].Mr S
8 5. s . w•ce.. k:: , r::r442.A ; i• wYk..i .r:v •. , • z, .?,
..2 .:}.: t,?:. •.,-: .... t�.,n':r� :'+i ri :i' ,..2?:0}?.::A}u ;`ue?'°? ?' L >,..ao'rx.:..22`2¢'"?:'
.^v ••, `:;t??.xi.^.... .,.0,r]+:??C, .aa. . •k' r : 7x.: vr.}}, . •..}'•4 }, d
... ,:.:C�):�,i4}.,: :v$.,i�:.k'{..: ..,4.r4.r::•..: � � : •R ::i:.r ,yt•.v w.$:}:A\'4'. [4ti`{v..p.�y ar}.:}:,
.} }}VY}}}}} \?3Y:1�}}};r .Y:{J:SJ: A'.���: hN:�??7r J}:a45hv�4fl};.}}:J}k'•:Y}Xvv,.k•J}:•J:J};.}S]}:::�}:riti}}:Cti4:i3r57::3}.Y''Ar: S} rY55�A555}NWi}}:v:'••7%-]}:.3�}:+iY�+YkS:uY.1:hY:vY:J:iWY0..a h1W.S4�77:JF�h� �'�}:4n:4Uri4:
ANIMAL WASTE UTILIZATION AGREEMENT
(Needed only if additional land has to be leased, etc.)
I, , hereby give
permission to apply animal waste from his Waste Utilization System on acres
of my land for the duration of time shown below.
I understand that this waste contains nitrogen, phosphorous, potassium, and other
trace elements and when properly applied should not harm my land or crops. I also
understand that the use of waste will reduce my needed for commercial fertilizer.
Adjacent Landowner: Date:
Waste Producer: Date:
Technical Representative:
SWCD Representative:
Date:
Date:
Term of Agreement: '19 to , 20•
(Minimum of Ten Years on Cost Shared Items)
(See Required Specification No, 2)
NUP Page 10

268 FORAGE GRASSES AND LEGUMES
(Stansel et aI. 1939; Jones et al. 1960; Haines et
to Florida, southern 'Texas, and sot:
al. 1965). Its most widespread use is for lawns in
nia. It grows only in regions free
the lower South. It is especially adapted to moist
and is especially adapted to well-(
muck soils and is considered the most depend-
dry sandy soils. A plant may form
able pasture grass for the organic soils of south-
cm in diameter with flowering culn
ern Florida where growth is practically yearlong
high. Flowers are produced all se
(Chapman et al. 1963; Haines et al. 1965; Pate et
colored panicles. It is used on are
al. 1980).
fested with nematodes.
CULTURE AND MANAGEMENT
PARAGRASS
Management practices for saint augustine-
Paragrass, Brachiaria mutica (Foi
grass consist of fertilization, controlled stocking
adapted to Florida and the 'Ibxas (
rate, and mineral supplementation. On muck
grows on soils too moist for many
soils annual applications of 100-650 kg of 0-10-
on margins of lakes and streams,
:�0 with 4 kg CuO, 4 kg MnO, 3 kg ZnO, and 3 kg
and on bottomlands subject to pro
B4O,/ha are recommended. The pastures should
flow; it is a pest in sugar canefields
carry three cows and their calves per hectare
ics. It is used as a soiling, hay and I
with the use of supplemental P and energy feed
in the winter months (Pate et al. 1980). This
NAPIERGRASS
plant does not produce seed; therefore pastures
Napiergrass, Pennisetum Purpu.
are established vegetatively.
mach., is native to Africa. In 191"
introduced it in the southern U.S.
DISEASES AND INSECTS
mentation (Thompson 1919). 0th
No serious reduction in forage production has
names include elephantgrass, nap
been reported from disease or insects. Brown
herbe elephant, elefante, and pa
patch, Pellicularia filamentosa (Pat.) Rogers, and
(Bogdan 1977). Tbday napiergrass 1
gray leaf spot, PiricuLaria grisea Cke. & Sacc.,
troduced into nearly all tropical and
are the most common diseases. The chinch. bug,
regions from sea level to 2000 m wl
Blissus leucopterus (Say), is the most serious
exceeds 1000 mm.
pest.
Napiergrass is a robust perennial
that contains many canelike stems u:
in thickness and grows to heights
OTHER GRASSES OF
Each stem has numerous nodes frorr
blades originate. The leaves vary in
MINOR IMPORTANCE
1 to 5 cm and in length from 30 to 1.
leaf blade has serrated margins, sm
and lower surfaces, with a prominen
RESCUEGRASS
the lower side (Edwards and Bogda
Rescuegrass, Bromus catharticus Vahl., is
Napiergrass grows best in hot te
adapted to the South and Southwest where win-
(30-35 C) (Ferraris 1978) and will tr
ters are mild and humid. Its agricultural value is
temperatures down to 10 C befc
limited to areas southward from North Carolina
ceases (Bogdan 1977). Frost will kill t
and Tennessee and in areas of the Pacific Coast.
leaving roots unharmed; however,
It is a short-lived perennial bunchgrass, acts as
freezes, root damage will occur. .
an annual under cultivation, and will not make a
drought restrict growth; however, wit
satisfactory growth on low -fertility soils without
of rains, plants resume rapid growth.
fertilization. It grows to a height of 60-120 cm,
will not tolerate waterlogging or floc
with drooping open panicles of large flattened
tions (Gosnell and Weiss 1965).
spikelets containing seed almost as large as oats.
Napiergrass is established from
Its forage has similar nutritive value to oats
cuttings placed into the soil with V
when grown on soil of the same fertility. After
fertilizer/ha (Whyte et al. 1959)
the grass has reseeded, the area can be used for
tablished napiergrass will respond to
growing another crop in the summer. It is most
of fertilizer, and DM yields of up to 30
commonly found in combination with warm -sea-
have been documented (Caro-Costos
son perennial grasses such as bermudagrass.
cente-Chandler 1961).
Blaser et al. (1955) determined th
NATALGRASS
grass would persist for several years ii
Natalgrass, 7hcholaena rosea Nees., is adapted
trial near Gainesville, Fla. With adeg1

f
imap:Hpaul.sherman%40dwq.denr.ncmail.net a nplex l .ncmaihiet:1431...
Subject: Annual Certification Form
From: Paul Sherman <paul.sherman a ncmai1.net>
Date: Fri, 15 Feb 2002 14:56:46 -0500
To: alinton a mtirpliyfarms.com
CC: Paul Rawls <Paul.Rawls cr ncmail.net>
BCC: paul sherman <paul.shernian a ncniail.net>
AJ Linton,
lF'I,✓e Fc;[,,: Moo ga^77
I have attached the Annual Certification Form as required by your NPDES Permit No:
NC0086614. This form is valid for the year ending 2001 and should not be considered
valid for 2002. Please request a new form for
2002, as the form will likely have been modified.
Should you need any additional information or have any questions, please
do not hesitate to call our office.
Paul Sherman
I of 1 02/15/2002 2:59 PM

i
ANIMAL FACILITY ANNUAL CERTIFICATION FORM
Permit Number NCO086614 County _Sampson Year 2001
Facility Name
Operator in Charge for this Facility
Operator Certification Number
Phone #
Land application of animal waste as allowed by the above permit occurred during the past calendar year
YES NO, If NO, skip Part I and Part I1 and proceed to the certification. Also, if animal waste
were generated but not land applied, please attach an explanation on how the animal waste was handled.
Part I
-Total number of application Fields LLor Pulls C(please check the appropriate box) approved in the Certified
Animal Waste Management Plan (CAWMP). Total Wettable Acres approved in the CAWMP
-Total number of Fields ar Pulls Qplease check the appropriate box) on which land application occurred
during the year. Total Acres on which waste was applied
-Total pounds of Plant Available Nitrogen applied during the year for all application sites.
-Total pounds of Plant Available Nitrogen allowed to be land applied annually by the CAWMP and the permit
Largest number of animals by type at this facility at any time during the previous year
Facility's integrator if applicable
year? ❑'es L -lo if No, please explain
Part II
Facility Status:
This is not a change from the previous
I F TFIE ANSWER TO ANY QUESTION BELOW 1S NO, PLEASE PROVIDE A WRITTEN
DESCRIPTION AS TO WHY THE FACILITY WAS NOT COMPLIANT, THE DATES OF
NON COMPLIANCE, AND EXPLAIN CORRECTIVE ACTION TAKEN OR PROPOSED TO
BE TAKEN TO BRING THIS FACILITY BACK INTO COMPLIANCE.
1. Only animal waste generated at this facility and approved for land application at this ❑ Yes ❑ No
facility were applied to sites covered by this permit during the past year.
2. The largest number of animals by type on this facility at any time during the previous year ❑ Yes ❑ No
did not exceed the pennitted number of animals by type authorized by the Permit for this
2-15-02
1

� facility.
3. There were no discharges of waste to the surface water from this facility during the ❑ Yes ❑ No
past year.
4. There were no freeboard violations in any lagoons or storage ponds at this facility ❑ Yes ❑ No
during the past year.
5. There were no PAN applications to any Fields or crops at this facility greater ❑ Yes ❑ No
than the levels specified in this facilities Certified Animal Waste Management Plan
(CAWMP) during the past year.
6. Soil pl-I was maintained as specified in the permit. ❑ Yes ❑ No
7. Annual soils analysis was performed on each site receiving waste during the past ❑ Yes ❑ No
calendar year.
$. All required monitoring and reporting was performed in accordance with the facility's ❑ Yes ❑ No
permit during the previous year.
9. All operations and maintenance requirements in the permit were complied with or, in ❑ Yes ❑ No
the case of a deviation, prior authorization was received from the Division of Water Quality.
10. Vegetative cover as specified in the permit was maintained on this site and the crops ❑ Yes. ❑ No
grown were removed in accordance with the crop management plan and the Permit.
11. No runoff of waste from the application sites occurred. ❑ Yes ❑ No
12. All buffer requirements as specified on the permit were maintained during each ❑ Yes ❑ No
application of waste.
13. All Groundwater monitoring requirements in the permit were met. ❑ Yes ❑ No
" I certify under penalty of law that this document and all attachments were prepared under my direction or
supervision in accordance with a system designed to assure that qualified personnel properly gather and
evaluate the information submitted. Based on my inquiry of the person or persons who manage the system, or
those persons directly responsible for gathering the information, the information submitted is, to the best of
my knowledge and belief, true, accurate, and complete. I am aware that there are significant penalties for
submitting false information, including the possibility of fines and imprisonment for knowing violations."
Permittee Name and Title (type or print)
Signature of Permittee Date
2-15.02 2

4/
Signature of Operator in Charge
(if different from Permittee)
2-15-02
Date

1
DM Farms of Rose Hill LLC.
P.O. Box 1076
Rose Hil1, NC 28458 [phone] 7123103
�C 2
Dear Sir or Madam:
Please find enclosed the most current set of waste plans for facilities 82-77 and 82-15. We
have amended these plans to include field acres that will be covered with an Aerway
System. We have also included a millet rotation to be put in place of some of the soybean
fields. If you need any further information please call me. My number is 910-289-7298
ext.202.
Sincerely,
AJ Linton

PRODUCER:
LOCATION
TELEPHONE:
TYPE OPERATION
MAG IV, MELVILLE I & II, DELL, DM SECTION 1 SITE 4
Facility # 82-77 S4'*%00
4750 WAYCROSS RD,�LPCEN COUNTY
F)F ,
[phone] ext. 4541
FARROW - FINISH
.;J _� F
AU
2 8 2003
NUMBER OF ANIMALS: 32,080
400 - WEAN -FEEDER, 27,280 FEEDER -FINISH, 4,400 FARROW -WEAN
The waste from your animal facility must be land applied at a specified rate to prevent
pollution of surface and/or groundwater. The plant nutrients in the animal waste should
be used to reduce the amount of commercial fertilizer required for the crops In the fields
where the waste is to be applied. This waste utilization plan uses nitrogen as the
limiting nutrient. Waste should be analyzed before each application cycle. Annual soil
tests are strongly encouraged so that all plant nutrients can be balanced for realistic
yields of the crop to be grown.
Several factors are important in implementing your waste utilization plan in order to
maximize the fertilizer value of the waste and to ensure that it is applied in an
environmentally safe manner. Always apply waste based on the needs of the crop to
be grown and the nutrient content of the waste. Do not apply more nitrogen than the
crop can utilize. Soil types are Important as they have different infiltration rates,
leaching potentials, cation exchange capacities, and available water holding capacities.
Normally waste shall not be applied to land eroding at greater than 5 tons per acre per
year. With special precautions, waste may be applied to land eroding at up to 10 tons
per acre per year. Do not apply waste on saturated soils, when it is raining, or when
the surface is frozen. Either of these conditions may result in runoff to surface waters
which is not allowed under DEM regulations. Wind conditions should also be
considered to avoid drift and downwind odor problems. To maximize the value of
nutrients for crop production and to reduce the potential for pollution, the waste should
be applied to a growing crop or applied to bare ground not more than 30 days prior to
planting. Injecting the waste or disking will conserve nutrients and reduce odor
problems.
The estimated acres needed to apply the animal waste is based on typical nutrient
content for this type of facility. Acreage requirements should be based on the waste
analysis report from your waste management facility. Attached you will find Information
on proper sampling techniques, preparation, and transfer of waste samples to the lab
for analysis.
This waste utilization plan, if carried out, meets the requirements for compliance with
15A NCAC 2H.0217 adopted by the Environmental Management Commission,
NUP Page 1

Amount of Waste Produced Per Year (gallons, ft, tons, etc.
4,400 6.1 26,840
27,280 animals X 1.9 (tons) waste/animal/year = 51,832 (amt.) waste/year.
400 0.42 168
78,840 TONS
Amount of Plant Available Nitrogen (PAN) Produced Per Year
4,400 5.4 9,504
26,280 animals X 2.3 lbs. PAN/animal/year = 60,444 lbs. PAN/year. (PAN from N.C. Tech.
1,000 2.3 920 Guide Std. 633)
400 0.48 77
70,945 60% reduction in PAN for 2 -stage lagoon
# PAN/YEAR
Applying the above amount of waste is a big job. You should plan time and have
appropriate equipment to apply the waste in a timely manner.
The following acreage will be needed for waste application based on the crop to be grown
and surface application:
See page 3 and 3a for Table 1 acres owned by producer.
"The 60% reduction is at the MAG IV lagoon only and In actuality it is a 77% reduction based on historical
waste analysis.
"This N is from animal waste only. If nutrients from other sources such as commercial
fertilizer are applied, they must be accounted for. N must be based on realistic yield
expectation.
NOTE: The applicator is cautioned that P and K may be over applied while meeting the N
requirements. Beginning in 1996 the Coastal Zone Management Act will require farmers in
some eastern counties of North Carolina to have a nutrient management plan that addresses
all nutrients. This plan only addresses Nitrogen.
NUP Page 2

Table 9:
Tract Field Soil Crop
# No. Type
ACRES OWNED BY PRODUCER
Lbs. N Acres Lbs. N Month of
Per Acre Utilized Application
MAG IV
1
ChA
Matua
230
6.2
1,435
Oct -May
MAG IV
1
ChA
Soybeans
80
6.2
499
May -Sep 15
MAG IV
2
ChA
Matua
230
8.8
2,024
Oct -May
MAG IV
2
ChA
So ans
80
8.8
704
May -Sep 15
MAG IV
3
ChA
Matue
230
8.8
2,024
Oct -Ma
MAG IV
3
ChA
Soybeans
80
8.8
704
Mav-Sep 15
MAG IV
8
ChA
Matua
230
2.1
483
Oct -May
MAG IV
8
ChA
Soybeans
80
2.1
168
May-SeP 15
MAG IV
9
WaB
Bermuda
275
13.6
3,740
Mar -Aug
MAG IV
10
WaB
Matua
255
13.6
3,468
Oct -May
MAG IV 1
10
WaB
Soybeans
112
13.6
1,523
May -Sep 15
MAG IV 1
11
WaB
Bermuda
275
5.4
1,485
Mar -Aug
Melville
16
Au
Bermuda
275
2.3
633
Mar -Aug
Melvllla
17
BOB
Bermuda
225
2.5
563
Mar -Aug
Melville
18a
BOB
Matua
205
4.2
861
Oct -May
Melville
18a
BOB
Soybeans
100
4.2
420
May -Sep 15
Melville
18b
BOB
Matus
205
3.0
615
Oct -May
Melville
18b
BOB
Soybeans
100
3.0
300
May -Sep 15
Melville
19a
BOB
Matua
205
5.3
1,087
Oct -May
Melville
19a
BOB
Soybeans
100
5.3
530
May -Sep 15
Melville
19b
BOB
Matus
205
4.0
820
Oct -May
Melville
19b
BOB
Soybeans
100
4.0
400
May -Sep 15
Melville
20
BOB
Matua
205
4.2
861
Qct -Ma
Melville
20
BOB
So ans
100
4.2
420
May -Sep 15
Melville
21
BOB
Matua
205
2.2
451
Oct -May
Melville
21
BOB
Soybeans
100
2.2
220
May -Sep 15
Melville
22a
BOB
Matua
205
4.4
902
Oct -Ma
Melville
22a
BOB
Soybeans
100
4.4
440
May -Sep 15
Melville
22b
BOB
Matua
205
3.1
636
Oct -May
Melville
22b
BOB
Soybeans
100
3.1
310
May-SeP 15
Melville
23a
BOB
Matua
205
3.8
779
Oct -Ma
Melville
238
BOB
Soybeans
100
3,8
380
May -Sep 15
Melville
23b
BOB
Matua
205
1.3
267
Oct -Ma
Melville
23b
BOB
Soybeans
100
1.3
130
May -Sep 15
Melville
24
BOB
Bermuda
225
2.7
608
Mar -Aug
Melville
25a
BOB
Bermuda
225
2,7
608
Mar -Aug
Melville
25b
BOB
Bermuda
225
4.8
1,080
Mar -Au
Melville
26
BOB
Bermuda
225
2.9
653
Mar -Aug
Melville
27
BOB
Matua
205
3.3
677
Oct -Ma
Melville
27
BOB
Soybeans
100
3.3
330
May -Sep 15
Melville
28
BOB
Matua
205
4.4
902
Oct -Ma
Melville
28
BOB
Soybeans
100
4.4
440
May -Sep 15
Melville
29
BOB
Bermuda
225
4.2
945
Mer -Au
Melville
30
BOB
Bermuda
225
7.3
1,643
Mar -Au
Melville
31
BOB
Matue
205
4,3
882
Oct -Ma
Melville
31
BOB
Soybeans
100
4.3
430
May -Sep 15
Melville
32
BOB
Matua
205
2.9
595
Oct -Ma
Melville
32
BOB
Soybeans
100
2.9
290
May -Sep 15
Melville
33
BOB
Bermuda
225
6.1
1,373
Mar -Aug
Melville
34a
BOB
Bermuda
225
4.6
1,035
Mar -Au
Melville
34b
BOB
Bermuda
225
6.3
1,418
Mar -Aug
TOTAL 155.3 44,185
NUP Page 3

Table 1:
Tract Field Soil Crop
# No. Tvoe
ACRES OWNED BY PRODUCER
Lbs. N Acres Lbs. N Month of
Per Acre Utilized ADDiication
Dell
35
AuB
Bermuda
275
5.7
1,568
Mar -Aug
Dell
36
AuB
Bermuda
275
0.8
220
Mar -Aug
Dell
37a
WaB
Bermuda
275
1.9
523
Mar -Au
Dell
37b
WaB
Bermuda
275
2.8
770
Mar -Aug
Dell
38
WaB
Wheat
76
1.3
99
Se -Apr
Dell
38
WaB
Soybeans
112
1.3
146
Apr - Sep
Dell
39
WaB
Wheat
76
3.3
251
Se -Apr
Dell
39
WaB
Soybeans
112
3.3
370
Apr - Sep
Dell
40
WaB
Wheat
76
2.1
160
Se - Apr
Dell 1
40
WaB
Soybeans
112
2.1
235
Apr - Se
Dell
41
WaB
Wheat
76
2.1
160
Sep - Apr
Dell
41
WaB
Soybeans
112
2.1
235
A r - Sep
Dell
42
WaB
Wheat
76
3.6
274
Sep - Apr
Dell
42
WaB
So ans
112
3.6
403
Ap r - Sep
Dell
43
W eB
Wheat
76
2.1 1
160
Se - Apr
Dell
43
WaB
Soybeans
112
2.1
235
Apr - Sep
Dell
44a
WaB
Wheat
76
2.0
152
Sep - Apr
Dell
44a
W aS
Soybeans
112
2.0
224'
Apr - Se
Dell
446
WaB
Wheat
76
2.0
152
Se - Apr
Dell
44b
WaB
Soybeans
112
2.0
224
Apr - Sap
S1S4
45
WaB
Wheat
76
3.5
266
Se -Apr
SiS4
45
WaB
Soybeans
112
3.5
392
Apr - Sep
81S4
46a
W88
Wheat
76
5.8
426
Se - Apr
S1S4
46a
WaB
Soybeans
112
5.6
627
Apr - Sep
S1S4
46b
WaB
Wheat
76
1.4
106
Se -Apr
S1S4
46b
WaB
So ans
112
1.4
157
Apr - Sep
S1S4
47a
WaB
Wheat
76
.6.6
494
Se -Apr
S1 S4
47a
WaB
Soybeans
112
6.5
728
Apr - Sep
SiS4
47b
WaB
Wheat
76
4.1
312
Se - A r
S1S4
47b
WaB
Soybeans
112
4.1
459
Apr Se
S1S4
48
WaB
Wheat
76
5.2
395
Se - A r
S1S4
48
WaB
Soybeans
112
5.2
582
Apr - Sep
S1S4
49
WaB
Wheat
76
3.2
243
Se - A r
S1 S4
49
WaB
Soybeans
112
3.2
358
Apr - Sep
S1S4
50
Bob
Matua
205
2.0
410
Oct -May
S1S4
50
BOB
Soybeans
100
2.0
200
May -Sep 15
S1S4
51
BOB
Matua
205
3.0
615
Oct -Ma
Si S4
51
BOB
Soybeans
100
3.0
300
May -Sep 15
S1S4
52
BOB
Matua
205
2.4
492
Oct -Ma
S1S4
52
BoB
Soybeans
100
2.4
240
Ma -Sep 15
S1S4
53
BOB
Matua
205
4.1
841
Oct -May
S1S4
53
BOB
Soybeans
100
4.1
410
May -Sep 15
SiS4
54a
Was
Bermuda
275
6,9
11898
Mar -Aug
Si S4
54b
BOB
Matua
205
1.9
390
Oct -Ma
S1S4
54b
BOB
Soybeans
100
1.9
190
May -Sep 15
Mag 4
55
WaB
Bermuda
275
2.7
729
Mar -Au
"""`
"""'
""""""""""
Small Grain
100
86.2
8,620
Sep -Mar
TOTAL 82.2 27,437
Total page 3 155.34
Total Farm Acres 237.5
ALL BERMUDA FIELDS WILL BE O&RSEEDED WITH SMALL GRAIN IN THE WINTER.
NUP Page 3a

° kWA T'E
Table 1:
Tract Field Soil Crop
# No. Tvoe
ACRES OWNED BY PRODUCER
Lbs. N Acres Lbs. N Month of
Per Acre Utilized Application
Dell
35
Aub
Bermuda
275
5.7
1,568
Mar -Aug
Dail
36
AuB
Bermuda
275
0.8
220
Mar -Aug
Dell
37a
WaB
Bermuda
275
1.9
523
Mar -Aug
Dell
37b
WaB
Bermuda
275
2.8
770
Mar -Aug
Dell
38
WaB
Wheat
76
1.3
99
Sep - Apr
Dell
36
WaB
Millet
250
1,3
325
Apr - Sep
Dell
39
WaB
Wheat
76
3.3
251
Sep - Apr
Dell
39
WaB
Millet
250
3.3
825
Apr -Sep
Dell
40
WaB
Wheat
76
2.1
160
Sep -Apr
Dell
40
WeB
Millet
250
2.1
525
Apr - Se
Dell
41
WaB
Wheat
76
2.1
160
Sep - Apr
Dell
41
WaB
Millet
250
2.1
525
Apr - Sep
Dell
42
WaB
Wheat
76
3.6
274
Se - A r
Dell
42
WaB
Millet
250
3.6
900
Apr - Sep
Dell
43
Was
Wheat
76
2.1
160
Se - Apr
Dell
43
WaB
Millet
250
2.1
525
Apr - Se
Dell
44a
WaB
Wheat
76
2.0
152
Sep - Apr
Dell
44a
WaB
Millet
250
2.0
500
Apr - Se
Dell
44b
WaB
Wheat
76
2.0
152
Sep - Apr
Dell
44b
Was
Millet
250
2.0
500
Apr - Sep
S1S4
45
WaB
Wheat
76
3.5
266
Se -Apr
S1 S4
45
WaB
Millet
250
3.5
876
Apr - Se
S1S4
46a
WaB
Wheat
76
5.6
426
Sep - A r
S1S4
46a
Was
Millet
250
5.6
1,400
Apr - Sep
S1S4
46b
WaB
Wheat
76
1.4
106
Se - Apr
S164
46b
WaB
Millet
250
1.4
350
Apr - Se
SiS4
47a
WaB
Wheat
76
6.5
494
Se - A r
S1S4
47a
Was
Millet
250
6.5
1,625
Apr - Sep
S1S4
47b
WaB
Wheat
76
4.1
312
Sep - Apr
S1S4
4715
WaB
Millet
250
4.1
1,025
Apr - Sep
S 1 S4
48
WaB
Wheat
76
5.2
395
Sep-- Apr
S1S4
48
Wag
Millet
250
5.2
1,300
Apr - Se
S1 S4
49
WaB
Wheat
76
3.2
243
Se - Apr
S1S4
49
WaB
Millet
250
3.2
800
Apr - Sep
S1S4
50
BOB
Matus
205
2.0
410
Oct -Ma
S1S4
50
BOB
Soybeans
100
2.0
200
May -Sep 15
S1 S4
51
BOB
Matua
205
3.0
615
Oct -May
S1S4
51
Bob
Soybeans
100
3.0
300
May -Sep 15
S1S4
52
BOB
Matua
205
2.4
492
Oct -May
S1S4
52
BOB
Soybeans
100
2.4
240
May -Sep 15
S1S4
53
BOB
Matue
205
4.1
841
Oct -Ma
SiS4
53
BOB
Soybeans
100
4.1
410
May -Sep 15
S1S4
64a
WaB
Bermuda
275
6,9
1,898
Mar -Au
S1S4
54b
BOB
Matua
205
1.9
390
Oct -May
S1S4
54b
BOB
Soybeans_
100
1.9
190
Ma -Sep 15
Mag 4
55
WaB
Bermuda
275
2.7
729
Mar -Aug
.........
.......
.M...........i....
Small Grain
100
86.2
8,620
Sep -Mar
TOTAL 82,2 34,061
Total page 3 155.34
Total Farm Acres 237.5
kkkkkkkk ALL BERMUDA FIELDS WILL BE 0VERSEEDED WITH SMALL GRAIN IN THE WINTER.
NUP Page 3a Millet

Table 1: Acres owned by producer
Tract Field Soil
# No. Type
Will be reached with Aerway
Crop Acres Month of
Application
MAG IV
1-3
ChA
Matua
47.3
Oct -May
MAG IV
1-3
ChA
So Bans
47.3
May -Sep 15
MAG IV
8
ChA
Matua
3.6
Oct -May
MAG IV
8
ChA
Soybeans
3.6
May -Sep 15
MAG IV
9,11
WaB
Bermuda
16.0
Mar -Aug
MAG IV
10
WaB
Matua
20.0
Oct -May
MAG IV
10
WaB
Soybeans
20.0
May -Sep 15
Melville
16
Au
Bermuda
4.0
Mar -Aug
Melville
17
BOB
Bermuda
5.2
Mar -Aug
Melville
18a-21
BOB
Matua
36.9
Oct -May
Melville
IBa-21
BOB
Soybeans
36.9
may -Sep 15
Melville
22a -23b
BOB
Matua
20.8
Oct -Ma
Melville
22a -23b
BOB
Soybeans
20.8
May -Sep 15
Melville
24-26
BOB
Bermuda
20.4
Mar -Aug
Melville
24-26
BOB
Bermuda
20.4
Mar -Aug
Melville
27
BOB
Matua
5.6
Oct -Ma
Melville
27
BOB
Soybeans
5.6
Ma Sep 15
Melville
28
BOB
Matua
5,0
Oct -May
Melville
28
BOB
Soybeans
5.0
May -Sep 15
Melville
29.30
BOB
Bermuda
20.0
Mar -Aug
Melville
31-32
Bob
Matua
13.0
Oct -Ma
Melville
31-32
BOB
Soybeans
13.0
May -Sep 15
Melville
33-34b
BOB
Bermuda
30.7
Mar -Aug
Dell
35-36
AuB
Bermuda
11.7
Mar -Aug
Dell
37a -37b
WOB
Bermuda
9,7
Mar -Aug
Dell
38-44b
WaB
Wheat
31.0
Sep - Apr
Dell
38-44b
WaB
Soybeans
31.0
Apr - Se
S1S4
45
Was
Wheat
5.4
Sep - Apr
S1S4
45
WaB
S2t2ans
5.4
Apr - Sep
51 S4
46a -47b
WaB
Wheat
24.3
Sep - Apr
S1 S4
46a -47b
Was
S2twns
24.3
Apr - Sep
S1 S4
48
WaB
W heat
10.0
Sep - Apr
S1 S4
48
WaB
Soybeans
10.0
Apr - Sep
S 1 S4
49
WaB
Wheat
6.6
Sep - Apr
S1 S4
49
WaB
Soybeans
6.6
Apr - Sep
S1S4
50-53.54b
BoB
Matua
25.4
Oct -May
S1 S4
50-53,54b
BOB
Soybeans
25.4
May -Sep 15
S1S4
54a
WaB
Bermuda
8.0
Mar -Aug
Mag 4 1
55
WaB
Bermuda
4.0
Mar -Au
•'•""' I
".."'
"""'*••""..".."'
Small Grain
129.7
Sep -Mar
Total Farm Acres 384.6
******** ALL, BERMUDA FIELDS WILL BE OVERSEEDED WITH SMALL GRAIN IN THE WINTER.
NUP Page 3 Aerway

Table 2: ACRES WITH AGREEMENT OR LONG TERM LEASE
(Agreement with adjacent landowner must be attached)
(Required only If operator does not own
adequate land [see Required Specification 2])
Tract Field Soil Crop Lbs. N Acres Lbs. N Month of
. See footnote for Table 1.
Totals from above Tables
Acres Lbs. N
Utilized
Table 1 237.5 71,621.9
Table 2 0 -
Total 237.5 71,621.9
Amount of N Produced 70,944.8
Surplus or Deficlt 677
NOTE: The Waste Utilization Plan must contain provisions for periodic land
application of sludge at agronomic rates. The sludge will be nutrient rich and will
require precautionary measures to prevent over application of nutrient or other
elements.
NUP Page 4

Table 2: ACRES WITH AGREEMENT OR LONG TERM LEASE
(Agreement with adjacent landowner must be attached)
(Required only if operator does not own
adequate land [see Required Specification 2])
Tract Field Soil Crop Lbs. N Acres Lbs. N . Month of
See footnote for Table 1.
Totals from above Tables
Acres Lbs. N
Utilized
Table 1 237.5 78,245.9
Table 2 0 -
Total 237.5 78,245.9
Amount of N Produced 70,944.8
Surplus or Deficit 7,301
NOTE: The Waste Utilization Plan must contain provisions for periodic land
application of sludge at agronomic rates. The sludge will be nutrient rich and will
require precautionary measures to prevent over application of nutrient or other
elements.
NUP Page 4 Millet

o .w sT� u��T�oNPLAN 3
r
See attached map showing the fields to be used for the utilization of waste water.
Application of Waste by Irrigation
Field Soil Type Crop Application Application
No. Rate (In/Hr) Amount (In.)
1-3
ChA
MatualSoybean
0.75
1
8
ChA
Matua/Soyboan
0.75
1
9,11
W aB
Berm/SG
0.6
1
10
WaB
Matua/So n
0.6
1
16
Au
Berm/SG
0.6
1
17
BOB
Berm/SG
0.75
1
18a-21
BoB
MatualSoybean
0,75
1
22a -23b
BoB
MatualSoybean
0.75
1
24-26
BOB
Berm/SG
0.75
1
27
BOB
MatualSoybean
0.75
1
28
BOB
MatualSoybean
0.75
1
29-30
BOB
BemVSG
0.75
1
31-32
BOB
MatualSoybean
0.75
1
33-34b
BOB
Berm/SG
0.75
1
35-36
Au
Berm/SG
0.6
1
37a -37b
W aB
Bem /SG
0.6
1
38-44b
W aB
Wheat/Soybeans
0.6
1
45
W aB
Wheat/Soybeans
0.6
1
46a -47b
W aB
Wheat/Soybeans
0.6
1
48
W aB
WheaVSoybeans
0.6
1
49
W aB
WheaVftybeans
0.6
1
50-53,54b
BOB
MatualSoybean
0.75
1
54a
W aB
Berm/SG
0.6
1
55
lWas
-MatualSoybean
0.6
1
THIS TABLE IS NOT NEEDED IF WASTE IS NOT BEING APPLIED BY IRRIGATION,
HOWEVER A SIMILAR TABLE WILL BE NEEDED FOR DRY LITTER OR SLURRY.
"" 6 Lagoons
Your facility is designed for_180_days of temporary storage and the temporary
storage must be removed on the average of once every —6—Months. In no
instance should the volume of waste being stored in your structure exceed
Elevation "see lagoon design.
Call the local Natural Resources Conservation Service (formerly Soil
Conservation Service) or Soil and Water Conservation District office after you
receive the waste analysis report for assistance in determining the amount per
acre to apply and the proper application rate prior to applying the waste.
NUP Page 5

Narrative of operation:
This NUP reflects wettable acres and is written by
pulls.
Information. for the
matualsoybe n rotation -may -be
found in Forages
the Science of Grassland
Agriculture
4th edition.
The book was printed
by the Iowa State Uniyersi
Press copyright
1985. A copy of the
article is attached
to this
waste plan.
This plan utilizes
the 100# smalLarairl overseed option—The
last apglication
ofN on the_bermuda
must beDrlor to
August 31st. There
maybe a total of 50# of put
out Sep -Oct with
the remalnino 50#
put out in Feb
-Mar.
There will be no
application of N during the months
of Nov.Dec.Jan
and the gyefgeed must
be removed
by April 7th
or before head Ing
which ever cgmas first.
On the fields with
wheat/soybean rotation the 20#
residual nitrogen
from the soybeans was
deducted
from the following
crop.
These farms use
a hard hose traveler.aerway an�cepivot
systems forirTigatios,_-The
method
of nutrient removalis 1hrough hgylng and Eow cro
methods.
NUP Page 5a

REQUIRED SPECIFICATIONS
1 Animal waste shall not reach surface waters of the state by runoff, drift, manmade
conveyances, direct application, or direct discharge during operation or land
application. Any discharge of waste which reaches surface water is prohibited.
2 There must be documentation in the design folder that the producer either owns or
has an agreement for use of adequate land on which to properly dispose of waste,
he/she shall provide a copy of an agreement with a landowner who is within a
reasonable proximity, allowing hlm/her the use of the land for waste application. It
is the responsibility of the owner of the facility to secure an update of the Waste
Utilization Plan when there is a change in the operation, increase in the number of
animals, method of utilization, or available land.
3 Animal waste shall be applied to meet, but not exceed, the nitrogen needs for
realistic crop yields based on soil type, available moisture, historical data, climatic
conditions, and level of management, unless there are regulations that restrict the
rate of application for other nutrients.
4 Animal waste shall be applied to land eroding less than 5 tons per acre per year.
Waste may be applied to land that is eroding at 5 or more tons, but less than 10
tons per acre per year providing grass filter strips are Installed where runoff leaves
the field. (See FOTG Standard 393 - Filter Strip).
5 Odors can be reduced by injecting the waste or disking after waste application.
Waste should not be applied when there Is danger of drift from the irrigation field.
6 When animal waste is to be applied on acres subject to flooding, it will be soil
incorporated on conventionally tilled cropland. When applied to conservation tilled
crops or grassland, the waste may be broadcast provided the application does not
occur during a season prone to flooding. (See "Weather and Climate in North
Carolina" for guidance.)
7 Liquid waste shall be applied at rates not to exceed the soil infiltration rate such that
runoff does not occur offsite or to surface waters and in a method which does not
cause drift from the site during application. No ponding should occur in order to
control odor or flies.
Animal waste shall not be applied to saturated soils, during rainfall events, or when
the surface is frozen.
NUP Page 6

REQUIRED SPECIFICATIONS
(continued)
9 Animal waste shall be applied on actively growing crops In such a manner that the
crop is not covered with waste to a depth that would Inhibit growth. The potential
for salt damage from animal waste should also be considered.
10 Waste nutrients shall not be applied in fall or winter for spring planted crops on soils
with a high potential for leaching. Waste nutrient loading rates on these soils
should be held to a minimum and a suitable winter cover crop planted to take up
released nutrients. Waste shall not be applied more than 30 days prior to planting
of the crop or forages breaking dormancy.
11 Any new swine facility sited on or after October 1, 1995 shall comply with the
following: The outer perimeter of the land area onto which waste is applied from a
lagoon that is a component of a swine farm shall be at least 50 feet from any
residential property boundary and from any perennial stream or river (other than an
Irrigation ditch or canal. Animal waste other than swine waste from facilities sited
on or after October 1, 1995), shall not be applied closer than 25 feet to perennial
waters. (See Standard 393 - Filter Strips).
12 Animal waste shall not be applied closer than 100 feet to wells.
13 Animal waste shall not be applied closer than 200 feet of dwellings other than those
owned by the landowner.
14 Waste shall be applied In a manner not to reach other property and public right -of
ways.
15 Animal waste shall not be discharged into surface waters, drainageways, or
wetlands by a discharge or by over -spraying. Animal waste may be applied to prior
converted wetlands provided they have been approved as a land application site by
a "technical specialist". Animal waste shall not be applied on grassed waterways
that discharge directly into water courses, and on other grassed waterways, waste
shall be applied at agronomic rates in a manner that causes no runoff or drift from
the site.
16 Domestic and industrial waste from washdown facilities, showers, toilets, sinks, etc.,
shall not be discharged into the animal waste management system.
17 If animal production at the facility is to be suspended or terminated, the owner is
responsible for obtaining and implementing a "closure plan" which will eliminate the
possibility of an illegal discharge, pollution and erosion.
NUP Page 7

18 Waste handling structures, piping, pumps, reels, etc., should be inspected on a
regular basis to prevent breakdowns, leaks, and spills. A regular maintenance
checklist should be kept on site.
19 Animal waste can be used in a rotation that Includes vegetables and other crops for
direct human consumption, However, if animal waste is used on crops for direct
human consumption it should only be applied preplant with no further applications
of animal waste during the crop season.
20 Highly visible markers shall be installed to mark the top and bottom elevations of
the temporary storage (pumping volume) of all waste treatment lagoons. Pumping
shall be managed to maintain the liquid level between markers. A marker will be
required to mark the maximum storage volume for waste storage ponds.
21 Waste shall be tested within 60 days of utilization and soil shall be tested at least
annually at crop sites where waste products are applied. Nitrogen shall be the rate -
determining element. Zinc and copper levels In the soils shall be monitored and
alternative crop sites shall be used when these metals approach excessive levels.
pH shall be adjusted for optimum crop production and maintained. Soil and waste
analysis records shall be kept for five years. Poultry dry waste application records
shall be maintained for three (3) years. Waste application records for all other
waste shall be maintained for five (5) years.
22 Dead animals will be disposed of in a manner that meets North Carolina
regulations.
NUP Page 8

WASTE UTILIZATION PLAN AGREEMENT
Name of Fara: Mag IV, Melville I & II, Dell, DM Section 1 Site 4
Owner/ Manager Agreement
I (we) understand and will follow and implement the specifications and the operation
and maintenance procedures established in the approved animal waste utilization plan
for the farm named above. I (we) know that any expansion to the existing design
capacity of the waste treatment and storage system or construction of new facilities will
require a new certification to be submitted to the Division of Environment Management
(DEM) before the new animals are stocked. I (we) also understand that there must be
no discharge of animal waste from this system to surface waters of the state from a
storm event less severe than the 25 -year, 24 -Hour storm. The approved plan will be
filed on-site at the farm office and at the office of the local Sall and Water Conservation
District and will be available for review by DEM upon request.
Name of Facility Owner: DM Farms of Rose Hill LLC.
(please print)
Signature: ADate: Z3 O 3
Name of Manager (if different from owner : D vId Hulbert
Signature,.— iDate-
Name
Signet _ '' \ Date -
Name of Technical Specialist: ( please print): AJ Linton
Affiliation: DM Farms of ose Hill LLC.
Address (Agency): P.O. Box 1076
Rose Hill. -NC 28458
'' 7��31�
Signature: Date:
NUP Page 9

`Q�oF w A r�RQc
DM Farms of Rose Hill LLC
Mag 4, Melville I & II, DELL, DM Section 1 Site 4
PO Box 1076
Rose Hill NC 28458
Dear Sir:
Michael F. Easley, Governor
William G. Ross Jr., Secretary
North Carolina Department of Environment and Natural Resources
April 27, 2003
Alan W. Klimek, P. E., Director
Division of Water Quality
lj APR 2 B 2003
L
Subject: Application No. NCO086614
Request to change W UP
Mag 4, Melville I & II, DELL, DM Section 1
Site 4
Animal Waste Operation
Sampson County
The Non -Discharge Permitting Unit has completed a review of the request to change this facilities WUP.
It is the decision of the Division that the request be granted to change fields 1-3, 8, and 18a-23b.from Matua to a
Matua/soybean rotation and fields 9-11, 16, 17, 24-37b, and 50-55 from Bermuda/Matua to Bermuda/Sm allgrain.
If you have any questions regarding this request, please call me at [phone], extension 544.
cc: Fayetteville Regional Office, Water Quality
Permit Fite
Non -Discharge Permitting Unit
1617 Mail Service Center, Raleigh, NC 27699.1617
DENR Customer Service Center
An Equal Opportunity Action Employer
Sincerelly�/,,
'e /
Michelle McKay
Environmental Engineer
Nan -Discharge Permitting Unit
Internet http://h2o.enr.nc.state.us/ndpu
Telephone [phone] Fax [phone]
Telephone [phone]
50% recycled/10% post -consumer paper
D!R

NCDENR
North Carolina Department of Environment and Natural Resources
Michael F, Easley, Governor
May 7, 2002
MEMORANDUM
TO: Steve Lewis
Non -Discharge Compliance & Enforcement Unit
FROM: Paul Sherma
THROUGH: Paul Rawls
Regional Water Q pervisor
SUBJECT: 1 st Quarter 2002 Report Review
Mag 4 Sow, Melville I & 2, Dell Farm, and Section 1 Site 4
NPDES Permit #NC0086614
William G. Ross Jr., Secretary
Gregory J. Thorpe, Ph.D.
Acting Director
Division of Water Quality
I have reviewed the information submitted by DM Farms for the quarter ending March 2002 and have
included the following comment(s):
Information required by Condition 111. 12 of above referenced NPDES Permit:
• IRR -1 Forms
• IRR -2 Forms
• Lagoon Level Readings
• Rainfall Readings
All required information has been submitted for review.
No problems were noted during review of this quarterly report. Inspection procedures have been
modified so that inspection times are now in compliance.
Fayetteville Regional Office
225 Green Street — Suite 714, Fayetteville, North Carolina 28301-5043
Phone: [phone] FAX: [phone] Internet: www.anr.state.nc.us/ENR
An Equal Opportunity1 Affirmative Action Employer— 50% Recycled 110% Post Consumer Paper

A[VAA
NCDENR
North Carolina Department of Environment and Natural Resources
Michael F. Easley, Governor
August 12, 2002
MEMORANDUM
TO: Steve Lewis
Non -Discharge Compliance & Enforcement Unit
FROM: Paul Sherm n
THROUGH: Paul Rawls C_
Regional Water Quality Supervisor
William G. Ross Jr., Secretary
Alan Klimek, P.E., Director
Division of Water Quality
S U BJ ECT: 2nd Quarter 2002 Report Review
Mag 4 Sow, Melville 1 & 2, Dell Farm, and Section 1 Site 4
NPDES Permit NNC0086614
I have reviewed the information submitted by DM Farms for the quarter ending June 2002 and have
included the following comment(s):
Information required by Condition I11.12 of above referenced NPDES Permit:
• IRR -1 Forms
• .IRR -2 Forms
• Lagoon Level Readings
• Rainfall Readings
All required information has been submitted for review.
• One instance of clerical error was noted on April 16, 2002 for pull number 47B. Total gallons
pumped was transferred incorrectly between Irr-1 and Irr-2 forms.
• One instance of overapplication on April 23,.2002 for pull number 54B. Hydraulic overapplication
of 7.4%
Fayetteville Regional Office
225 Green Street—Suite 714, Fayetteville, North Carolina 28301-5043
Phone: [phone] FAX: [phone] Internet: www.enr,state,nc.us/ENR
An Equal Opportunity 1 Affirmative Action Employer — 50% Recycled 110% Post Consumer Paper

PWA
NCDENR
North Carolina Department of Environment and Natural Resources
Michael F. Easley, Governor
December 30, 2002
MEMORANDUM
TO: Steve Lewis
Non -Discharge Compliance & Enforcement Unit
FROM: Paul Shc n6P
THROUGH: Paul Ra ` /
Regional Water Quality Supervisor
William G. Ross Jr., Secretary
Alan Klimek, P.E., Director
Division of Water Quality
SUBJECT: 3rd Quarter 2002 Report Review
Mag 4 Sow, Melville 1 & 2, Deli Farm, and Section 1 Site 4
NPDES Permit#NCO086614
I have reviewed the information submitted by DM Farms for the quarter ending September 2002 and
have included the following comment(s):
Information required by Condition 111.12 of above referenced NPDES Permit:
• IRR -1 Forms
• IRR -2 Forms
• Lagoon Level Readings
► Rainfall Readings
All required information has been submitted for review.
• An amended W UP was submitted for review on October 25, 2002.
• Two instances of exceeding the 60 minute irrigation inspection requirement by 5 minutes:
• Pivot #10, September 19, 2002, 4:30-5:35.
• Pull 19-13, September 23, 2002, 11:15-12:20,
Fayetteville Regional Office
225 Green Street— Suite 714, Fayetteville, North Carolina 28301-5043
Phone: [phone] FAX: [phone] Internet: www.enr.state.nc.us/ENR
An Equal Opportunity 1 Affirmative Action Employer — 50% Recycled 110% Post Consumer Paper

A �,n �
NCDENR
North Carolina Department of Environment and Natural Resources
Michael F. Easley, Governor
February 13, 2003
MEMORANDUM
TO: Keith Larick
Non -Discharge Compliance & Enforcement Unit
FROM: Paul Sherman
THROUGH: Paul Rawls
Regional Water Quality Supervisor
William G. Ross Jr., Secretary
Alan Klimek, P.E., Director
Division of Water Quality
SUBJECT: 4th Quarter 2002 Report Review
Mag 4 Sow, Melville I & 2, Dell Farm, and Section 1 Site 4
NPDES Permit #NC0086614
I have reviewed the information submitted by DM Farms for the quarter ending December 2002 and
have included the following comment(s):
Information required by Condition 111.12 of above referenced NPDES Permit:
• IRR -1 Forms
• IRR -2 Forms
• Lagoon Level Readings
• Rainfall Readings
All required information has been submitted for review.
1. Automatic rainfall gauge is malfunctioning. Several attempts have been made to repair it, however,
it only works for a minimal amount of time. Daily manual measurements are being recorded.
2. No items of noncompliance were noted during this review.
Fayetteville Regional Office
225 Green Street— Suite 714, Fayetteville, North Carolina 28301-5043
Phone: [phone] FAX: [phone] Internet: www.enr,sta1e,nc.us/ENR
An Equal Opportunity 1 Affirmative Action Employer — 50% Recycled 110% Post Consumer Paper

A'5�1;,Av
NCDENR
North Carolina Department of Environment and Natural Resources
Michael F. Easley, Governor
March 12, 2002
MEMORANDUM
TO: Paul Rawl('
Regional at r Quality Supervisor
FROM: Paul Sherman OMPT
Environmental Engineer
SUBJECT: 2001 Annual Certification Report Review
Mag 4 Sow, Melville 1 & 2, Dell Farm, and Section 1 Site 4
NPDES Permit #NC0086614
William G. Ross Jr., Secretary
Gregory J. Thorpe, Ph.D,
Acting Director
Division of Water Quality
I have reviewed the above referenced information submitted by DM Farms for the year ending
December 31, 2001. I include the following comment(s):
Part II, Item 11 "No runoff of waste from the application sites occurred." was checked "Yes" on the
certification form provided by the division. This item was, however, explained in the attached
reference as if it had been checked "No". The reference letters clearly state that runoff had occurred
as a result of broken pipes (two occasions). Even thought the item was checked "Yes", there was
thorough explanation of the events and corrective action taken.
• The remainder of the certification is complete and satisfactory.
Fayetteville Regional Office
225 Green Street — Suite 714, Fayetteville, North Carolina 28301-5043
Phone: [phone] FAX: [phone] Internet: www.enr.State.nc.us/ENR
An Equal Opportunity 1 Affirmative Action Employer — 50% Recycled 110% Post Consumer Paper

ANIMAL FACILITY ANNUAL CERTIFIC T
Permit Number _ NCO086614 County _Sampson Year 2001
Facility Name M467M, f 1twj,,x- Taaet S . QGi. i DM Sec-roa,,.► T Sark Mr -
Operator in Charge for this Facility &Frtrn Zr- - 1-taroAli Phone #01�� .1a 7A1
Operator Certification Number J F (a 9r
Land application of animal waste as allowed by the above permit occurred during the past calendar year
✓ YES N0, If NO, skip Part i and Part II and proceed to the certification. Also, if animal waste
were generated but not land applied, please attach an explanation on how the animal waste was handled.
Part I
-Total number of application Fields ❑ or Pulls [7 (please check the appropriate box} approved in the Certified
Animal Waste Management Plan (CAWMP), Total Wettable Acres approved in the CAWMP
.237, S
Total number of Fields ❑ or Pulls [?/(please check the appropriate box) on which land application occurred
during the year. r 6 Total Acres on which waste was applied d? 3 f o
-Total pounds of Plant Available Nitrogen applied during the year for all application sites. 39., a3, va
-Total pounds of Plant Available Nitrogen allowed to be land applied annually by the CAWMP and the permit
75, IpS, 9
Largest number of animals by type at this facility at any time during the previous year
Sos,,1s = 3l�sy r 1,777,4iugi4(, a --
Facility's Integrator if applicable yJuxm4w AIa,M� LLC_ _ _ This is not a change from the previous
year? VYes ❑ No If No, please explain
Part H
Facility Status_
IF THE ANSWER TO ANY QUESTION BELOW IS NO, PLEASE PROVIDE A WRITTEN
DESCRIPTION AS TO WHY THE FACILITY WAS NOT COMPLIANT, THE DATES OF
NON COMPLIANCE, AND EXPLAIN CORRECTIVE ACTION TAKEN OR PROPOSED TO
BE TAKEN TO BRING THIS FACILITY BACK INTO COMPLIANCE.
1. Only animal waste generated at this facility and approved for land application at this /Yes ❑ No
facility were applied to sites covered by this permit during the past year.
2. The largest number of animals by type on this facility at any time during the previous year /Yes ❑ No
did not exceed the permitted number of animals by type authorized by the Permit for this
facility.
2-15-02 1
/h .ser- gTTAcOeO 6CPL4aA t,aN Wjjif lA Is !,V(o2ecRAr(cA 3Y

'�
f�
.... -. J

3. There were no discharges of waste to the surface water from this facility during the ❑ Yes VNo
past year.
4. There were no freeboard violations in any lagoons or storage ponds at this facility
VYes
❑ No
during the past year.
5. There were no PAN applications to any fields or crops at this facility greater
/
C?' Yes
❑ No
than the levels specified in this facilities Certified Animal Waste Management Plan
(CAWMP) during the past year.
6. Soil pH was maintained as specified in the permit.
e Yes
❑ No
7. Annual soils analysis was performed on each site receiving waste during the past
R/Yes
❑ No
calendar year.
/Yes
8. All required monitoring and reporting was performed in accordance with the facility's
❑ No
permit during the previous year.
9. All operations and maintenance requirements in the permit were complied with or, in ❑ Yes Ao
the case of a deviation, prior authorization was received from the Division of Water Quality.
10. Vegetative cover as specified in the permit was maintained on this site and the crops 1/yes ❑ No
grown were removed in accordance with the crop management plan and the Permit. /
11. No runoff of waste from the application sites occurred. 19 Yes ❑ No
12. All buffer requirements as specified on the permit were maintained during each 19/Yes ❑ No
application of waste. /
13, All Groundwater monitoring requirements in the permit were met. Q' Yes ❑ No
"1 certify under penalty of law that this document and all attachments were prepared under my direction or
supervision in accordance with a system designed to assure that qualified personnel properly gather and
evaluate the information submitted. Based on my inquiry of the person or persons who manage the system, or
those persons directly responsible for gathering the information, the information submitted is, to the best of my
knowledge and belief, true, accurate, and complete. 1 am aware that there are significant penalties for
submitting false information, including the possibility of fines and imprisonment for knowing violations."
1J M Fo,r m - -F A-., t H-, �\ I„ I- C. b A v 1 �
Permittee Name and Title (type & print)
Signature of Permittee
Signature Kf Operator in Charge
(if different from Permittee)
1343 rR44] mcae,-j tr
ate
3// /O
Date
2-15-02 4, 2
n- SEE ATrA WU t Vj,4,G/' !S r�rco�ui�M1%a [�y frEFr2�r .rc r ,

Attachment to DM Farms 2115102 Annual Certification Form
3/l/02
To Whom It May Concern:
* Part I: Total number of pulls on which land application occurred during the year was 66. The total
number of acres on which waste was applied was 234.10. This is the same number of pulls but fewer acres,
This is due to the change over to the pivots and a change in spray patterns on pulls 35,36 and 47b.
*Part 2 number 2: The higliest number of sows (3850) occurred on 6/23101. The highest number of
finishing animals (26777) occurred on 1/13101. The highest number of nursery animals (454) occurred on
9/29/01. At no time were there more total animals on site than the permit allows and the steady state live
weight was not exceeded. The fluctuation in members is due to the ebb and now of death and births on the
farm.
* Part 2 number 3: We had two separate incidents of nm off from the facility during the year. You will find
attached the explanations for both as well as corrective actions. This also addresses Pari 2 number 11.
* Part 2 number 9: Based on Terry Tate's phone conversation with Paul Rawls on 2/27/02, there appears to
be a dispute between DM Farms and D WQ regarding the appropriate inspection criteria under section 2.14
of the permit as reflected in the attached letter dated February 15, 2002. DM Farms believes that its
obligation is to inspect each hour, while DWQ believes the requirement is to inspect every 60 minutes.
Never the less, DM Farms acknowledges that in recording the time of the entry on the IRR -1 Form rather
than the time of the inspection itself, that it failed to conform with the record keeping requirement of the
permit. All personnel have now been instructed to record the actual time of the inspection in all future
cases.
We believe these explanations meet the requirements of the division and our permit. If there is
any further questions or if any of the above need to be discussed please do not hesitate to call. We look
forward to your feedback as we strive to meet the requirements of the permit and remain environmentally
compliant,
You may call myself 910-289-7364 or Teny Tate 910-289-7298 if you have questions.
Sincerely,
al -1 -
AJ Linton
Environmental Specialist
DM Farms of Rose Hill LLC.

DM FARMS of Rose Hill, LLC
P.O. Box 1076 Rose Hill, NC 28458
March 28, 2001
Mr. Paul Rawls
NCDENR
Fayetteville Regional Office
Division of Water Quality
In accordance with NPDES permit number NCO086614 Section M.11, this
communication provides a report of certain events that occurred on March 23, 2001 at
facility #82-77. This communication provides our response and the actions taken to
prevent a recurrence.
On March 23, 2001 at approximately 8:15 a.m., Kevin Pope observed a broken pipe in a
field at the Dell Farm. The pipe was a clean out for the force main leading from the lift
station to the lagoon. Mr. Pope immediately shut down the lift station to prevent
wastewater from leaving the force main. Mr. Pope then notified A.J. Linton by pager,
and began to shut down the flush tanks and recycle pump. Mr. Linton arrived at 8:50
a.m. He sent Mr. Pope for a tractor and disc. Terry Tate arrived at 9:25 a.m. with the
tractor and incorporated the wastewater into the sprayfield, preventing wastewater from
leaving the field. Mr. Linton took samples at the source of the spill, where ifentered the,
ditch, upstream, and downstream as required by Section III.9.a. of our permit. At
approximately 10:00 a.m., Mr. Tate notified your Regional Office of D WQ of the event
and actions taken.
Approximately 2,000 gallons of wastewater left the broken pipe. Based on our
calculations, no more than 1,500 gallons reached the ditch. The'remainder of the
wastewater remained on the sprayfield. In order to provide greater supervision, our
recycle systems are set on timers that run from 6 a.m. until 6 p.m. The pipe was not
observed to be broken on Thursday night when the area was checked.. It appears the pipe
was broken by a cow sometime during the night of March 22. Because of our system of
checks and timers, no wastewater could have left the system until it came online at 6:30
a.m. Friday. A check of the timer revealed that it was running a half-hour slow. Thus the
system could, not have been in operation for more than an hour and a half before the
release was discovered.
The clean out pipe was removed from the field and the cattle removed from the property.
In response to this one-time event, we have evaluated our systems. We are in the process
of removing all above ground clean -outs. We have also implemented additional
documented twice-daily checks of the lift station and all of the piping.

We evaluated the release from this event and determined that it was not feasible to
capture and return any of the waste to the lagoon. If we had attempted to do so, silt
would have entered the roadside ditch or creek, potentially causing significant harm.
Staff remained at the site until 6:30 p.m, on Friday. Mr. Tate conducted a follow up visit
to the site on Saturday March 24, 2001. He thoroughly inspected the farm, the ditch and
the creek and found no visible signs of the release in the ditch or creek.
We regret that this unusual incident occurred. We will continue to make every effort to
prevent discharges.
If you have any further questions or comments please call Terry Tate at [phone].
Sincerely,
4Te-
.
Assistant Production Director

DM FARMS of Rose Hill, LLC
P.O. Box 1076 Rose Hill, NC 28458
August 31, 2001
A& Paul Rawls
NCDENR
Fayetteville Regional Office
Division of Water Quality
In accordance with NPDES permit number NCO086614 Section IH. 11, this
communication provides a report of certain events that occurred on August 29, 2001 at
facility #82-77. This communication provides our response and the actions taken to
prevent a recurrence.
On August 29, 2001 at approximately 2:30 p.m., Kevin Pope observed a saturated area
and ponding in a field at Magnolia 4 Sow Farm. The field was away from the fields in
which irrigation had occurred during the morning hours. The saturated area was around a
portion of the sprayfield that had been recently excavated during the installation of
additional piping.
Mr. Pope instructed Keith- Stewart, a LNM technician accompanying him, to construct a
dam around the ponded area using a shovel. Mr. Pope immediately began to assess the
extent of the ponded area in an effort to determine if there was a point of entry into
adjacent woods. Mr. Pope found an area of clouded water in the woods. Mr. Pope paged
A.7. Linton to inform him of the event. A second LNM technician arrived on a tractor.
He had been traveling to the field in order to move equipment. Mr. Pope informed the
second LNM technician, Kenneth Avery, to construct a larger dam using the front-end
loader of the tractor. Once the dam.was constructed, Mr. Pope instructed the technicians
to go and get a backhoe and additional tractors.
Mr. Linton arrived at the site at approximately 3:00 p.m. to assist in control efforts. Mr.
Linton initiated the construction of a hole to contain the wastewater, as well as the
construction of another dam using round bales of hay. This dam was constructed to
control the flow of the creek and aid in the recovery of the small amount of wastewater
that had escaped.
From approximately 3:15 until 3:45 p.m., Mr. Linton collected samples from the
wastewater source, downstream, and upstream. Mr. Linton proceeded to notify me of the
event. The water collected in the containment hole that had been constructed was then
pumped into tanks and deposited on the sprayfield. I arrived during this time. While the

construction of the dam and spreading of the water was taking place, Mr. Linton and I
proceeded to a telephone to contact the Division of Water Quality. This notification
occurred at approximately 4:30.
Once the water from the containment area had been distributed on the field, the irrigation
dealer that had installed the pipe was contacted. The dealers' crew arrived at
approximately 7:30 p.m. to assess the nature of the pipe failure. The crew removed the
dirt from over the pipe and discovered that the pipe had backed out of the "T" fitting in
the line. The pipe was not completely removed from the "T". It had slipped back just
enough to damage the gasket on the fitting, resulting in the failure. The pipe was cut, a
section removed, the gasket replaced, and the pipe was then reconnected. The area
around the perimeter of the field was disked to incorporate any remaining wastewater
into the soil.
Less than 1,000 gallons of wastewater escaped the system. Certainly less than half of
that volume made it to the creek, of which a significant portion was recovered through
construction of the dam and containment area. The volume is reinforced by several
factors that were observed. First, during the repair a significant volume of water had to
be'pumped from the system, indicating that much less than the entire volume of the pipe
had escaped around the gasket. Second, visual observations of the site when we.
discovered the problem indicated a volume less than 1000 gallons. Third, there was no
evidence of erosion from the point of the pipe malfunction, even though the soil had
recently been disturbed during construction and was highly erodable. We believe that
because of the small volume, the potential impact should be minimal. I visually
monitored the stream during the evening of the 29� and saw significant fish activity with
no evidence of stress. On the 30t', we again spent significant time -in area and saw
normal fish activity and no evidence of waste in the tributary, I am confident that my
staff reacted quickly and appropriately in order to contain the wastewater, as well as to
return it to the sprayfield.
We are committed to take the necessary steps to prevent this type of failure in the future.
We have initiated an inspection of the new construction that occurred in the system. The
"T" fittings and thrust blocks will be inspected to make sure that the connections are
secure.
We regret that this unusual incident occurred. We will continue to make every effort to
prevent discharges.
If you have any further questions or. comments please call [phone].
Since ly,
e Tate
A stent Production Director

RAINMAN HMGATZON, INC.
P O Box 1137
Mt. Olive, N.C. 28365
[phone]
January 25, 2002
D. M. Farms
Attention: A J Linton
P O Box 759
Rose Hill, N.C. 28458
Dear Mr. Linton
The purpose of this letter is to inform you of the work details that our .company performed on th�
Mag N irrigation system. This work occurred as a result of a mishap caused during start-up,
immediately following a pipe retrofit to accommodate center pivot systems. A six inch gasketeq
Harco Tee split in the lower field, due to having insufficient air vents in the underground piping,
A number of risers equipped with air vents had been removed during the retrofit. The only air
vents remaining in the lower field following the retrofit, were the ones on the three end risers.
This would have been more than adequate if even one of the three risers was opened during the
operation of the system. However, the failure of the tee occurred when the pivot in the upper
field was operated and the piping in the lower field was being pressurized. There simply were not
enough air vents to evacuate the air quick enough.
As you know, we went back and installed five more air vents in the system along with a six inc
UGV(underground valve) that enables the operator to isolate the lower field. This means that
piping supplying the lower field will not be pressurized unless a pivot is operating in that sectiorj.
Last, but not least,. We excavated. around .all of the tees,"'elboWs and risers in order to nuke- sure
there was no other damage done to the system during that initial episode. The remaining systems
had not been damaged. l believe the steps we have taken will eliminate any such occurrences in,
the future. ;
Sincerely,
Gary R. Scalf, CID

DM FARMS, of -Rose Hill, LLC
P.O. Box 1076 Rose Ill, NC 28458
February IS., 2002
Mr. Paul Rawls
NCDENR
Fayetteville Regional Office
Division of Water Quality
Paul,
As a follow-up to our conversations regarding the compliance of our Magnolia 4 facility
with NPDES Permit Number NC0086614, I would like to address the issues you have
brought to my attention. More specifically, I would like to address the issue of
compliance with Section H.14 of the permit, which states:
"In accordance with 15A NCAC 8F .0203(b)(2), the Operator in Charge or a
designated back-up Operator in. Charge 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. In no case
shall #his _ftLMpction be Iess often that @very hour duringeapplication of animal
v_ r�aste� A mad oiea WspgctiMshalfbe_ incoxrQUed_inlp _I Form Md
shall W&u&—fte raeld er an of the opsotu for
'Inspection. The permittee may assert as an affirmative defense in any
enforcement action alleging noncompliance with the requirements imposed in this
condition that such noncompliance was due to circumstances beyond the
Permittee's control. A notation shall be made on the IRR -1 Form indicating the
inspection affected by such circumstance and an -explanation setting forth the
circumstances claimed to have been beyond the Permittee's control shall be.
submitted with the IRR 1 Form"
I have reviewed the information which you forwarded to A.J. Linton based on his
request. It is my understanding that this document was sent to your office by the
Environmental Protection Agency Region Four and is titled Murphy Farms Field
Records -- Non -Compliance Analysis, dated January 24, 2002. The document appears to
summarize infornaation from our 2001 third quarter IRR -1 forms and claims a total
number of violations of irrigation inspections totaling seventy-two.
It is apparent from this document that the Environmental Protection Agency has applied
the wrong compliance standard and is judging compliance with a requirement to inspect
every sixty minutes rather than "every hour" as required by the permit.

We have reviewed our'entire set of IRR -1 forms for quarters two through four during
2001 using the correct "every hour" standard. This review identified a total of eighteen
inspections that had been recorded as being performed outside of the "every hour"
requirement of Section IL 14. Of the eighteen inspections, five occurred during quarter
two, ten during quarter three, and three during quarter four. The eighteen inspections
represent only 1.09% of the 1654.inspections performed during the last three calendar
quarters of 2001.
During the last three calendar quarters, it had been our practice to record application
inspections after having completed the physical inspection. A.routine inspection
generally takes between five and fifteen minutes. Unfortunately, this method of record .
keeping is responsible for sixteen of the eighteen inspections that are recorded as being
less frequent than every hour: The remaining two are the result of the operator
misreading his watch, as the checks in question are at or before the start time of the event.
Specifically, in the first case a check was recorded at 3:35 on an event that was recorded
as starting at 3:30 and in the second a check was recorded at 3:30 on an event that was
recorded as starting at 3:40. Both events occurred on the same day and the same operator
performed the checks.
In summary, for the entire period we conducted a total of 1654 inspections of which none
were performed outside of the "every hour" requirement in Section 11.14 of the permit.
Never the less, we recognize the fact that the manner in which the time of the inspections
is recorded needs to be changed. As a result of our conversations with your office, the
subsequent review of our records, and a thorough review of our management practices,
we have since changed our method of recording irrigation event checks. In the future, the
actual time that the event check occurs will be recorded as opposed to the time of
completion.
I would respectfully ask that you provide me with a response as to the position of the
Division of Water Quality in regards to this matter. Should you have any further
questions please feel free to contact me [phone].
Sincerely,
T Tate
Assistant Production Director

MAR. 1.2002 1:58PM P :.
QIP PHONE NO. 910.209 6434
{
DM Farms of Rose Hill, LLC.
P 0 BOX 1076
ROSE HILL, NC 28458
910-289-6439 ext 4541
800-311-9458 ext 4541
FAX [phone].
i
Paul Rawls
c
FROM: David Hulbert
910-289-6439 ext 4490 or 1-800-311-9458 ext 4490
FAX OPERATOR Dallace Grady
910-289-6439 ext 41.541 or 1-800-311-9458 ext 4541
DATE 01 -Mar -02
' a
T,OTAI- NUMBER OF PAGES INCLUDING COVER. 11
NOTE: CALL DALLACE GRADY, 910-289-6439 EXT 4541 IF YOU HAVE A PROBLEM
RECEIVING ALL THE PAGES.
COMMENTS:
AA copy will follow by certified mail.
I

PROM
MAR. 1.2002 1:59PM P 2
PHONE NO. : 910 289 6434
ANIMAL FACILITY.ANNUAL CERTIFICATION FORM
Permit Number: S6086614 County�Sarx-son Year 2001
Facility Name M46 MI 4,oA� aoLot ZL ,t,I2ew� AM ;EGr,.,,, Z: Sr of .,,.�.
Operator in Charge for this Facility _41.faae V. l�,�u.ra,, ;M � _ Phone
Operator Certification Number
Land application of animal waste as allowed by the above permit occurred during the past calendar year
✓ YES : NO. If NO, skip Part` l and Part H and proceed to the certification. Also, if animal waste
were generated:but not land applied, please attach an explanation on how the animal waste was handled.
art 1
•Total;number bf application Fields ❑ or Pulls RR/(please check the appropriate box) approved in the�Cartified
Animal Waste Management Plan (CAWMP). = Total Wettable Acres approved in the CAWMP
_,2 �2
-Total number of Fields ❑ or Pulls 2/(please check the appropriate box) on which land application occurred
during the year. 16 Total Acres on.which waste was applied a 3 , to
-Total pounds 'of Plant Available Nitrogen applied during tate year for all application sites.
-Total pounds of Plant Available Nitrogen allowed to be land applied annually by the CAWMP and the permit
Largest number of animals by type at this facility at any time during the previous year
Sods = 3$So ti.s6., Isiq6
Facility's Integiator'jf applicable _mz_y;Aa s SLC _ This is not a change from the previous
year? "9- "Yes D7 No' If No, please explain `
Part Q
� cili a S#atuF:
IF THE ANSWER TO ANY QUESTION BELOW IS NO, PLEASE PROVIDE A WAN
DESCRIPTION AS TO WHY THE FACILITY WAS NOT COMPLIANT, THE DATES OF
NON COMPLIANCE, AND EXPLAIN CORRECTIVE ACTION TAKEN OR PROPOSA D TO
BE 'TAKEN TO BRING THIS FACILITY BACK INTO COMPLIANCE.
s.
1, Only animal waste generated at this facility and approved for land application at this CYee' ❑ No
facility were applied to -sites covered by ;this permit during the past year.
2. The largest ,number of ahimals by type on this facility at any time during the previous year 20"Yes Q No
did not exceed the permitted number of animals by type authorized by the Permit for this
facility.
2-15-02 1
Ae.
% Sm 4,rr4cH010 E9P&-4941ra^J w1arc1.1 IS #acalPaZArU JIy

MAR. 1.2002 1:59PM P .
FROM PHONE NO. 910 299 6434
3. There were. no discharges of waste to the surface water from this facility during the ❑ Yes &/No
past year.
4,
There were,.no freeboard violations in any lagoons or storage ponds at this facility
VYes ❑
No
during the pastyear. ` �''
S.
There were no PAN applications to any fields or crops at this facility greater
Aes ❑
No
than the levels specified in this facilities Certified Animal Waste Management Plan
(CAWMP)'during the past year.
6.
Soil pH was maintained as specified in the permit.
8"Y' cs ❑
No
7.
Annual soils analysis was performed on each site receiving waste during the past
BVYes ❑
No
calendar year.
8.
All required monitoring and reporting was performed in accordance with the facility's
C' Yes n
No
Permit during the previous year.
9,
All operations and maintenance require iients in the permit were complied with or, in
© 'Ye Fo-'No '
the case of a deviation, prior authorization was received from the Division of Wates Quality,
10,
Vegetative rover as specified in the permit was maintained on this site and the crops
R/Yes ❑
No
grown were removed in accordance with the crop management plan and the Permit.
11. No runoff of waste from the application sites occurred. 5/Yes 0 1`!o`
12. All buffer requirements as specified on the permit were mairntained during each (9/yes ❑ No
application ofwaste.
s.
13. All Ground*ater monitoring requirements in the permit were .met. III' Yes U No
"I certify under'penalty of law that this document and all attachments were prepared under ,rsy d#8d cl ','0r
supervision in aiccordance with a system designed to assure that qualified personnel properly &<fher ii d
evaluate the informataion submitted. Based on my inquiry of the person or persona who manage the 4stm or
those persons directly responsible for gathering the information, the information submitted is, to the best of my
knowledge and belief, true, accurate, and complete, I am aware that there are significant penalties for
submitting false information, including the possibility of fines and imprisonment for knowing violations.
-ef Rpt k7, 1N4 L.1, L b a, A .. t'a barrk-
Permittde Name and Title (type cfr print)
Signature of Permittee
Signature bif Operator in Charge
(if different from Permittee)
-15-02 i .2
A'M HU fXPL,f.4470+4 wHjcr4 if
i
-5 ex-
bate;��
3/ /oma
a -
Date
IAIL09P*f 'W0 8'Y ,

FROM : '
MAR. 1.2902 2:00PM P 4
PHONE NO. : 910 289 6434
Attachment to DM Farms 2115102 Annual Certification Form
3/1/02
To Whom It May Concern:
c
Part I: Total ntunber of pulls on which ;land application occurred during the year was 66. Thi total
number of acres on which waste was applied was 234.10, This is the same number of pulls but. #'ewer sates,
This is due to the change over to the pivots and a change in spray patterns on pulls 35,36 and 476.
*pan 21 number 2: The highest number of sows (3850) occurred on 6/23101. The highest number of
finishing animals (26777) occurred on l/.t 3101 • The highest number of nursery animals (454) occurred on
9129101; At no time were there more tottil animals on site than the permit allows and the steady state live
weight ivas riot exceeded. The fluctuation in numbers is due to the ebb and flow of death and births on the
farm. is
* Part 2 t=Mber .3; We had two separate inciderrts of runoff from the facility during the year. You will find
attached the explanations for both as well as corrective actions. This also addresses Part 2 numbs 11.
+ Part 2lnumlicr 9; Based on Teri Tale's phone canvorsataon with Paul Rawls on 2/27/{12, them appesm
''`
be a dispute atween DM Farms and DWQ regarding the appropriate inspection arteria under sd.:e icm 2.14
of the pfrrait as reflected in the attached letter dated February 15, 2002. DM Fauns believes that its
oblige ' a is to inspect each hour, while DW Q believes the requirement is to inspect every 60 mins.
Never tl�e less, DM Farms acknowledges that in recording the time of the entry on the IRR -1 Form ratber
than they time of ]ho inspection itself, that`it failed to conform with the record keeping requiremmt of the
permit ;All personnel have now b can instructed to record the actual time of the inspection in all futrsre
cases.
k
We believe these explanations meet the requireitlents of the division and our permit If there is
any further questions or if any of the above need to be discussed please do not hesitate to call. We ]osis:.
forwardlto your feedback as we strive to meet the requirements of the permit and re=n emironrritzaaUp
complia�t.
You may call myself 910-289-7364 or Terry Tate 910-289-7298 if you have questions.
Sincerely,
AJ Linton
;
Environmental Speciaw
DM Farms of Rope Hitt. LIZ

MAR. 1.2082 2:01PM P 7;
FROM �' PHONE N0. : 919 289 6434
DM FARMS of Rose Hill, LLC
P -Oa, ox 1076 Rose.HUL NC 28458
March28, 2001
Mr. Paul Rawls
NCDEI R
Fayetteville Regional Office
Division of Water Quality
In accordance with NPDES permit number NCO096614 Section M.11, this
comminication-providesa report of certain events that occurred on March 23, 2001 at
facility #82-77. This communication provides our response and the actions taken to
preveo a recurrence.
On March 23, 2001 at approximately 8:15 a.m., Kevin Pope observed a broken pipe in a
field at the Dell Farm. The pipe was a clean out for the force main leading from the lift
stationio the lagoon. Mr.,Pope immediately shut down the lift station to preen, it
wastewater from leaving the force,main. Mr. Pope then notified A.J. Linton by ps�er,
and began to shut down the flush tanks and recycle pump. Mr. Linton arrived s t &50
a.m. He sent Mr. Pope for a tractor and disc. Terry Tate arrived at 9:25 am. with the
tractor land Incorporated the wastewater into the sprayfleld, preventing waAawater ftm
leaving the field, W. Linton took'samples at the source of the•spill, where ifentered the
ditch, upstream, and downstream as required by Section M.9.a. of our permit. At
approAmately 10:00 a.m., Mr. Tate notified your Regional Office ofDWQ of the event
and actions taken.
Approximately 2,000 gallons of wastewater left the broken pipe. Based on our
calculations, no more than 1,500 gallons reached the ditch. The remainder ofth.vs
wastewater remained on the sprayfield• In order'to provide greater supervision ever
recycle systems are set on timers that run from 6 a.m. until 6 p.m. The pipe was not
observed to' be broken on Thursday, night when'the area was checked. It appews the pipe
was broken by a cow sometime during the night of March 22. Because of our system of
checks land timers, no wastewater could have left the system until it cam online at 630
a.m. Friday. A check of the timer revealed that it was running a half-hour slow. Thus the
system: could not have been in operation for more than an hour and a half before the
releasewas discovered.
The, cyan out pipe was removed fmm the field and the cattle removed from the prop ty. , , ;„
In response to this one-time event,;.we have evaluated our system. We are in the prates w ,. `
ofremovin all above ground clean -outs. We have also implemented additional ;dry �
documented twice-daily checks ofthe lift station and all of the piping.

rROM s
MAR. 1. 2002 '2: 01PIP 6
F
PHONE NO. : 910 2e9 643k
i- •
We evaluated the release from this event and determined that it was not feasible to
capture and' returnany of the wastd; to the lagoon:, jf we had attempted to do so, milt
would have entered the roadside ditch or creek, potentially causing significant hams.
Staff remained at the site until 6:30 p.m. on Friday. W. Tate conducted a follow up visit
to the site on Saturday March 24, 2001. He thoroughly inspected the farm, the ditch and
the creek and found no visible signs of the release in the ditch or creek.
Weregret that this unusual incident occurred. We will continue to make everyeffort to
prevent discharges.
If you have any ftuther questions or comments please call Terry Tate at [phone].
Sincerely, •
Tate
Assistant Production Director
. F
f
I 1 f c
ve 74..{.

MAR. 1.2002 2:02PM P 7
FROM PHONE NO. : 910 289 8434
DM FARMS of Rose Hall, TLC
P.O. Box 1076 Rose Hill, NC 28458
August 31, 2001
Mr:;Paul Rawls
NCDEPM
Fayett villi Regional Office
Divisign of Water Quality
In aocgrdarice with NPDES permit number NC0086614 Section M.11, this
communication provides a report of certain evente'that occurred on August 29, 2001 at
facility #82'-77, This communication provides our response and the actions taken to
p.revent a recurrence,
On Au't 29, 2001 at approximately 2.30 p.m., Kevin Pope observed a satuisted arf. us
and ponding in a field at Magnolia 4 Sow Farm, The field was away from the fiolds in
which jmgation had occurred during the morning hours. The saturated area was aro and
portiod of the sprayfield that had been recently ekcavated during the installation of
additioal piping.-
Pope
iping.Pape instructed Keith. Stewart,, a LNM technician accompanying him, to covstruat a
dam around the ponded area using a shovel. Mr. Pope immediately began to essess tie
extent of the porided' area in an effort to determine if there was a point of entry Bto
adjacent woods. 1Mlr.� Pope found an area of clouded water in the woods. Mr. Pezpe paged
AT Li*ohlto inform him of the event. A second LNM technician arrived on a-traftr.
He had,4l been traveling to the field in order to move equipment. Mr. Pope informed the
second; LNM technician, Kenneth Avery, to construct a larger dam using the frrnt-arid
loader of the tractor, Once the dam. was constructed, Mr. Pope instructed the technicians
to go and get a backhoe and additional tractors.
Mr. Li4ton arrived at the sate at approximatbly 3:00 p. m. to assist in control a:ffb t4: 14x.
Linton initiated the construction of a hole to contain the wastewater, as well gas the
coristriiiidon of another dam using round bales of hay. Thia dam was conatructee to
control! theflow of the creek and aid in the recovery of the small amount ofwegtewato.-
that had escaped::'
From appr6d nattily 3: IS until 3:45 p.m., Mh Linton collected samples from the ,
wastewater source, downstream, and upstream. ' Mr. Linton proceeded to notify me of the
event. 'The';water collected in the containment hole that had been constructed was the
pumped,into tanks and deposited on the sprayfield. I arrived during this time. While the

MAR. 1.2002 2:03PK P 8
'FROM :' PHONE NO. : 910 289 6434
r
construction of the dam and spreading of the water was taking place, Mr. Linton and I
proceeded to a'telephone to contact the Division of Water Quality. Thus notification
occurrod at; approximately 4:30.
Once tie water from the containment area had been distributed on the field, the irrigation
dealer that had installed the pipe was contacted. The dealers' crew arrived at
approximately 7:30 p.m. to assess the nature of the pipe failure. The crew removed tea
dirt from over the pipe and discovered that the pipe had backed out of the "T" fitting in
the line: The pipe was not completely removed from the "T". It bad slipped back just
enougli`to damage the gasket on the fitting, resulting in the failure. The pipe was cut, a
section removed, the gasket replaced, and the pipe was then reconnected. The area
around, the perimeter of the field was disked to incorporate any remaining wastewater
into the soil.
Less thin, 1;000 gallons ofwastewater escaped the, System.. Certainly less than half of
that. v*me made ifto the creek, 6'f which a significant portion was recovered tbrough
constr4etion of the dam and containment area. The volume is reinforced by several
factorsi,that were observed. First, during the repair a significant volume of water had to
be•puniped from the system, indicating that much less than the entire volunie'of the pipe
had escaped around the gasket. Second, visual observations of the site when we
discovered the problem indicated a volume less than 1000 gallons. Third, there was no
evidence of erosion from the point of the pipe malfunction, even though the soil had
recently been disturbed during construction and was highly erodable. We believe that
because of the small volume, the potential impact should be minimal. I visually
monitored the stream during the evening of the 29P, -and saw significant fish activity with
no evidence of stress. On the 30'x, .we again spent significant time-in•area and saw
normal, fish ,activity and no evidence of waste in the tributary. I am confident that rAy
staffre4cted quickly and appropriately in order to contain the wastewater, as well as to
return lit to the sprayfield.
We are; committed to take the necessary steps to prevent this type of failure in the f'ogie`s.
We have initiated an inspection of ;the new construction that occurred in the system'. The
"T" fit4ngs and thrust blocks will be inspected to make sure that the connections are
secure.
We regret that this unusual incident occurred. We will continue to make every effort to
prevent `discharges.
If you l ave "any fiirtlier questions or comments please call [phone],
Since
r i=�i ✓„i J
A stant Production Director
I
;V�!
4.
4

FROM
MAR. 1, 2002 2: 63Pm P 9
PHONE NO. : 910 289 6434
,
RAOWUN
t ,
UWGATION, INC.
P O Box I I37
Mt. Olive, N.C. 28365
[phone] t
•t rr
January 25, 2002
D. M. Few E
Attention: A J Linton
P O Hqx 759'.
Rose Dill, N.C. 28458 ;
Dear Ms. Linton 9
The,p*ose of this letter is to inform you of the work details that our.company peed 6 t
Mag IVirrigation system, This work occu=d as a result of a mishap caused cling stars -up,
imrnediatety following a pipe retrofit to accommodate center pivot systema. A six inch gsa
Harco Tee split in the Iower field, due to having i=f1cient air vents in the underground pip'
A numT er of risers equipped with air vents had been removed during the retrofit The ably air
vents remaining in the lower field following the retrofit, were the ones ori the three egad risers.
This wmizld have been more than ade4uste if even one of the three risers was opened during the
operation of;ihe sysi =. However, the failure of the tee occurred when the pivot in the Vpes
field wo operated and the piping in the lower field wse being pressurized. There sirr�,31y Wa xe not
enough'ak went to,evacuate the, air quick enough. ,
As you Imow, we went back and installed five more air vents in the cyst= along wiTh-a airs urac
U4V(underground valve) that enables the operator to isolate the lower field. This meansaY
piping supplying the lower field will rat be pressurized unless a pivot is operating i n that 04. = r
Lost; bu�'not, j east;. We excavated.arouud..all of the to cs alboviu and risers in order to saalre' sure, �s
there was no Other dauiagb'do ' to theisystem. during that initial episode. The remaW g ry a
had not been damaged. I believe the steps we have taken will eliminate any muh occcss in
the futm.
sincerely; `' ',
Gary R Scalf, CIDP
ri
4
i

FROM
MAR. 1.2002 2:04PM P10
PHONE NO. 910 269 6434
't
DM FARMS of Rose ICK LLC
P.O. Box 1076 Rose 1911, NC 28438
Feh u y 15, 2002
Mr. Paul bawls '
NCDE,NR
Fayetteville Regional Office
Division of Water Quality
Paul, • �'•
As a fallow -up toourconversations regarding the compliance of our Ahola 4 fadlity
with NODES Permit Numbeer NCO086614, I would h1w to address the issues you have
brought:to my ate cion: More spei~iflcally, I wauld'like to-addremthe issue of
cowVWnce with Section H.14 ofti e•,permit, which states:
In accordance with 13A NCAC 8F .0203(bX2), the Operator in Charge or a
ded&ated back-up Operator intbarge of$ Type A Animal Wasste:K&Aagemleld
iSyskem shall kwpact, ora person mdw the mpenisbn of en.OIC oar deg 1
buck' -up OIC shall inspect, the land application site as often as mmmsmy to imm
that the animal waste is land applied in accordance w#th the CAWW.
The permittee taay assent as an affirmative defense In any
antrcement action alleging noncompliance with the requi reme� imposed in this
condi�tion`that such noncompliance was due to circumstancea beyond the;
Permittee's control A notation shall be made on dw IRR -1 Form indicating the
Mian affected by such'circeuuoume an&an eacpbmation setting forth the
oircumstaneee claimed to have been beyond the Pesmittee's cotdrol shall be,
submitted with the IRR 1 Form." °
I haverovieared the information which you forwarded to A.J. Linton baste on W3
request. ,'It is lay understandinst that`this docusnt was sentto your office by
Environi'b i Protection Agency Region Four and is tided Murphy Farm Field
Records —Nan-Compftw ce 4nalysis, dated January 24, 2002. The document appears to
summarize information from our 2001 third quarter IRR -1 forms and claims a octal
number of violations of irrigation inspections un liM seventy-two.
It is appvm-from,this document that the Envimnm�eWal Protection Agency has applied
the wrong co. plane standard ansi'' S waging compliance with a requa+ MET to i�
every sixty aadiautes rather than "every hour" as required by the peumtt.,
ifR i

FRIDM "
MAR. 1.2002 2: 05PM P I i
PHONE NO. 910 289 6434
fa
rt
We hA ve reviewed our'entire set o IM -1 forms for quarters two trough four during
2001 using dw correct "every hoii? standard. This review identified a total of eishtem
I ectio badbe�n
b� 0 A!t recorded as beingperformed outside of t& "every 13
jrequiremrn#-.of Section U.14. Of, eighteen inspections, five occumd doming meter
two, tin.: d,wring quarter three, and three during quarterfour. The eighteen hwee-dow
represew only 1.09% of the 1654;inspections performed dewing the last three Waw
quarters of42001.
Ouring, theUst three calendar quarters, it, had been our practice to record application
inspec6ons, after having completed the physical inspection. A.routine inspection
generdlly takes between five and fifteen minutes. Unfortunately, this method of record
keeping is responsible for abrteen 'of the eighteen hopections that am recorded as being
less frequent than every hour. The remaining, two are the result of the operator
mureading his watch, as the checks in question are at or before the start tante of the eveft,
SpecifIcally, in the first em it check was reomded at 3-35 on an even the was morded
as starting 4t,3,.,:30 and in the secot4 a check was recorded at 3:30 on on ~ *t'law
re6ord0d, dr. starting at 3:40, ^ Both'40eaU 6ccuiied, ointhe' gs day and the smp-, oreratau:'kk
In muninay, for the entire pez'Wd 'we conducted 'a, total of 1654 inspections of-wWohwne
were pl r&rzned outside ofthe "every hout"iequiretneml in Sean -.14 of the permit.
.Ne ver Xhe less, we recognize the fitct that the manner in which the time of the inspections
isrecoided'needs-tobeclanged. As aresuh of our conversations with your office, the
I
subsequent review of our records, land a thorough review of our
we havo since changed our method of recording irrigation event In itme, tbc.
actual time that the event check occurs will be recorded as opposed to the thne cif
completion. �
Wo 011y ask that you' vide me with a response as to the position of the
Division :"o'f,..Wa'i'er'QWaity:in regar#s to this matter. Should you have any ffi&�n
questions please :i -el' :".free to contaa = [phone].
V.
Sincere ! ly
TIRY Tate
Assis;taat. Production rector

AGA
NCDENR
North Carolina Department of Environment and Natural Resources
Michael F. Easley, Governor
March 12, 2002
MEMORANDUM
i
TO: Paul Rawl
Regional at r Q ality Supervisor
FROM: Paul Sherman M 5
Environmental Engineer
SUBJECT: 12001 Annual Certification Report Review
Mag 4 Sow, Melville 1 & 2, Dell Farm, and Section 1 Site 4
NPDES Permit #NC0086614
F.2- .7 2
William G. Ross Jr,, Secretary
Gregory J. Thorpe, Ph.D,
Acting Director
Division of Water Quality
I have reviewed the above referenced information submitted by DM Farms for the year ending
December 31, 2001. 1 include the following comment(s):
Part II, Item 11 "No runoff of waste from the application sites occurred." was checked "Yes" on the
certification form provided by the division. This item was, however, explained in the attached
reference as if it had been checked "No". The reference letters clearly state that runoff had occurred
as a result of broken pipes (two occasions). Even thought the item was checked "Yes", there was
thorough explanation of the events and corrective action taken.
• The remainder of the certification is complete and satisfactory.
Fayetteville Regional Office
225 Green Street — Suite 714, Fayetteville, North Carolina 28301-5043
Phone: [phone] FAX: [phone] Internet: www.enr.state,l]cros/ENR
An Equal Opportunity 1 Affirmative Action Employer— 50% Recycled 110% Post Consumer Paper

ANIMAL FACILITY ANNUAL
i
i
CERTIFIC TI,iO d
Permit Number _ NCO086614 County ,Sampson Year 2001
Facility Name Mj6- I&aaffz j2cie. DM 5evooj -' grne Ir
Operator in Charge for this Facility A,.Frern S• L,urom ji Phone #(qla ;n -
Operator
9 -
Operator Certification Number j g b 'IS
Land application of animal waste as allowed by the above permit occurred during the past calendar year
✓ YES NO' If NO,..skip Part I and Part II and proceed to the certification. Also, if animal waste
were generated but not land applied, please attach an explanation on how the animal waste was handled.
Part I .
-Total number of application Fields ❑ or Pulls /(please check the appropriate box) approved in the Certified
Animal Waste Management Plan (CAWMP). 6 Total Wettable Acres approved in the CAWMP
37, S
-Total number of Fields ❑ or Pulls [. (please check the appropriate box) on which land application occurred
during the year. 66 Total Acres on which waste was applied -.? Sq. t
-Total pounds of Plant Available'Nitrogen applied during the year for all application sites. 3-9 b83. Va
-Total pounds of Plant Available Nitrogen allowed to be land applied annually by the CAWMP and the permit
75
Largest number of animals by type at this facility at any time during the previous year
SOIaS ^ 3S5p 3 Nu�Srcrty r 451 ti �+Vlfbl�:ll eiia '77% -
T
Facility's Integrator if applicable . e!j L This is not a change from the previous
year? ' E(Yes ❑ No If No, please explain
Part II
Facility Status:
IF THE ANSWER TO ANY QUESTION BELOW IS NO, PLEASE PROVIDE A WRITTEN
DESCRIPTION AS TO WHY THE FACILITY WAS NOT COMPLIANT, THE DATES OF
NON COMPLIANCE, AND EXPLAIN CORRECTIVE ACTION TAKEN OR PROPOSED TO
BE TAKEN TO BRING THIS FACILITY BACK INTO COMPLIANCE.
1. Only animal waste generated at this facility and approved for land application at this /Yes ❑ No
facility were applied to sites covered by this permit during the past year.
2. The largest number of animals by type on this facility at any time during the previous year ER/yes ❑ No '
did not exceed the permitted number of animals by type authorized by the Permit for this
facility.
2-15-02
Ser- AtM rwro rc PLA14411DA) W440-1 ►S 1N[42paitArr" iYY 2tcFrL,?EUtE.

3. There were no discharges of waste to the surface water from this facility during the
past year.
4. There were no freeboard violations in any lagoons or storage ponds at this facility
during the past year.
5. There were no PAN applications to any fields or crops at this facility greater
than the levels specified in this facilities Certified Animal Waste Management Plan
(CAWMP) during the past year.
6. Soft pH was maintained as specified in the permit.
7. Annual soils analysis was performed on each site receiving waste during the past
calendar year.
S. All required monitoring and reporting was performed in accordance with the facility's
permit during the previous year,
❑ Yes
VNo
VYes
❑ No
Q' Yes
❑ No
Q' Yes
❑ No
Aes
❑ No
/Yes
❑ No
9. All operations and maintenance requirements in the permit were complied with or, in ❑ Yes /No
the case of a deviation, prior authorization was received from the Division of Water Quality,
10. Vegetative cover as specified in the permit was maintained on this site and the crops B' Yes ❑ No
grown were removed in'accordance with the crop management plan and the Permit.
11. No runoff of waste from the application sites occurred. L9' Yes ❑ No
12. All buffer requirements as specified on the permit were maintained during each Cq' Yes ❑ No
application of waste.
13. All Groundwater monitoring requirements in the permit were met. Y Yes ❑ No
"I certify under penalty of law that this document and all attachments were prepared under my direction or
supervision in accordance with a system designed to assure that qualified personnel properly gather and
evaluate the information submitted. Based on my inquiry of the person or persons who manage the system, or
those persons directly responsible for gathering the information, the information submitted is, to the best of my
knowledge and belief, true, accurate, and complete, I am aware that there are significant penalties for
submitting false information, including the possibility of fines and imprisonment for knowing violations."
OM Fes,,m� a-+Roat R -,i\, Li L b v1
Permittee Name and Title (type dr print)
Signature of Permittee
IsL.A4_in_t:33. M-A0,wo)tr
—31///,02,
ate
31 lad -
Signature Kf Operator in Charge Date
(if different from Permittee)
2-15-02 2
'e5Ej[ AYTAcHec expL't,447oA wNrtA if 1NLv�r°o�,f rFa � �2TcFr2+%�fcrL ,

DM FARMS of Rose Hill, LLC
P.O. Box 1076 Rose Hill, NC 28458
March 28, 2001
Mr. Paul Rawls
NCDENR
Fayetteville Regional Office
Division of Water Quality
In accordance with NPDES permit number NCO086614 Section In. 11, this
communication provides a report of certain events that occurred on March 23, 2001 at
facility 982-77. This communication provides our response and the actions taken to
prevent a recurrence.
,On March 23, 2001 at approximately 8:15 a.m., Kevin Pope observed a broken pipe in a
field at the Dell Farm. The pipe was a clean out for the force main leading from the lift
station to the lagoon. Mr. ,Pope immediately shut down the lift station to prevent
wastewater from leaving the force main. Mr. Pope then notified A.J. Linton by pager,
and began to shutdown the flush tanks and recycle pump. Mr. Linton'arrived at 8:50
a.m. He sent Mr. Pope for a tractor and disc: Terry Tate arrived at 9:25 a.m. with the
tractor and incorporated the wastewater into the sprayf eld, preventing wastewater from
leaving the field. Mr. Linton took samples at the source of the spill, where ifentered the.
ditch, upstream, and downstream as required by Section M,9.a. of our permit. At
approximately 10:00 a.m., Mr. Tate notified your Regional Office of D WQ of the event
and actions taken.
Approximately 2,000 gallons of wastewater left the broken pipe. Based on our
calculations, no more than 1,500 gallons reached the ditch. The remainder of the
wastewater remained on the sprayfield. In order to provide greater supervision, our
recycle systems are set on timers that run from 6 a.m, until 6 p.m. -The pipe was not
observed to be broken on Thursday night when the area was checked. It appears the pipe
was broken by a cow sometime during the night of March 22. Because of our system of
checks and timers, no wastewater could have left the system until it came online at 6:30
a.m. Friday. A check of the timer revealed that it was running a half-hour slow. Thus the
system could not have been in operation for more than an hour and a half before the
release was discovered.
The clean out pipe was removed from the field and the cattle removed from the property.
In response to this one-time event, we have evaluated our systems. We are in the process
of removing all above ground clean -outs. We have also implemented additional
documented twice-daily checks of the lift station and all of the piping.

Attachment to DM Farms 2/1.5/02 Annual Certification Form
3/1/02
To Whom It May Concern:
* Part 1: Total number of pulls on which land application occurred during the year was 66. The total
number of acres on which waste was applied was 234, 10. This is the same number of pulls but fewer acres.
This is due to the change over to the pivots and a change in spray patterns on pulls 35,36 and 47b.
*Part 2 number 2: The highest number of sows (3850) occurred on 6/23/01. The highest number of
finishing animals (26777) occurred on 1113/01, The highest number of nursery animals (454) occurred on
9/29/01. At no time were there more total animals on site than the permit allows and the steady state live
weight was not exceeded. The fluctuation in numbers is due to the ebb and flow of death and births on the
farm.
* Part 2 number 3: We had two separate incidents of run off from the facility during the year. 'You wiI I find
attached the explanations for both as well as corrective actions. This also addresses Part 2 number 11.
* Part 2 number 9: Based on Terry Tate's phone conversation with Paul Rawls on 2/27/02, there appears to
be a dispute between DM Farms and DWQ regarding the appropriate inspection criteria under section 2.14
of the permit as reflected in the attached letter dated February 15, 2002. DM Farms believes that its
obligation is to inspect each hour, while DWQ believes the requirement is to inspect every 60 minutes,
Never the less, DM Farms acknowledges that. in recording the time of the entry on the IRR -1 Form rather
than the time of the inspection itself, that it failed to conform with the record keeping requirement of the
permit. All personnel have now been instructed to record the actual time of the inspection in all future
cases.
We believe these explanations meet the requirements of the division and our permit. If there is
any further questions or if any of the above need to be discussed please do not hesitate to call. We look
forward to your feedback as we strive to meet the requirements of the permit and remain environmentally
compliant.
You may call myself 910-289-7364 or Terry Tate 910-289-7298 if you have questions.
Sincerely,
Q�
AJ Linton
Environmental Specialist
DM Farms of Rose Hill LLC.

DM FARMS of Rose Hill, LLC
F.O. Box 1076 Rose Hili, NC 28458
August 31, 2001
Mr: Paul Rawls
NCDENR
Fayetteville Regional Office
Division of Water Quality
In accordance with NPDES permit number NCO086614 Section IH. 11, this
communication provides a report of certain events that occurred on August 29, 2001 at
facility #82-77. This communication provides our response and the actions taken to
prevent a recurrence.
On August 29, 2001 at approximately 2:30 p.m., Kevin Pope observed a saturated area
and ponding in a field at Magnolia 4 Sow Farm. The field was away from the fields in
which irrigation had occurred during the morning hours. The saturated area was around a
portion of the sprayfield that had been recently ekcavated during the installation of
additional piping.
Mr. Pope instructed Keith Stewart, a LNM technician accompanying him, to construct a
dam around the ponded area using a shovel. Mr. Pope immediately began to assess the
extent of the ponded area in an effort to deternune if there was a point of entry into
adjacent woods. Mr. Pope found an area of clouded water in the woods. Mr. Pope paged
A.J. Linton to inform him of the event. A second LNM technician arrived on a tractor.
He had been traveling to the field in order to move equipment. Mr. Pope informed the
second LNM technician, Kenneth Avery, to construct a larger dam using the front-end
loader of the tractor. Once the dam. was constructed, Mr. Pope instructed the technicians
to go and get a backhoe and additional tractors.
Mr. Linton arrived at the site at approximately 3.00 p.m. to assist in control efforts. Mr.
Linton initiated the construction of a hole to contain the wastewater, as well as the
construction of another dam using round bales of hay. This dam was constructed to
control the flow of the creek and aid in the recovery of the small amount of wastewater
that had escaped.
From approximately 3:15 until 3:45 p.m., Mr. Linton collected samples from the
wastewater source, downstream, and upstream. Mr. Linton proceeded to notify me of the
event. The water collected in the containment hole that had been constructed was then
pumped into tanks and deposited on the sprayfield. I arrived during this time. While the

We evaluated the release from this event and determined that it was not feasible to
capture and return any of the waste to the lagoon. If we had attempted to do so, silt
would have entered the roadside ditch or creek, potentially causing significant harm.
Staff remained at the site until 6:30 p.m. on Friday. Mr. Tate conducted a follow up visit
to the site on Saturday March 24, 2001. He thoroughly inspected the farm, the ditch and
the creek and found no visible signs of the release in the ditch or creek.
We regret that this unusual incident occurred. We will continue to make every effort to
prevent discharges.
If you have any further questions or comments please call Terry Tate at [phone].
Sincerely,
Tesiiy Tate
Assistant Production Director

RAINMAN HMGATION, INC.
P O Box 1137
Mt. Olive, N,C.:28365
(919) 658-112
January 25, 2002
D. M. Farms
Attention: A J Linton
P O Box 759
Rose Hill, N.C. 28458
Dear Mr. Linton
The purpose of this letter is to inform you of the work details that our"company performed on th
Mag TV irrigation system. This work occurred as a result of a mishap `caused during start-up,
immediately following a pipe retrofit to accommodate center pivot systems. A six inch gasketeq
Harco Tee split in the lower field, due to having insufficient air vents in the underground piping,
A number of risers equipped with air vents had been removed during the retrofit. The only air C
vents remaining in the lower field following the retrofit, were the ones on the three end risers.
This would have been more than adequate if even one of the three risers was opened during the
operation of the system. However, the failure of the tee occurred when the pivot in the upper . f
field was operated and the piping in the lower Meld was being pressurized. There simply were not
enough air vents to evacuate the air quick enough.
As you know, we went back and installed five more air vents in the system along with'a six inc
UGV(underground valve) that enables the operator to isolate the lower field. This means that th
piping supplying the lower field will not be pressurized unless a pivot is operating in that section.
Last, but not least;. we excavated. around .all ,of the tees, -elbow s and risers in order to make. sure �
there was no other damage done to the system during that initial episode. The remaining system
had not been damaged. I believe the steps we have taken will eliminate any such occurrences in.
the future. ;
Sincerely,
Gary R, Scalf, CID

construction of the dam and spreading of the water was taking place, Mr. Linton and I
proceeded to a telephone to contact the Division of Water Quality. This notification
occurred at approximately 4:30.
Once the water from the containment area had been distributed on the field, the irrigation
dealer that had installed the pipe was' contacted. The dealers' crew arrived at
approximately 7:30 p.m. to assess the nature of the pipe failure. The crew removed the
dirt from over the pipe and discovered that the pipe had backed out of the "T" fitting in
the line. The pipe was not completely removed from the "T". It had slipped back just
enough to damage the gasket on the fitting, resulting in the failure. The pipe was cut, a
section removed, -the gasket replaced, and the pipe was then reconnected. The area
around the perimeter of the field was disked to incorporate any remaining wastewater
into the soil.
Less than 1,000 gallons of wastewater escaped the system. Certainly less than half of
that volume made it to the creek, of which a significant portion was recovered through
construction of the dam and containment area. The volume is reinforced by several
factors that were observed. First, 'during the repair a significant volume of water had to
be'pumped from the system, indicating that much less than the entire volume of the pipe
had escaped around the gasket. Second, visual observations of the site when we.
discovered the problem indicated a volume less than 1000 gallons. Third, there,was no
evidence of erosion from the point of the pipe malfunction, even. though the soil had
recently been disturbed during construction and was highly erodable. We believe that
because of the small volume, the potential impact should be minimal. I visually.
monitored the stream during the evening of the 29'n, and saw significant fish .activity with
no evidence of stress. On the 30'", we again spent significant time in area'and saw
normal fish activity and no evidence of waste in the tributary. I am confident that my
staff reacted- quickly and appropriately, in order, to contain the wastewater, as well as to
return it to the sprayfield.
We are committed to take the necessary steps to prevent this type of failure in the future.
We have initiated an inspection of the new construction that occurred in the system. The
"T" fittings and thrust blocks will be inspected to make sure that the connections are
secure.
We regret that this unusual incident occurred. We will continue to make every effort to
prevent discharges.
If you have any further questions or comments please call [phone].
Since ly,
Tate
A Stant Production Director

We have reviewed our entire set of IRR -1 forms for quarters two through four during
2001 using the correct "every hour" standard. This review identified a total of eighteen
inspections that had been recorded as being performed outside of the "every hour"
requirement of Section 11. 14. Of the eighteen inspections, five occurred during, quarter
two, ten during quarter three, and three during quarter four. The eighteen inspections
represent only. 1.09% of the 1654 inspections performed during the last three calendar
quarters of 2001.
During the last three calendar quarters, it had been our practice to record application
inspections after having completed the physical inspection. A routine inspection
generally takes between five and fifteen minutes. Unfortunately, this method of record
keeping is responsible for sixteen of the eighteen inspections that are recarded 'as being
less frequent than every hour: The remaining two are the result of the operator
misreading his watch, as the checks in question are at or before the start time of the event.
Specifically, in the first case a check was recorded at 3:35 on an event that was recorded
as starting at 3:30 and in the second a check was recorded'at 3:30 on an everd that,was
recorded as starting at 3:40. Both events occurred on the same day and'the some operator
performed the checks.
In summary, for the entire period we conducted a total of 1654 inspections of which none
were performed outside 'of the "every hour" requirement in Section 11.14 of the permit.
Never the less, we recognize the fact that the manner in which the time of the inspections
is recorded needs to be changed. -As a resent of our conversations with your office, the
subsequent review of our records, -'and a thorough review of our management practices,
we have since changed our method of recording irrigation event checks. In the future, the
actual time that the event check occurs will -be recorded as opposed to the time of
completion.
I would respectfully ask that you -provide me with a response as to the position of the
Division of Water Quality in regards to this matter. Should you have any further
questions please feel free to contact me (910) 289 -7298. -
Sincerely,
T Tate
Assistant Production Director

DM FARMS. of Rose Hill, LLC
P.O. Box 1076 Rose KdI, NC 29458
February 15, 2002
Mr. Paul Rawls
NCDENR
Fayetteville Regional Office
Division of water Quality
Paul,
As a follow-up to our conversations regarding the compliance of our,Magnolia 4 facility
With NPDES Permit Number NC0086614, I would like to. address the issues you have
brought to my attention More specifically, I would like to address the issue of
compliance with Section 11.14 of the -permit, which states:
`In.accordabde with 15A NCAC 8F .0203(bX2), the Operator in Charge or a
designated back-up Operator in Charge of a Type A Animal Waste Management
System shall inspect, or a person under the,supervision of an,OIC or'des4. paled
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 CAVMV. Ig gg cage.
01.e11 +l.ie " 1a._ .4-- o&_. e.,e.... U-_ A..�:"" +i.a .
MC6216rI J -K aca, vaaa vi vcwau UWW&LIJ W Ak"Jl6W � - a„�. uut i i't JLAU tutu
include the date. time. MLmjr end number and name of the o or for each
i=gg&. The permittee may assert as. an affirmative defense in any
enibreement action alleging noncompliance with the requirements imposed in this
condition that -such noncompliance was due to circumstances beyond the
Permittee's control. A notation shall be made on the IRR -1 Form indicating the
inspection affected by such circumstance and an.explanation setting forth the
circumstances claimed to have been beyond the Permittee's control shall be
submitted with the IRR -1 Form"
I have reviewed the information which you forwarded to A.J. Linton based on his
request. It is my understanding that this document was sent to your office by the
Environmental Protection Agency Region Four and is titled Murphy Farms Field
Records — Non -Compliance Analysis, dated January 24, 2002. The document appears to
summarize information from our 2001, third quarter IRR 1 forms and claims a total
number of violations of irrigation inspections totaling seventy-two.
It is apparent from this document that the Environmental Protection Agency has applied
the wrong compliance standard and is judging compliance with a requirement to inspect
every sixty minutes rather than 'every hour" as required by the permit.

FROM
PHONE NO. : 910 283 6434
ANIMA. FACILITY ANNUAL CERTIFICATION FORM
Permit Number` _ NCO08 bl _ _ County _SAmpsor Year 2001��_�_
Facility Name 1#46:a, e h► S�tr,a Ta
'Operator in Charge for this Facility AhEdmn :3*. 1r,uro„ Z!L r'Phone #Ilb IS,- 73ty
Operator Certification Number __19
Land application of animal waste as allowed by the above permit occurred during the past calendar year
✓ YESNO. If NO, skip Part I and Part 11 and proceed to the certification: • Also,. if animal waste
were generated" but not land applied, please attach an explanation on how the animal waste wag handled.
Part t
-Totalnumber of application Fields ❑ or PullsL� please check the appropriate box) approved 'ur the Certified
Animal Waste Management Plan (CAWMP.). Total Wettable Acres approved in TJm CAVjW
.2-:17_ :
-Total number of Fields ❑ or Pulls Alease check the appropriate box) on which land spplica.tion occurred
during the year. �_ Total Acres on .which waste was ipplied ,? 3 q, I o
Notal pounds of Plant Available Nitrogen applied during the year for all application aitea. J�_b1
.Total pounds of Plant Available Nitrogen allowed to be land applied annually by the CAVITW and the permit
75, jos',
Largest number of animals by type at this facility at any time during the previous year
Sowas= 3,999--,- Ah-orsarey -- !15:y ,��Jsst,�� j6.777
Facility'a Integrator if applicable Mu,e.r,r4: go&j, kL _ This is not a char es from the previous
year? Yes U; No • If No, please explain _ - - — __ I
part iI
IF TSE ANSWER TO ANY QUESTION BELOW IS NO, PLEASE PROVIDE A WR N
DESCWTION AS TO WHY THE FACILITY WAS NOT COMPLLAINIT, THE 13-4, i'ES OF
NON COMPLIANCE, AND EXPLAIN CORRECTIVE ACTION TAKEN OR PROPOSED TO
BE TAKEN TO BRING THIS FACILITY BACK INTO COMPLIANCE..
1. Only animal waste generated at this facility and approved for land application at this #yes ❑ No
facility were applied to sites covered by this permit during the past year.
2. Thelargest number of ariimals by type on this facility at any time during the previous year /Yes C3 No
did not exceed the permitted number of animals by type authorized by the Permit for this
facility.
2-f 5 -OZ 1
%� S%a- g7,AcN¢o E��A,+aT,ea W�r�•I �s A •-..r ,- ,•'�•;,

OM
DM Farms of Rose Hill, LLC
P 0 BOX 1076
ROSE HILL, NC 28458
910-289-6439 ext 4541
800-311-9458 ext 4541
FAX [phone].
Paul Rawls
MHR. 1.2V02 1:58PM P
PHONE NO. : 910 269 6434
FROM: David Hulbert
910-289-6439 ext 4490 or 1-800-311-9458 ext 4490
FAX OPERATOR Dallace Grady
910--289-8439 ext 4,541 or 1-800-311-9468 ext 4541
DATE 01 -Mar -02
TOTAL NUMBER OF PAGES INCLUDING COVER. 11
NOTE: CALL DALLACE GRADY, 910-289-6439 EXT 4541 IF YOU HAVE A P€'03 �k!
RECEIVING ALL -THE PAGES,
COMMENTS:
A copy wilifollow by certified mail.
(?� 97

FROM :
MHR. 1.2002 2:OOPM P 4
PHONE NO. : 911a 2139 6434 -
Attgehment to DM Farms 2/15/02 Annual Certificadev.1"UnTra
3/l/02
To Whom It May Concern,
* Past 1: Total munber of pulls an which land application occurred during the year was 66. 71w total
number Of acres on which waste was applied was 234.10. This is the &uw number of Pulls but finwvf -jrme
This is due to the change over to thcTivots and a change in spray pa" on pulls 35,36 and 47b.
*Part 2ALunber 2- The highest number of sows (3850) occurred on 6123/01. The highest ttunbern?
finishi4 animals (26777) occurred on 1/13/01. The highest number of nursery anixnals• (454) occarrp"d M.
9/29A0f6 At no time were there more tots] animals an site than the permit allows and the study state live
weight ivas not exceeded. The fluctuation in numbers is due to the ebb and flow of death and births or, -die
farm
Put 2*urnber 3: We had two separate huAerds otnim off from the facility during tho yenr. Yr u wit LW
attached the explanations for both as well u corrective actions. This also addresses Parr 2 mWm:z 'k i.
IP Pan 1number 9-. Based ouTerry Tale's phone conversation with Paul Rawls on 2/27/02,ilirm a tr.to
be a di4we between DM Farms and DWQ regarding the appropriate inspection criteria on 2,14
of the Ormi
t as reflected in the attached letter dated February 15, 2002. DM Farms behoves tw 'its
obligatignis to inspect each how, while DWQ believes the requirement is to inspect every 60 1Tdr,:-Xfj% -
Never t1w less, DM Farms acknowledges that in recording the dini of the entry on the ]PIR -1 Fonn
than the time of the inspection itself, that'it failed to conform with the record keeping reqWzLT-- ofthc
permit 'AD personnel have now boon instructed to record the actual time of the inspections in aA futL.b
We believe these explanations M"C'et the requirements of the division and our ptr:riL If then,. is
any finthor questions or if any of the above need to be discussed please do not hesitate . -w c211. "Ali., lo.;
forward7to your feedback as we strive to mftn the requirements of the permit and rmv,n
comp] int.
You ma� call myself 910-299-7364 or Terry Tate 910-299-7298 if you have questions.
Sincerely,
Aj Linton
Envir==W Evezian-,l
DM Famis of kw -,c M11 U.C.

ROM
NAR. •1.2X022 1: S9PM P 3
PHONE NO. : 919 299 6434
•3 • There were no discharges of waste to the surface water from this facility during the El Yes G/No a;=
past year,
'4, There were; no freeboard violations in any lagoons or storage ponds at this facility vYes ❑ No
during the past year.
S. There were no PAN applications to any fields or crops at this facility greater R/Yes❑ No
than the levels specified in this facilities Certified Animal Waste Management Pian
,AWW) Iduring the past year,
b. Soil pH was maintained as specified in the permit. "Yes ❑ No
7. Annual soils analysis was performed on each'site receiving waste during the past t/Yes ❑ No
calendar year.
8. All required monitoring and reporting was performed in accordance with the facility, s As ❑ No
permit during thc'previous year.
9. All operations and maintenance requirements in the permit were complied with or, is , ❑ 'Yes': -VNo '
the case of a deviation, prior authorization was received from the Division of WoLex
I O. Vegetative cover as specified in the permit was maintained on this site and the crops Yes ❑ No
grown were removed in accordance with the crop management plan and the armit.
11. No runoff of waste from the application' sites occurred'. yes ❑ 1.",o
12. All buffer requirements as specified on the permit were maintained during each As ❑ No
application of waste.
13. All Groundwater monitoring requirements in the permit were .met. ?": ' L1 No
;.
"I certify underipenalty of law that this document and all attachments were prepared under zv.y 617eam'-or
supervision in accordance with a system designed to assure that qualified personn©l proVc,t'y std
evaluate the information submitted. Based on my inquiry of the person or persons who mas)agf dh ;:ystern, or
those persons directly responsible for gathering the information, the information subs fitted s, to'd.lic best of my
knowledge and belief, true, accurate, and complete. I am aware that there are signifi. cant for
submitting false, information, including the possibility of fines and imprisonment for kao;viag "a-;iztions,"
Q M Far n a e'F Rw t H'01. Z, L bg b*Jk- a r t b a n sd w r;.i
Permittee Name and Title (type dr print)
i
Signature of Permittee
Signature 6f Operator in Charge
(if different from Permittee)
3 �L)
ate ^�
;Jk
Ft
31 ln.L :.
Date
2-15-022
4106'SEC A-'rAcN F,[Pi'Fr►�=.a,� �uNrcl� If rN10Va,e4'nro s'y

MAR, i. 4__:.0_' a: 31pM
FROM PHONE NO. : 91-012'35 6434
DM FARMS of Rose Hill, LL
P.0.,;4Box 1076 Roae Hilt, NC 15458
March 28, 2001
Mr. Paul Rawls
NCDFNR
Fayetteville Regional Office
Division of Water Quality
In accordance with NPDES permit, number NCO086514 Section M.11, this
comminication-providesa report of certain events .that occurred on March 23,.12001 at
facility,.#82-77. This communication provides our response and the actions tarn to
preven� a recurrence.
On March 23, 2001 at approximately 8:15 a,m., Kevin Pope observed a bm mrr p'"
field at the Dell Farm. The pipe was a clean out far the force main leading frarn fhs, 11A
station'to the lagoon. Mr. Pope immediately shut down the lift station to pmwf:nt.
wastewater from leaving the force main, Mr. Pope then notified A.J. Linton
and began to shutdown the flush tanks and recycle pump. Mr. Linton arrived s c 1:30
a.m. He sent Mr. Pope for atractor and disc. Terry Tate arrived at 9:25 a.m. wifla tho
tractor land Incorporated the wastewater into the sprayfield, preventing P -cm
leaving the field. Mr. Linton took samples at the source of the spill, where it,'u��ierr a tha
ditch, upstream, and downstream as required by Section M.9.a, of our peraft At
approximately 10:00 a.m., Mr. Tate notified your Regional Office of DVr Q of &h evurt
and actions taken
Approximately 2,000 gallons of wastewater left the broken pipe. Based on our
calc4la;ions, no more than 1,500 gallons reached the ditch. The rerntiindi!
wastewater remained on the sprayfield. In order to provide greater stipemsif, , ai
recyclosystems are set on timers that run from 6 a.m. until 6 p.m. The pips wa.a
observed to be broken on Thursday night when the area was checked.
was broken. by a cow sometime during the night of March 22, Because of ou sy'ltum 1-,t'
checks iand timers, no wastewater could have, left the system until It es.me or�ine .et X10
a.m. Friday. A check of the timer revealed that it was running a half-limir slow. Thus ti,s
systern�.could not have been in operation for more than an hour and a half be.F�.�r,;; fAu+
releasewas discovered.
The clean out pipe was removed from the field and the cattle removed from tjer ­;,. .
In response to this one-time event, we have evaluated our aysterna, We �Re n tne,
of removing all above ground clean -outs. We have also implemented
documented twice-daily checks of the lift station and all of the piping.

FROM
PHONE NO. : 310 289 6434 .
We evaluated the release from this event and determined that it was not feasible to
capture and return any.ofthe waste, to the lagoon., If we had attempted to do so, mill
would have' entered the roadside ditch or creels, potentially causing significant hu -m.
Staff remained at the site until 6:30 p.m. on Friday. Mr. Tate conducted afallow up visit
to the elite on Saturday Marsh 24, 2001. He thoroughly inspected the farm, the ditch and
the.crei k and found no visible signs of the release in the ditch or creek.
We regret that this unusual incident occurred, We will continue to matte every effort to
prevent discharges.
If you have any further questions or comments please call Terry Tate at (910) 289-72493.
Sincerely,
y Tate
Assistant Production Director

-ROM PHONE NO. : 910 '2n) 5434
DM FARMS of Rose Hill, LLC
P.O. Box 1076 Rose Hill, NC 18438
August 31, 2001
Mr.. P" Rawls _.
NCD
Faye rtvi e Regional Office
Division of Water Quality
•
In accgrdance with NPDES permit number NC0086614 Section MAL this
communication provides a report of certain events that occurred on August 29, 2001 at
facility, #82-77. This communication provides our response and the actions taken to
prevent a recurrence,
On Aii�t 29, 2001 at approximately 2:34 p.m., Kevin Pope observed a satnrsr.ed
and ponding in a field at Magnolia 4 Sow Farm. The field was away filam -GSW fl,4 :g iin
which'rrigation had occurred during the morning hours. The saturated area w4a urouxg1 a
portion of the sprayfield that had been recently ekcavated during the installation of
additioal piping.
Mr. Poise instructed Keith. Stewart, a LNM technician accompanying him, to emistr act a
dam around the ponded area using a shovel. b4r. Pope immediately began to saaos!j tha
extent bf the ponded area in an effort to determine if there was a point of ewy ,il,zvo
adjacemt woods. Mr. Pope found an area of clouded water in the wands.
A.7: Li�ton'to inform him of the event. A second LNM technician arrived on a trar ter.
He hash been traveling to the field in order to move equipment. Mr, Popo inforrned Vhv
second LNM technician, Kenneth Avery, to conatruct a larger dam using the frrjnt-(�:;ted
loader of the tractor. Once the dam was constructed, Mr. Pope instructed thy
to go and get it backhoe and additional tractors.
Mr. Luton arrived at the site at 'approximately 3; 00 p.m, to assist in control efi'b!vt. it R.
Linton;finitiated the construction of a hole to contain the wastewater, as well szis -!Ee
constr46tion of another dam using round bales of hay. This dam vvw czAm- u.;t::l 1_�)
control! the flow of the creek and aid in the recovery of the small amount of w4€; ;o:x
that had escaped. "6
From approximately 3:15 until 3:45 p.m., Mr. Linton collected samp]�a frown td6
wastewater source, downstream, and upstream. Mr. Linton proceeded to ncr y- gas;o, c f the
event. ;The water collected in the containment hole that had been constmcte i way :
pumped into tanks and deposited on the sprayfield. I arrived during this time. IhMA'-', the

MAR. 2.200 - 2: 93PM P a
FROM PHONE NO. : 910 299 6434
construction of the dam and spreading of the water was taking place, Mr. Linton mid I
proceeded to a telephone to contact the Division of Water Quality. This notification
occurrFd at approximately 4:30.
Once toe water from the containment area had been distributed on the field, the irrigation
dealer that had installed the pipe was contacted. The dealers' crew arrived at
approximately 7:30 p.m. to assess the nature of the pipe failure. The crew rem-nr ed ttha
dirt from over the pipe and discovered that the pipe had backed out of the "T" ¢:sting in
the line: The pipe was not completely removed from the "T". It had slipped brck jut,
enough'to damage the gasket on the fitting, resulting in the failure. The tripe w.as crit, a.
sectior .rerroved, the gasket replaced, and the pipe was then reconnected, The area
around the perimeter of the field -was disked to incorporate any remaining wastr;watei
into the soil.
Leas ttien 1;000 gallons .of wastcw4ter cscaped the system. Certainly lois th w hai f sof
that, volume made it to the creek, of which a aignifica.nt portion was recovered through.
construction of the dam and containment area. The'volume is reinforced by se~reud
factorslthat were observed. First, during the repair a significant vol"ne.ofw�tF � aid ti
"
be'pwnped from the syiten� indicating that much less than the'entire volunie'oTtho pipe
had escaped around the gasket. Second, visual observations of the site when wt
discovered the problem indicated a volume less than 1000 gallons. Third, there wa.3, no
evidence of erosion from the point:of the pipe malfunction, even. though the soil had
recently:been disturbed'during construction and was highly erodable, We believe that
because of -the small volume, the potential impact should be minimal. I visually
monitored the stream during the -evening of the 29' ,,and saw significant fish activity with
no evidence of stress. On the W, .we again spent significant time. in' area and saw
normal' fish activity and no evidence of waste in the tributary. I am confident that my
staff reacted quickly and appropriately in order to contain the waste ►Ater, s �;zii =: .y;,
return Lt to the sprayfield.
We are,commined to take the necessary steps to prevent this type of failyr«: i
We haue initiated an inspection of'the new construction that occurred .in t.hti
"T" fittings and thrust blocks will be inspected to make sure that the conrisc` oh,,� Elfw
secure. "
We regret that this unusual incident occurred. We will continue to make every effort "to
prevent discharges.
If you lave any further questions or comments please call (910) 289-729!S
since )y,
1y=
Tate
A start Production Director

FROM
PHCNr= NO. 2iS9 6434
DCVI FARMS of Rose HU1, LLC
P.O. Box 1076 Rose ill, NC 28458
Februa' y 15, 2002
X*. Paul Rawls
NCDE�R
Fayetteville Regional Office
Division of water Quality
Paul,
As a fallow: up to our conversations regarding the compliance of our MV%olia 4 602hy
with N?DES Permit Number NC0086614, I would lace to address the issues you have
brougbfto my attention- More RM' ifioslly, I vmuld lilt# to adch+e.4s the asses of
coffifio ao'with Section U.14 oftbe permit, whieh'stat6s:: .
"In accordance with 1 SA NCAC SF .0203(bx2), the Operator in Charge or a
;designated back-up Operabar' in Charge of a Type A Animal Waste lfaaVwneid
iSysteai ehali itqeat, or a parson under the `supervision of au,01C or Wgnaed
beck -up OIC sal inspect, the Lind application site es often as n SSK , irixe
that the animal wasta is land applied in accordance with the CAS WV. ; N- :ave
�. The permittee may assert as an affirmative defense in any
ardbrcemeat actionming noncompliance with the , uhments imposed in ibis
condition that -inch nonce fiance was due to -ft- natanoes beyond th-
Permittee's control "A notation stall be nada on the IRR -1 Form indicating 'die
bugectian affected by such affcumshme Had' an •Mkzation wttiDg ibAlk, the.
eironmatenoes claimed to have been beyond, the Perm tee's eotitrol -3b4lll In.
w4=1tted with the IRR -1 Form."
I have reviewed the i n&rmation which your forwarded to A.J. Linton b&qedcr
request. jt is my understanding that this document was sent to yc irr officeby t ill,
Environmental Protection Agency Region Four and is titled Murphy Farre.
Records;— Non -Compliance Analysis, dated January 24, 2002, The docum=
summarize information from -our 2001, third quarter IRR -1 forms and claime a'total
number of violations of irrigation motions totaling wvwq-two.
F.:
It is apparent from this document that the Ew/konmental Protection Agency �im =:jpj� eel
the wrong conVIiance standard and is judging compliance with a requkezu r t to ] 1.'l. p"l�i
every sixty minutes rather than "every hour" as required by the phi+ ,
f

FROM PHONE W. : !�? n 6434
RAVMAN MMGATTON, Wc.
P O Box 1137
Mt. dive, N.C. 28365
[phone]
January 25, 2011:"1.
U. M. Farms '
Attent6iA J Linton
P O Box 759
Rose I1ill, N.O.28458
Dear Mr, Linton , ti
The pu hme' of this letter js to intbrM you of the work details that our company perfcixu5d m thC!
Meg W ji gation system., This work. occ=cd as a result of a mishap caused d-ar a mat—w,
imrntidia*y fouowiag a pipe retrofit as accorzunadato canter pivot ejigtems, A si,�c ixch iii
Harco Teo split in the lower Held, due to having insuffioient air vents in the under9M= Zai
A numb of risen equipped with air mems had been removed during the retrofit_ T a ouly ai*
vents ramainiug in the lower field following the retrofit, were the ones at the Orce end rui cn,
This'wouon
ld have been more than adequate if even e of the three risers waa op�med dusinz ':fr
operation'if the system: However, the failure of the'tw occurred when the pivot in the t plic-f p
fiold•w" operated and the Piping in the lower field was being pressurized, There sim;rly x� rr
enougb�air vents to ev'seuate the, air quick enough.
As you lmow, we wag back and'installed five more air vents is the syatam alcmg w t -a sh,
UGV(ubdergrouad valve) that enables the operator to isolate the lower' field.. This xnesuae
i 1 ' the lower field will not be esurized unless a pivot is in that a '
piping � YmS 1� Pi �a� � +74 "
East, bud'riot east;. wo eccavated.around,.all of the teas;_.elbowa and risers in order to W4,IX'I rs
there w4s no gther damao done to the system during that initial episode. The rvrndCmj ffy�
had not been damaged. I believe the steps we have taken will eliminate. any n3 h
the fhtm.
Sincerely,
Gary IL Scalf, CID
� .d

FROM ;
a. ed 11�11rm F111
PHONE NO. : 910 2a9 6434
We h4ve reviewed our'entire set of IRR -1 forms for quarters two through four during
2001 using the correct "every lour" standard. This review identified a total ofeightevan
it*, ctions �-..
athat hadrbeen recorded as being performed outside ofthe "eveiylv-ae'
-reqummem ' I of Section 11. 14. Of the a in�iM five occurred dtir1q, qfti�&-=
two, tin, dunng qWnw thee, and,three dizi"�q'wka flDUr. The WOW= ktq�ectlatq
rqmsmt only, LOVA of the 1654.inspectioas perfsytmed during the IM t1ree mlw, Liu
quartars of 200 L.
Dmring,,tbe &
three cudar quatam tt. had been our practice to record applicatlDn
inspections' aftar hav'mg cotapleWd the physcal i=rwt= A. routine inspection
golly takes bAvm five and fifteen minutes. Ua&Mm&b*, thio =cftd of mord
keep* U icspoisible IlDr 6bde= 64d'w Cight6= -hWPCCtJ0n8'dW MM ieC0T&d n3 bZbg
less Sequent than every hour. The remaining two are the result of the operator
luw=ift his wWrk as the checks in quedlon are at or ba&re the start tilm of the uvayL
SpecificaUY, to the first cam a che6k- was recorded at 3:35 on an evert tb#, wi rt:)rjed
as siaAmg at.3-:30 wd in the secood a check was recorded'at 3:30 ea ma avetit
" �.�i'j a
recoid�k as' entidot 3:40. Botli4� occurred, on the'same day and the sar,,;� ojuiTdor
performed the chvks.
In summary, for the entire Peiicd we con&aaW'a total of 1654 irmpectlow of-tvble'a turf;
were pl r&rmed outside ofthe "every hour" raquhivmemt in Section U.14 of the pftm*.
Never � liss, we r000gaize the flict that the manwr in which the time of the iuspe'alonz
is recorded needs to be changed. As a result of our conversations with your ofte, this -
subsequent review of our records, 'and a thorough review of our m9am-gena-mi , Tn—&3cep,
we haw since changed our method of recording irrigation event chmks. lt. TRug i'vh.ae, tire:
actual time tbAt the event check occurs will be recorded as opposed to tLe t.Tz,-. of
conlplert�
I mould'mpw"y ask that you #Tovide me wish a response as to to positioz o f ite
Divisiop'of Water Quality in regards to this matter.. Sbovkl you have aw AmtV:,T.
queado'09 please fee=l free to contact roa (91.0) 299-7299.
Sincerily,
Tate
4T &I
Assistant. fto&Cdon Direct"
I

File Memo
Mag IV Farm
Facility No. 82-77
February 28, 2003
This facility has been given an extension for filing the annual certification as required by
the permit. The extension was granted due to the late date that the new annual
certification form was delivered to the facility. The new deadline for filing of the annual
certification is March 14, 2003.
M. Paul Sherman

February 7, 2002
FILE NOTE
MAG 4 SWINE FARM
NPDES Permit No: NCO086614
On January 23, 2002, staff from the DWQ-FRO called AJ Linton with DM Farms to
inform him of the 72 discrepancies found in the 3rd Quarter 2001 reports. The
discrepancies involved the inspection times during irrigation events. Mr. Linton asked
for and received a copy of the discrepancy list. Mr. Linton informed us that he would
look into these discrepancies and send us a written response.
M. Paul Sherman

February 15, 2002
FILE MEMO
Mag 4 Facility
NPDFS No: NCO08614
Facility No: 82-77
On February 15, 2002 Mr. Terry Tate with DM Farms asked for the annual certification
forms that are to be provided by the Division. A draft copy of the forms will be faxed to
the regional office this afternoon and forwarded to Mr. AJ Linton with DM Farms. Mr.
Linton had asked for these forms in the past but nothing had been provided to him.
�ean

ENFORCEMENT
NORTH CAROLINA
Department of Environmental Qua

I
R
M E M O R A N D U M
DATE: September 8, 1997
TO: Steve Tedder, Section Chief
Water Quality S cti
FROM: Kerr T. Steve �i nal Supervisor
Fayetteville Re conal Office
SUBJECT: Recommendation for Enforcement
Unpermitted Discharge of Swine Waste
MAG4 Sow Farm - Murphy Farms, Inc.
SR1944 - Taylor's Bridge, NC
Sampson County
Find attached a fast track enforcement package pertaining to
the discharge of animal waste from the subject swine facility. The
attached inspection form will detail the basis for the action as
well as serving as a list of assessment factors.
If additional information or clarification is required, please
advise.

STATE OF NORTH CAROLINA NORTH CAROLINA
ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT COMMISSION
.COUNTY OF SAMPSON
IN THE MATTER OF
MURPHY FAMILY FARMS, INC.
MAGNOLIA 4 FARM
FOR VIOLATIONS OF PERMIT
15A NCAC 2H.0217
File No. DD
FINDINGS AND DECISION
AND ASSESSMENT OF
CIVIL PENALTIES
Acting pursuant to North Carolina General Statute (G.S.)143-215.6A,
1, A. Preston Howard, Jr., P.E., Director of the Division of Water
Quality (DWQ), make the following:
1. FINDINGS OF FACT:
A. Murphy Family Farms, Inc. operates a concentrated animal
operation in Sampson County.
B. The Magnolia 4 (MAG4) Swine Farm was deemed permitted as
a nondischarge facility on April 1, 1995, in accordance with 15A
NCAC 2H.0217.
C. On July 10, 1997, DWQ staff observed a discharge of wastewater
by the MAG4 Swine Farm from associated spray fields
to an Unnamed Tributary to Six - Runs Creek , which are Class
C -SW waters of the State within the Cape Fear River Basin.
D. The MAG4 Swine Farm had no valid permit for • the above
described activity.
E. The cost to the State of the enforcement procedures in this
matter totaled $674.30.

Based upon the above Findings of Fact, I make the following:
11. CONCLUSIONS OF LAW:
A. The MAG4 Swine Farm is a "person" within the meaning of G.S.
143-215.6A pursuant to G.S. 143-212(4).
B. A permit for this animal waste management system is required
in accordance with 15A NCAC 2H .0217 and G.S. 143-215.1.
C. The Unnamed Tributary to Six - Runs Creek constitutes waters
of the -State within the meaning of G.S. 143-215.1 pursuant to
G.S. 143-212(6). -
D. The above-cited discharge is a violation of the nondischarge
permit.
E. The MAG4 Swine Farm 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 ten thousand dollars -10,000.00)
per violation may be assessed against a person for failing to
act in accordance with the terms, conditions or requirement of
a permit required by G.S. 143-215.1.
F. The State's enforcement costs in this matter may be assessed
against the MAG4 Swine Farm pursuant to G.S. 143-215.3(a)(9)
and G.S. 143B -282.1(b)(8).
G. The Director, of the Division of Water Quality, pursuant to
delegation provided for by G.S. 143-215.6A(h), has the authority
to assess civil penalties in this matter.

III
Based upon the above Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law, I
make the following:
Accordingly, the MAG4 Swine Farm is hereby assessed a civil
penalty of:
$ for discharging waste to the waters of the
State in violation of 15A NCAC 2H.0217.
t
TOTAL CIVIL PENALTY, which is percent
of the maximum penalty authorized by G.S. 143-
215.6A.
Enforcement costs
TOTAL AMOUNT DUE
As required by G.S. 143-215.6A(c), in determining the amount of the
penalty I have considered the factors listed in G.S.143B-282.1(b), which
are:
(1)
The
degree and extent of harm to the natural resources of
the
State, to the public health, or to private property resulting
from
the violation;
(2)
The
duration and gravity of the violation;
(3)
The
effect on ground or surface water quantity or quality or
on air quality;
(4)
The
cost of rectifying the damage;
(5)
The
amount of money saved by noncompliance;
(6)
Whether the violation was committed willfully or intentionally;
(7)
The
prior record of the violator in complying or failing to
comply with programs over which the Environmental Management
Commission has regulatory authority; and
(8)
The
cost to the State of the enforcement procedures.
(Date)
A. Preston Howard, Jr., P.E., Director
Division of Water Quality

OiUie OT North Carolina
Department of Environment,
Health and Natural Resources
Fayetteville Reglonal Office
James B. Hunt, Jr., Governor
Jonathan B. Howes, Secretary
1:3EF.HNF;Z
DIVISION OF WATER QUALITY
July 21, 1997
Mr. James Sauls Jr.
DM Farms Mag4 Sow Farm
P O Box 1075
Rose Hill, NC 28458
SUBJECT: Notice of Violation
Administrative Code 15A NCAC 2H.0217
DM Farms Mag4 Sow Farm
Registration No, 82-77
Sampson County
Dear Mr. Sauls,
You are hereby notified that, having been deemed permitted to have a
nondischarge permit for the subject animal waste disposal system pursuant to 15A
NCAC 2H.0217, you have been found to be in violation of your 2H.0217 permit based
on the following.
During an inspection of the subject farm on July 10, 1997 staff of the Division of
Water Quality Central Office and the Fayetteville Regional Office observed a discharge
of waste. The discharge was traced from a field utilized for land application of swine
waste to an Unnamed Tributary of Six -Runs Creek, Class C Sw Waters. The above
inspection was prompted by staff observing what appeared to be waste in the tributary
from SR 1944.
The inspection revealed that waste had been applied to the field in a manner that
resulted in the discharge. Based on information obtained from farm staff at the time of
the inspection, 0.5 inches of wastewater had been applied to the Feld.
A discharge of waste ' as noted above is a violation of 15A NCAC 2H.0217,
"Permitting By Regulation" that states, in part,
Wachovia Building, Suite 714, Fayetteville ��' FAX [phone]
North Carolina 28301-5043 N)mf C An Equal Opportunity Affirmative Action Employer
Voice 910-486-1541 ,. 571a recycled/ 100% post -consumer paper

Page 2
Mr. Sauls
7121197
(a) The following nondischarge facilities are deemed to be permitted pursuant to
G.S.143-215. I (d) and it shall not be necessary for the Division to issue
individual permit for construction or operation of the following facilities:
(1)Animal waste management systems for which waste does not reach the
surface waters by runoff, drift, direct application or direct discharge
during operation or land application and which meet the following criteria:
In addition to violating 15A NCAC 2H .0217, you are also considered to be in
violation of NCGS 143-215. ] (a), which states in part that:
"No person shall do any of the following things or carry out any of the following
Activities until or unless such person shall have applied for and shall received
from the Commission a permit therefor and shall complied with such conditions,
if any, as are prescribed by such permit :
(])Make any outlets into the waters of the State
Also, the purpose of this letter is to inform you that;
(1) All unpermitted discharges of waste from your facility must cease
immediately,
(2) That all actions necessary to prevent further discharges of waste from this
facility must be initiated immediately,
(3) That further correspondence addressing this issue can be expected.
As you already know this is the second documented discharge of waste from the
"Mag 4 Sow Farm" into waters of the State, the first of which was documented on
November25, 1996. As a result of that documented violation, enforcement actions were
recommended as well as a modification of the Waste Utilization Plan (Plan) for the
farm to address waste runoff.
A review of the most recent version of the Plan for the farm reveals that the
section entitled "Required Specifications" states in part,
(1)Animal waste shall not reach surface waters of the state by runoff, drift,
manmade conveyances, direct application, or direct discharge during operation
or !curd application. Any discharge of waste which reaches surface .water is
prohibited. Illegal discharges are subject to the assessment of civil penalties of
$10,000 per day by the Division of Environmental Management for every day
the discharge continues.

Page 3
Mr. Sauls
7121197
It is the opinion of this office that the discharge of waste as previously noted, is
also a violation of this portion of your Plan.
(7) Liquid waste shall be applied at rates not to emed the soil infiltration rate
such that runoff does not occur offsite or to surface waters and in a method
which does not cause drift from the site during application...
It is the opinion of this office that the discharge of waste as previously noted, is
also a violation of this portion of your Plan.
The Waste Utilization Plan Agreement signed by the farm owner, manager,
technical specialist and corporate affiliate reveals that those persons had sufficient
knowledge of the terms and conditions of the Plan to have taken the necessary action to
prevent this second documented release of waste into the waters of the state.
By allowing waste to again be discharged to the waters of the State, we have no
choice but to ask that you again revise your Waste Utilization Plan to thi$ time insure
that further discharges of waste do not occur from this farm. We also ask thk you
evaluate the sloped portions of field #2 and determine if the continued use of these
areas is prudent in light of the history of discharges and steep grade of these sections.
Your evaluation and revision of the Plan should be submitted to this office on or
before September 24, 1997. It is strongly recommended that should the heavily sloped
portions of field # 2 be utilized during the review period and prior to approval of your
revised Plan by the Division, that farm staff be stationed at the field during each waste
application event to prevent waste from being discharged to the waters of the State.
Failure to comply with the above conditions may result in the facility losing it's
deemed permitted status and being required to obtain an individual nondischarge permit
for the facility. In addition, please be aware that this notice does not prevent the
Division of Water Quality from taking enforcement actions for this or any past or future
violations and the Division of Water Quality has the authority to assess a civil penalty
of not more than $10,000.00 per day per violation.
t
As requested by Dr. Garth.Boyd, please find enclosed a copy of the lab results'
from samples taken at the site. on July 10, 1997 and copies of a few photographs taken' �►
at the site during the investigation.

Page 4
Mr. Sauls
7/21197
If you have any questions concerning this matter, please do not hesitate to
contact either myself or Mr. Ed Buchan, Environmental Engineer, at [phone].
Sincerely,
Y-�" .a �-
Ken T. Stevens
Regional Supervisor
cc: Sue Homewood- Compliance Group
Wilson Spencer - Sampson Co. NRCS
Audrey Oxendine- DSWC Fayetteville Office
Mike Lewandowski - Permits & Engineering Group
Central Files - Raleigh
Dr. Garth Boyd- Murphy Farms, Inc.
Enclosure

13
41 r
lo ­
Az
-.bar
4

09-14-91 11:30 MICROBAC ENVIRON LABORATORY
4ELM
OSAC ENVIRONMENTAL
399 Pat
TORY, INC. r
r
817 Castle Hayne Si.. r-ayette-villa. North Carolina 29303
Phone [phone] - Fax (910) 864-$774
NC Lei+ ID *11 • N(.' 1.pb.1D#37714 - SC 1.ah 1D fl W)2G7 - US[)A L.ab LU # '37}17
cx.#AII DAI1: RI:c'11vtn:/Z, SAMPLE T)AM: Wv ')
AI)IM!'SS: SAM P1.10 BY. _PICKED IJP BY:
CONTACT PERSON: 61 460'C A w 1-1 � - REV R I NCE: �
SAMA I.D. �, u� r-� -1 �w wolm AtT1110R D DY:
270 &dd 029041"
- - - AzWysia I I-ecmxuc I 1 _r, 2 .. I
Ammonlw as N (PnWL)
_ ChlodnemCVL) —.
COD
Fecal Collfotm(per 1oc ml
Nitmto m
Nitrate 8 Nitrila (MOM
Oil & Gmase (mptl
_. .
Phonol (mg/L_
Phosphorus (mgtil
Solids. Sus ndod
Solids. Total (mg&} — --
Total K�Qeht Nitrapan (mei.) � ____ .� �
Aluminum
Area mleiP _, ,...—
Baoum —
ca"Urn IM)
Chromium Tctat
Capper(ppm) -.
Cnida
Load JRVJ ... �
Nickel (ppm) _
Sod►um
Zinc ..T
PAGJ; --I- (')i' 1� '

e
Microbac Laboratories, Inc.
FAYETTEVILLE DIVISION NC #11
817 CACTL2 UAYNF STREET NC 437714
FAYETTEVILLE, NC 28303 USDA #3787
[phone] / [phone] (FAX)
AIR • FUEL • WATER • FOOD • WASTES
CERTIFICATE OF ANALYSIS CERT #1993
CLIENT: NC DEHNR DATE RECD: 07/10/97 SAMPLED: 07/10/97
ADDRESS: Wachovia Building, Suite 714 SAMPLED BY: E. Buchan
Fayetteville, NC 28301 DELIVERED BY: E. Buchan
cbNTACT PERSON: Mr. Ed Buchan SAMPLE CODE: Stream, grab
ACCOUNT NUMBER: #KN003 REFERENCE: MAG #4
SAMPLE ID: 1. Upstream of field ditch - ID #97WU73889
2. Downstream of field ditch - ID #97WD73690
3. DATA REVIEWED BY: -
4. DATE REPORTED: 07/15/97
ANALYSIS bm=OD 1 2 3 4
COLIFORM, FECAL (per 100 ml)
COMMENTS: < - Less than
> - Greater than
SH18 9222D 541
61261
- C' D
Q' Ut 2 1 1997
fE
RGA.0Pici ;��..
PAGE 1 OF 1
The data and other Information contained on this, and other accompanyinp documents, represent only the samples) analyzed and is MEMBER
rendered upon the condition that it is not to be reproduced wholly or In part for adrartis}ng or other purposes without written approval
from the laboratory,
USDA -EPA -NIOSH Testing Food Sanitation Consulting Chemical and Microbiological Analyses and Research f"

Microbac Laboratories, Inc.
FAYETTEVILLE DIVISION
817'CASTLE HAYNE STREET
FAYETTEVILLE, NC 28303
[phone] / [phone] (FAX)
NC #11
NC #37714
USDA #3757
AIR & FUEL • WATER * FOOD • WASTES
CERTIFICATE OF ANALYSIS
CLIENT: NC DWINR
ADDRESS: Wachovia Building, Suite 714
Fayetteville, NG 26301
CONTACT PERSON: Hr. Bal Buchan
ACCOUNT NUMBER: #$N003
SAMPLE, IDs 1. Downstream + - ID 097WD73891
2. Upstream •+ - ID #97WIJ73892
3.
4.
CERT #199
DATE RECD: 07/10/97 SAMPLED: 07/10/97
SAMPLED BY: S. Buchan
DELIVERED BY: E. Buchan
SAMPLE CODE: Stream, grab
REFERENCE: MAG #4
DATA REVIEWED BY: 4S -
DATE REPORTED: 07/15/97
ANALYSIS bc=D 1 2' ' 3 4
+taarrrra+ataaaa+aaaa+aaata++++a+a++a+aa+aaatr++ata+ata++ataa+a++++a+r+►'a,rr�arar+r+aaaat++
COLIFORM, FECAL (per 100 ml) SM18 9222D 154545 400
COMMENTS: + a Downstream of confluene point w/UT to Six Runs Creek
*r Upstream of confluens point w/UT to Six Runs Creek
s Less than
> Greater than
C kf'�'
'JUL 2 11997;
.
Pelf TTEVt) I �-
PAGE 1 OF 1
The date and other Information contained on this, and othar actampanyinq documents, represent only the sample(:) analyzed and Is MEMBER
rendered upon the Condition that it is not to be reproduced wholly or in part for advertising or other purposes without w011an approval
from the laboratory,
USDA -EPA -NIOSH Tasting Food Sanitation Consulting Chemical and Microbiological Analyses and Research l

State of North Carolina
Department of Environment,
Health and Natural Resources
Fayetteville Regional Office
James B. Hunt, Jr., Governor
Jonathan B, Howes, Secretary
0
IDIEHNF;Z
DIVISION OF WATER QUALITY
July 21, 1997
CERTIFIED MAIL
RETURN RECEIPT REQUESTED
Mr. James Sauls
DM Farms Mag4 Sow Farm
P.O. Box 1076
Rose Hill, NC 28458
Subject: Notice of Recommendation for Enforcement
Mag4 Sow Farm
Facility No. 82-77
Samspon County
Dear Mr. Sauls,
This letter is to notify you that the Fayetteville 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 the
violation by the Mag4 Sow Farm on July 10, 1997 of your 2H .0217
non -discharge permit, pusuant 15A NCAC 2H .0217.
If you have an explanation for this violation that you wish to
present, please respond to this office on or before August 5, 1997.
Your explanation will be reviewed and if an enforcement action is
still deemed appropriate, your explanation will be forwarded to the
Director with the enforcement package for his consideration.
If you have any questions concerning this matter, please
contact me at [phone].
Sincerely,
Kerr T. Stevens
Regional Supervisor
cc: Sue Homewood - Compliance Group
Central Files
Wachovia Building, Suite 714, Fayetteville �Iy� FAX [phone]
North Carolina 28301-5043 Nu«� C An Equal Opportunity Affirmative Action Employer
Voice 910-486-1541 5T/. recycled/10% post -consumer paper

I
1. Date of Inspection(s): July 10, 1997
2. Regional Office: Faxcjcvil].c, Water Quality Section
3. Name of Owner Of Property: MUEphyFarms, Inc. (Copy of Deed attached)
4. Name of Operator: Mr. Brugf, Evans
5. Address: 692 Bonham Road
Magnolia,
6. Phone Number: (991 ?) 289-2111
7. Description of Facility Location, Map excerpt attached
Wot.�side of SR, 1944. approximately 1 mile North of intersection of SR J245 and
S R 1944. �-
8. Date this facility began operation: The farm has been in full operation -since AlUiL
of 1995,
B•_ Il W601111! 14! 1!fool) FM : , 1 U T-10 1=1011 1
10. Has the facility registered with DWQ? YES-. NO—
If yes, date of registration .,j,,
11. Does the facility have an approved Animal Waste Management Plan YES -X- NO_
Is one required? YES.& NO_
Date Approved: 3113195
12. Has this facility received a CAFO Designation? YES_ NOS
If yes, date issued:
13. Type of Operation: Swine, Sow - Farrow to Wean

15. Length of time animals have been, are, or will be stabled, or confined and fed or
maintained in any 12 month period. Twelve 12) months.
16. Are crops, pasture, or post harvest residues sustained in the normal growing season over
any portion of the lot or facility? Yes, the farm is nnw rewired to have approximately
72.5 acres of bay pasturr, land--,Qn which to apply Rgste. - Ibc atjachrd cgilified
waste management plan calls for a combination of Matua Grass and Rye Qrass to
be gr. own gp various Sites. Apploximately64.5 acres are established with Matua and
$_ more acres ---are, planted with Rye inthe winter months. At the tiMr, of_the
insi2gction, it was clear that the siceply- sloped poElionLDLthr, Wray fields had
r�cntLy--been-sjeeded with Matua Grass. However, this cover crop was still in the
early stages pf development and. as the attached photographs illustrate, was not
established wrll enough to VeYent run-off problems except during the lightest
application events. This is especially evident in -light of the heavily sloped
topography of the fields in jjue51 .
1 00
1 I l 1 !! .! ! • e 1 1_ !! 1 ! ! 1 III, . - - "IMM-Me1
18. Description of other animal operations in immediate vicinity and proximity to same or
other surface waters- It was nptcd that a Meivilie#1 swine farm yy s located off
SR 19-43 a Qut500 feet_SE fry the Mgg4 facility. This fum_ iN i2wned by UL Tim
Barnette and ibis facility applies waste on different fields, although it is upstream
from the Mag4 application site. It did not appear that any waste was being,
19. Proximity of facility to neighboring houses, wells, etc.: No residences arc kogwn to be
in close roximity to the farm.
24. Approximate depth of ground water table in the area of the facility or discharge: L??

21. Proximity of facility to surface waters: Eacilily (edge of lagoons) is locate
apt2roximately_50 feet from a unnamed intermittent tributary to Six -Runs Creek
Class "C -SW waters. The geek actually runs between the two lagoons.
22. Animal waste discharged. Sw!
Sue Homcwood. J2W ".-0 Eentral Office [phone],
24. D/ or have discharges occurred in response1 a storm
year, hour storm? YES, I is the opinion of the writer that discharges. of wasle have
occurred in the past -du plication even1s. SmcU conclusion iS-baSed
on hrcandition -of the1ray field -which x !!41' 11'1 in cMaija amas and
1 1 not haye well !f 1 11:[hg5g 1!!+ !'4 1 !d
themsdyes to creating ! 1 -problems wbich havg probably 1 to! _!1 /
discharges i! thg past andngt in response to ' hour 1 !! !
!!.!I ! note thatthe lagoons had well over the minimum freeboard and
25. What is the degree and extent of harm to the natural resources of the State, to public
health,or to private property resulting from the violation?: The discharge has caused
the introduclion f
12ssibility of algal blooms and accelerated eutrophication ofthe slow movingwaters
of the receiy'na stream._Als"mples taken indj-.catC elexate-d f"al �olifarm_leyels

5
28. What is the cost of rectifying the damage?: The writer observed no areas that cleanup
activities would be recommended. Any cleanup would cause adverse im acts to
nearby wetlands. There has been no report of downstream impacts outside the area
of the investigation.
29. What is the amount of money saved by noncompliance?: Based pn-obseryations made
during the investigations, no cost was significantly decreased by over-gPD13dag the
whstc. Although,if�h waste was. oyer -applied, it may have allowed for fewer
rsn avin events in the future and therefore less man hours consumed.
30. Was the violation committed willfully or intentionally?:
YES— NOS
Explain: Although it does seem that the irrigation eQuipment operators Swmld have
been More car fUl in how mugh and where the waSte was being applied, it does not
appcar_that they intended for the waste to reach surface waters.
31. What is the prior record of the violator in complying or failing to comply with
programs over which Environmental Management Commission has regulatory
authority?: As previously noird- the -D3YQ has jakra enforgrmrnt action against
the MAG4Farm for a similar discharge documCated on 11 /25/96.
32. What is the cost to the State for the enforcement procedures?:
Regional Costs are as follows:
Photo, film and developing:
Mileage: $0.20 per mile for 100 miles:
Fecal Coliform ($22.00 per sample) * 4:
Ed Buchan @ $20.251 hr
3 hours - Drive Time
2 hours - Investigation
8 hours - Report Development.
13 hours 1.a1
Mike Lewandowski Cpl $20.25 /hr
3 hours - Drive Time
2 hours - Investigation
5 hours UjW
Sue Homewood @ $20.25 /hr
3 hours - Drive time
2 hours - investigation
5 hours jUl1
Kerr T. Stevens - 1 hour (Supervisory Review)
Central Office Review
$ 6.00
$ 20.00
$ 88.00
$ 222.75
$ 101.25
$ 101.25
$ 35.05
$ 100.00
Total $ 674.30

33. Type or general nature of business: Swine, Sow -Farrow to Wean Operation
1 1 1'' •' 1 1 1 1' 1 1 �
+!1 ►L 11 1. a !! ! ! +'1 � !.� 1. + ! , 1 1 't. II
Trip M-0 I ' 1 1 ' . . I 1 .
! 1' 11 + !' a _�11 !! I!'� !• r M
11 _�11 11 11 , M 11 1 4' L II 111 1
! IM RIMINI IT411 IT 1 " ! 1.1 ! 111 �
35. Are there any Mitigating Circumstances?: NO
36. Assessment Factors:
b. Receiving Stream : Unnamed Tributa[y to Six -Runs Cree
c. Damage Yes — No _2L (Based on observations at the time of the investigation)
If YES, include report from Wildlife Resources Commission.
1j?J.I t I1 ! Y 1!11JI� 1 t
38. Recommendations Made to Owner/Operator:
I- Immediately ceaseum- . ste o to the field.
2- Take immediate action to prevent any future discharge of waste.
1 ---Contact NRCS toobtain uchnical assist anoeif-nece5sary
39. Recommendations for further DWQAction:
otic_ -of Violation (FojxardedDCCQmbeT5- 1226)
- Enforcement Action
Rein ection
11 it I'. } 1 11' /! + 1 1 !
!74+ a O Rwfffmwalm I IR 110101-I Nil 10 111Q 111M1 a I WAN I ! I

zr rr r- uw!
M
w .t r` •fit ,', '{. ��'� ...'a;'.•Y*• it ., . i
y.. E•,•..•
re
i'a
- d +psi .1 '• F:r {t i. r. s.s
I ";Y` .$^•�+ 1 I"0.0 r:rl `t �- :wS ]..;.t� tee".,?., J t7� 'tom` `f f. at:..lt'•'- .;l � '{.. !••� 11, _ "� �j
., le.i f ••Q I � r i J'
:� ,•7r .. ..i';A"'�. Yr�e~�'� a` •.:F 1`+: A;:f: �Y:.::'' �(, s. . ,I'.iw i +r w'ry i'.� ,i }}}---„
-* r �., � .,a! ..'ti'l� t 'ti + , 3 r - �' i {•, 1"- r,t• rr ���,i. �y M",'�
,�w4 at I ,I • „ r tw» ++- �a !rr � :'y c � ' r,!/,' � n �-•�'~ {' j�' L I ` , ,�: ! r :^ r
3i,v�t �,'l�i: k 1. �r,,..,i +1•� •. `�{ i. � � i• Fr„++L � ti '.0 y! �•1 .sCr
' .. rys I/ a + t � 1' . ..r v +ro+.. � A+� •,}•a.' ,�r� �.{ _�r j •fl -
+"A + . ti, i+' � 1 °+•� � !F.lfi. �_. -y t� x • �l t � � �Jb i itf��y ! + x r•'"'`Ft•/ �':r.
{ 4 a 1 � P+. I 1i wra i ,' n, r ! ,� kk �s' • � * '� ,, 'r yt � '`••• t 1�
ti ; t iV• ,I - �.ti k h r' -� i .1 a{ft� ( 1- 1 h f ti r 't.t'.r n.. �r ,:.s
•�� � I i C .!• i�. r:� s I h• t ti 11 n !! 1 Q"; � 'A., iv T iy � wo •, r r�
� Mr i IM r % 1 .A� x"r r. �I-ti w rdhs , I `zs�_A ryf� r Jr 5.�+fir 1 +41¢l i• ^� a �r,.r�"I It,h/:Nf,(h f u�� t r �5 ,.
,���r vr+...q� -' + ..a♦ � � e I S y �� - � F A k7�+ t r r S � `PC-.
;�{Q{•t`z � J �'f3.`rcyy�:,rr�ra}. {�,,k+ T t ` Ffi` �iY 4r��� hs a ye i rp , ,!r i �i*?y w+., i�n+1�S.�, �. iq'IS ���r
„1!¢T;R.,"�x �'�'�f"Y�'G;�;�'�i��'� 1�� �" _�..ds:'r�ri..It4.�'wr:'3�� �,litnl.�.fr'��'�'R•�r4�6,t�.'.�i..- }1-J r+�1�.i.cS1,5i:.r_,
I jj( ,•
It
SIS} 14',� }fa �'�•
�11. ��, �il•5rife..l��s!a�:i � +! .i. s�fl�,: ,
MIS
fill
1 f. '� '1� � w"'PA- i �f t�je�rs� �ilF•r,•-
«���'�,J``.P'ti��n,�„
^���.�y '�-y,yM �d ,5+j �`..+�+{y"{�.,F'l s.�'+►,.°ly � ' I11 , t •t f, e!"y. {e' �+
e rT14F5'-ar �i+'w D' }s�l Y� ��� I ��1g' +�W';• �' I d ��; �-k'
�ytrT � ..�-d�'•.��y� ti .r.;, � y
14
:�!'a:�,�•r; i��•, l::"`�,y6r'• p:y:'�:,�"�I',+rti,',..1� �>,r;"�`',:,I` " } r'�1•:'�?

.-, .. ,, r I �rj ,� .f... , • 'r'i. C �1 �✓1r�. ta7'{}: ' ,fr�,l 1��f1:' .: � r ,' �F.
,�, 1 1,.1L6, ��' rt� �f 'rt •r •V '' L1. ��1 \` S.•r�-f 4141 •�fl \�•� 7'q�?,/!I ��I •���ln:r1%.L\� 1'�N�`
i \ ` � 1 T f 1 �.y 1 , l ,•r, ti I{�' l \ s'. .( jjjy IM1M1M1s zi 4 �fi 1 tj ���.rs'r`�: 5_ �.�j • ff� .
lti���ss s'T�..1� h�sfrAy� i��f. i. �lv��l �\�1� � {� s sy�y.l;; � i 4/ �' lL�I ! � �°�� �•i � t
s tsb:t6L�e..����i. �,� +�a �.lt .�,�.i,i ;��irs/1^-T.�'C ,4�,,� �rff� :.�31 .� •���,s.,•�•#;�>af .�i'�f<x�+.✓�I
v
�
•1�1 1• µi it �. `l rM ' 1r
F / l; i��yy 'Y.�'f ��f ll� ��i l��Ix �t.''rY j� �i {.i r 1 l }} j•} d � ]� ter L 1`r! jj�= f �tt,Ir�� i+w- dr� s '(�• •�j r . r}}}��� 1 � r �y fis�4'.%
r L t r 1; &_,.
Jnr' s C ra v
r �;At �S t ''1.s`;,; .L�.1 f }.• �y��, �rla {p'i�J,�7V^/.• ,r.. l 'i{•.S�a �' ���/4/f r� � � t� ('�,c1,�y� `/J>� � i�'
Y!` �V \ �L,.y.l { ,.IAli:-Il,���S...';'14. �+. 1.'h dEt f.f•.j.*•'M..F ^�1 �.4-r ���•ilr\��!?+'.il.•r,r1. �.G,J 1!� •;•s•a/,
'^icy �'r•'i r;.i � i" �� _j� - �.
tl ism . r �•� � �
41 S
t -r V
• t • -�x �'`•'� ..�"'s:.•'�7� �y�. • :44Y. 1.
Alm
Evidence of Recent Run -Off
f •,•?TL :•fes �a'[��. � '4� {[
All
;WWt lot
Am
'' R � 'jai +i Y• � -Y'� � '�. �.� 4t.. �(,r,r � � � •, r "' : f � •
.rt-. � r...'�; fir:' ^� .�" � s J � %�t yti-•{iF."fti
=JU2

p1atA SL,.tdS uo'Butpuod aIsi3M
plaid ,CvjdS furnnal ajst!A�

. •� .
fit
`f ` c '°";1,�.,df' kx. ,.' r a s t ` �"• ., ati Aft?
40
Y .rte A'kr::'^. • s� i � -AOP,.. TLS • �'� a � ��
VT
�."JL`.

t
F �s �r1p •r +r�i_ �
C\4-

Microbac Laboratories, Inc.
FAYETTEVILLE DIVISION NC #11
017 CACTLE UAYUR OTRRRT NC #37714
FAYETTEVILLE, NC 28303 USDA #3787
[phone] / [phone] (FAX)
AER FUEL WATER FOOD • WASTES
CERTIFICATE OF ANALYSIS
CERT #19933
CLIENT: NC DEHNR DATE REC'D: 07/10/97 SAMPLED: 07/10/97
ADDRESS: Wachovia Building, Suite 714 SAMPLED BY: E. Buchan
Fayetteville, NC 28301 DELIVERED BY: E. Buchan
CONTACT PERSON: Mr. 8d Buchan SAMPLE CODE: Stream, grab
ACCOUNT NUMBER: #KNO03 REFERENCE: MAG #4
SAMPLE ID: 1. Upstream of field ditch - ID #97WU73889
2. Downstream of field ditch - ID #97WD73890
3. DATA REVIEWED BY: -
4. DATE REPORTED: 07/15/97
arta+ttaaa+ttaaaa++++tatttta+tat+:tt+tacttaa+++a'+matt+t+at+ttta+atttt+ttt++++ttaaatat+tta
ANALY819 Bd:THOD 1 2 3 8
taatattaaatrata+tart+t+aatttt+ttattttttata+ttttttatttt+at+aattaata+tattaaat+++tattta++tart
COLIFORM, FECAL (per 100 ml)
COMMENTS: < Less than
> Greater than
SM18 9222D 541 61261
RE-CEMED
JUL 2 1 1991
F;�y r .
EW1 il�
REt7. c) j':' � ;�
PAGE 1 OF 1
The pats and other Intormallon contained on this, and other accompanying documents, represent only the sample(s) analyzed and Is M E M B E R
rendered upon the oondllion that it Is not to be reproduced wholly or In part for advertising or other purposes without written approval
from the laboratory.
USDA -EPA -NIOSH Testing Food Sanitation Consuking Chemical and Microbiological Analyses and Reaaarch

.,(-n
'ro Stx
Fu�s
PoIf�T tAor
t r
r
r
SkMP�E 3 �
4►WLE .1 SLoP�D r
D1 1. G•R �C7 - `- 1 1
� RuNor--r- L�
ShmP� Y Elk 14YDP�r� fi `
p,pShGEN i� �, 4 r r
4-
t 1
r 7J !
rr
� 5 I
r 4 c
{ � r
l `
r
'pl�Y fzDhD r r
STATE SkE—I(
L ►.Sdt +� S �hfe.)

MAG LAND MGT.
PHME N0. 910 289 7298 Dec, 03 19% 04:53PM Pi
r.
y
4
O•
. • ri1 dt
G
•
J
r
a
0
P
0

11051 ,...�. .
ii

PHONE N0.
dl—
� w
• _ � .• ,. .�:71�',rtYh!,C?OF7N.i�F,�G'EriTY � .
MGT.
Ito
CM
1I
s
PHONE N0.
dl—
� w
• _ � .• ,. .�:71�',rtYh!,C?OF7N.i�F,�G'EriTY � .

State of North Carollna
Department of Environment,
Health and Natural Resources 1 • •
Fayetteville Regional Officet1i
James B. Hunt. Jr., Governor IDP.HNF;Z
Jonathan B. Howes, Secretary
July 15, 1997
Mr, Bruce Evans
692 Bonham Road
Magnolia, NC 28453
SUBJECT: Operation Review Corrective Action Recommendation
Magnolia 4 Sow Farm
Facility No. 82-77
Sampson County
Dear Mr, Evans,
On July 9, an Operation Review was conducted on Magnolia 4 Sow Farm, facility no. 82-77. This
Review, undertaken in accordance with G.S. 143-215.10D, is one of two visits scheduled for all registered
livestock operations during the 1997 calendar year. The Division of Water Quality will conduct a second site
inspection.
During the Review, it was determined that waste was !Lot being discharged to the waters of the State,
and the animal waste collection, treatment, storage and disposal systems were operated under the responsible
charge of a certified operator. However, the following management deficiencies were discovered and noted for
corrective action: repair all over -filling and leaking flush tanks; erosion was seen on outside lagoon slope;
reseed bare spots on lagoon wall; needs to have waste utilization plan written for matua, millet, and rye;
remove weeds from spray fields;'resprig bermuda in late fall or early spring at DM Farms Sec. 1 Site 4
approximately thirty-four acres before sludge is applied from Dell Farm; and farm needs a follow-up by DWQ.
These management deficiencies need to be addressed and corrected. You are encouraged to contact your
certified technical specialist if additional assistance is needed. During ensuing reviews, these same
deficiencies will be re-examined to determine if corrective actions were implemented.
In order for your facility to remain in compliance with environmental regulations, animal waste cannot be
discharged into the waters of the State, and the animal waste collection, treatment, storage and disposal
systems must be properly maintained and operated under the responsible charge of a certified operator.
Please remember that you are required to obtain and implement an approved animal waste
management plan by the end of this year. The plan must be certified either a designated technical specialist or
a professional engineer. For additional assistance with the plan, please contact your local Soil and Water ,
Conservation District Office or local Cooperative Extension Service Office.
Wachovia Building, Suite 714, Fayetteville W -
North Carolina 28301-5043 Nvf
;6 FAX [phone] An Equal Opportunity Affirmative Action Employer
Voice 910-486-1541 :,.� 50% recycled/ 109, post -consumer paper

The Division of Soil and Water Conservation appreciates your cooperation with this Operation Review.
Please do not hesitate to call me at 9101486-1541 If you have any questions, concerns or need additional
information.
Sincerely,
qDMAJfl�1-
Scott Faircloth
Environmental Specialist 11
cc: Sampson Soil and Water Conservation District
Ed Buchan, DWQ Environmental Engineer
Carroll Pierce
Murphy Family Farms
DSWC Regional Files

Routine
Facility Number
DSWC Animal Feedlot Operation Review
DWQ Animal Feedlot Operation Site Inspection
Follow-up of
Farm Status: [3 Registered 13 Applied for Permit
9 Certified Q Permitted
ollow-up of DSIVC review O Other
Date of Inspection
Tithe of Inspection 24 hr. (hh:mm)
Total Thne (in fraction of hours
lex:J?S for 1 hr 15 min)) Spent on Review
or Inspection (includes travel and processing)
DNot Operational Date Last Operated: .................. ......... ...................................................................................................................
FarmName:..d......... S.d'�Count} :............................................................�....�.............................................
Owner Name: ----- ... ............................................................................. , Phone No: ......... ..........................................
R��.r.~...���.f.........
Facility Contact: ........ .,p!1�C�,.... �a .. ..... Title: ..........�.t� Phone No:......a?.1.^.��................
RMailing Address:..........�11......... .1..1.1....... .............................................. g.. ii i.q ........ 14r....... .� .................
e:,..t,.............................................Onsite RepresentativN.. l
Certified Operator:......... .1..........RRgf rd �..... ........ ...... ................................ Operator Certification \Tu Imhcr:.......1.� ...............
Location of Farm: fpm a SS u{f\VN
c
Latitude Longitude �• �� �«
Type of Operation . " Design . ,.,,"Current `> =. `. Design Current
Swine v r':': Capacity Population Poultry, Capacity Population
❑ Wean to Feeder
❑ Feeder to Finish
Farrow to Wean
❑ Farrow to Feeder
❑ Farrow to Finish
❑ Other
❑ Layer
❑ Non -Layer
Total Design Capacity
Total SSLW
Design Current
Cattle Capacity Population
❑ Dairy
❑ Non -Dairy
Number of Lagoons / Holding Ponds < ❑Subsurface Urains Present ❑Lagoon Area 0 Spray Field Area
general
1. Are there any buffers that need maintenance/improvement? ❑ Yes No
?. Is any discharge observed from any part of the operation? ❑Yes No
Discharge originated at: ❑ Lagoon ❑ Spray Field ❑ Other
a. If dischar-e is observed, was the conveyance man-made? ❑ Yes No
b-. lI' discharge is observed, did it reach Surface Water:' (If yes, notify DWQ1 ❑ Yes No
c. If discharge is observcd. what is the estimated flow in gal/nein?
d. Dees discharge hypass a lagoon system'' (if yes, notify D«'Q)
El Yes No
3. is there evidence of past discharge from any part of the operation? ❑ Yes ![� No
4. Were there any adverse impacts to the waters of the State other than from a discharge? ❑ Yes [' No
5. Does any part of the waste management system (other than lagoonslholding ponds) require ❑ Yes l No
4/30/97 maintenance/in;prcwemNnt?
Conlutued on back

Facility Number:—
6. Is facility not in compliance with any applicable setback criteria in effect at the time of design?
7. Did the facility fail to have a certified operator in responsible charge?
S. Are there lagoons or storage ponds on site which need to be properly closed?
Structures .a oons n o Holding d.
9. is storage capacity (freeboard plus storm storage) less than adequate?
Freeboard (ft): Structure I Strucpre 2 «Structure 3 Structure 4
A191. 9Oka ...... ........ ��!A...11�.... 0ON _.....
N
10. Is seepage observed from any of the structures?
11. Is erosion, or any other threats to the integrity of any of the structures observed?
❑ Yes j No
❑ Yes / No
❑ Yes No
❑ Yes 0 No
Structure 5 Stnicture 6
Yes ❑ No
Yes ❑ No
12. Do any of the structures need maintenance/improvement? Yes ❑ No
(If any of questions 9-12 was answered yes, and the situation poses
an immediate public health or environmental threat, notify DWQ)
13. Do any of the structures lack adequate minimum or maximum liquid level markers? ❑ Yes [ No
Wastg Applicatim
14. Is there physical evidence of over application? ❑ Yes No
(If in excess of WMP, or runoff entering waters of the State, notify D�hW)
15. Crop type!...................mf�k±............. �..c.......... ............1",!i�....0........................................... . ..................................................
16. Do the receiving crops differ with those designated in the Animal Waste Management Pian (AWMP)? Yes ❑ No
17. Does the facility have a lack of adequate acreage for land application? ❑ Yes No
18. Does the receiving crop need improvement?Yes ❑ No
19. Is there a lack of available waste application equipment? 1111❑Yes F No
20. Does facility require a follow-up visit by same agency?] Yes ❑ No
21. Did Reviewer/Inspector fail to discuss review/inspection with on-site representative? !❑, Yes [ No
For Certified Facilities 0013,
22. 'Does the facility fail to have a copy of the Animal Waste Management Plan readily available? ❑ Yes No
23. Were any additional -problems noted which cause noncompliance o the Certified WMP? Yes ❑ No
24. Does record keeping need improvement? t �- es No
Maks�rxjt5 rj OYQ{ -�i r\j jjq+ k � nks 1
Seer an 01h)d( }A DoN3lbF�S .
a
Iz- Mesutl bAre RiMs on 2a oo`n WA 11 �C V
4
51b- 1�leer5 z hama t LJP1
�SI)IUA 4q wf,�i� Ile tCP �la�tin t
s 1
At�c� Aot �.0 tt� k . ,
I�' �e.Movc y,r�zc 5 �rom S tryy 1�9_ljs.
bL( MIJt\ at N i. F�rM 3� a�re5 �?��tft 5 l�1ye
Reviewer/Inspector NameR s:¢auh�.r rd
• 'T
Reviewer/Inspector Signature: Dale: f i, , HI I
e
/V

State of North Carolina
rl,epart. gent of Environment,
Health and Natural Resources
Division of Water Quality
James B. Hunt, Jr., Governor
Jonathan B. Howes, Secretary
A. Preston Howard, Jr., P.E., Director
Mr. James Sauls Jr.
D M Farms Mag 4 Sow Farm
P O Box 1076
Rose Hill NC 28458
Dear Mr. Sauls:
a4
C3EHNR
July 29, 1997 i
clil 1 1191
r-t-gETT� i c
or
SUBJECT: Acknowledgment receipt letter
D M Farms Mag 4 Sow Farm
Case No. DD 97-002
Farm #82-77
Sampson County
This letter is to acknowledge receipt of check No. 1901 in the amount of
$2,539.65 received from D M Farms on July 25,1997.
This payment satisfies in full the civil penalty levied against D M Farms and this case has
been closed. Payment of this penalty in no way precludes further action by this Division for
future violations of the State's environmental laws, if you have any questions please call me at
[phone], extension 233.
Sincerely, A4,
y�,c.., ' ,�,o
Robert L. Sledge, Supervisor
Compliance Group
RLS/te
cc: .Fayetteville Regional Office
Enforcement/Compliance Files
Central Files
P.O. Box 29535, Raleigh, North Carolina 27626-0535 Telephone [phone] FAX [phone]
An Equal Opportunity Affirmative Action Employer 50% recycled/ 10% post -consumer paper

State of North Carolina
"Department of Environment,
Health and Natural Resources `
Division of Water Quality
,lames B. Hunt, Jr., Governor sift 111111111111k
Jonathan B. Howes, Secretary F== N F,.
A. Preston Howard, Jr., P.E., Director
June 6, 1997 p
CERTIFIED 1yIAIL , .... w. R E C ENE D
James Sauls Jr.
DM Farms Mag 4 Sow Farm Fi1,77 1: ; r _E
PO Box 1076x , t�;..;�;f,
Rose Hill, NC 28458
SUBJECT: Assessment of Civil
Penalties for Violation(s) of
NCAC 2H .0217.
Farm #: 82-77
Sampson County
File No. DD 97-002
Dear Mr. Sauls:
This letter transmits notice of a civil penalty assessed against DM Farms in the amount of
$2,539.65 including $539.65 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 pursuant to N.C.G.S. 143-215.6A(h). Any
continuing violation(s) may be the subject of a new enforcement action, including an additional
penalty.
Within thirty days of receipt of this notice, you must do one of the following:
Submit payment of the penalty:
Payment should be made directly to the order of the Department of
Environment, Health, and Natural Resources (do not include waiver
form). Payment of the penalty will not foreclose further enforcement
action for any continuing or new violation(s).
Please submit payment to the attention of:
Mr. Steve W. Tedder
Water Quality Section Chief
Division of Water Quality
P.U. Box 29535
Prleigh, North Carolina 27626-0535
P.O. Box 29555 " • ,1h Carolina 27626-0535 Telephone [phone] FAX [phone]
An EqI t-., • atirmative Action Employer 50% recycled/ 10% post -consumer paper

2. Submit a written request .for remission or mitigation including- a
. detailed justification ,for such request:
A request for remission or mitigation is limited to consideration of the
reasonableness of the amount of the penalty and is not the proper procedure
for contesting the accuracy of any of the statements contained in the
assessment letter. Because a remission request forecloses the option of an
administrative hearing, such a request must be accompanied by a waiver of
your right to an administrative hearing and a stipulation that there are no
factual or legal issues in dispute. You must execute and return to this office
the attached waiver Ad stipulation form and a detailed statement which you
believe establishes whether.
(a) one or more of the civil penalty assessment factors in G.S. 143B -
282.1(b) were wrongfully applied to the detriment of the petitioner;
(b) the violator promptly abated continuing environmental damage
resulting from the violation;
(c) the violation was inadvertent or a result of an accident;
(d) the violator had been assessed civil penalties for any previous
violations,
(e) payment of the civil penalty will prevent payment for the remaining
necessary remedial actions.
Please submit this information to the attention of:
Mr. Steve W. Tedder
Water Quality Section ChieVDWQ
P.O. Box 29535
Raleigh, North Carolina 27626-0535
W
3. Submit a written request for an administrative hearing:
If you wish to contest any portion of the civil penalty assessment, you must
request an administrative hearing. This request must be in the form of a
written petition to the Office of Administrative Hearings and must conform
to Chapter 150B of the North Carolina General Statutes. You must:
File your original petition with the:
Office of Administrative Hearing,
P.O. Drawer 27447
Raleigh, North Carolina 27611-7447
and
Mail or hand -deliver a Copy of the petition to:
Mr. Richard Whisnant
Office of General Counsel
NCDEHNR
Post Office Box 27687
Raleigh, NC 27611

Failure to exercise one of the options above within WM days, as evidenced by a
date stamp (not a postmark) indicating when we received your response, will result in this
matter being referred to the Attorney General's Office with a request to initiate a civil action
to collect the penalty. Please be advised that additional assessments may be levied for
future violations which occur after the review period of this assessment.
If you have any questions, please contact heir. Shannon Langley at [phone],
extension 581.
Sincerely,
A. Preston Howard, Jr., F.E.
ATTACHMENTS
cc: Fayetteville Regional Supervisor wl attachments
Comphance/Enforcement File wt attachments
Central Files w/ attachments
Public Information Officer wlattachments
a

STATE OF NORTH CAROLINA
COUNTY OF
ENMONMENTAL MANAGEMENT
COMMISSION
IN THE MATTER OF ASSESSMENT } WAIVER OF RIGHT TO AN
OF CIVIL PENALTIES AGAINST ) ADMINISTRATIVE HEARING AND
PERMIT NO. ) STIPULATION OF FACTS
Having been assessed civil penalties totalling for
violation(s) as set forth in the assessment document of the Director of the Division of Water Qua -=
dated, _ the undersigned, desiring to seek remission of the civil
penaldes, does hereby waive the right to an administrative hearing in the above -stated matter and does
stipulate that the facts are as alleged in the assessment document.
This the day of , . ... .. _ .. 019—.
.. SIGNATURE
�`±
TELEPHONE

TATE OF NORTH CAROLINA
:OUNTY OF SAMPSON
K THE MATTER OF
WARMS
MAGNOLIA 4 FARM
OR VIOLATIONS OF PERMIT -
SA NCAC_2H,.0217
NORTH CAROLINA
ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT COMMISSION
File No. DD 97-002
FINDINGS AND DECISION
AND ASSESSMENT OF
CIVIL PENALTIES
Acting pursuant to North Carolina General Statute (G.S.) 143-215.6A, I, A. Preston
_Howard, Jr., P.E., Director of the Division of Water Quality (DWQ), make the following:
I . FINDINGS OF FACT:
A. DM Farms owns and operates a concentrated animal feeding operation in Sampson
County known as the Magnolia 4 Sow Farm.
B . DM Farms f The Magnolia 4 Sow Farm was deemed permitted as a nondischarge
facility on April 1, 1995, in accordance with 15A NCAC 2H.0217.
C. On November 25, 1996, DWQ staff observed a discharge of wastewater from the
aforementioned swine facility's spray fields to an unnamed tributary to Six -Runs
Creek, which are Class C -SW waters of the State within the Cape Fear River Basin.
D. DM Farms had no valid permit for the above described activity.
E. The cost to the State of the enforcement procedures in this matter totaled $539.65.
Based upon the above Fndings of Fact, I make the following:
II. { CONCLUSIONS OF LAW:
A. DM Farms is a "person" within the meaning of G.S. 143-215.6A pursuant to G.S.
143-212(4).
B . A permit for this animal waste management system is required in accordance with I SA
NCAC 2H .0217 and G.S. 143-215.1.
C. The unnamed tributary to Six -Runs Creek constitutes waters ofthe- State within the
meaning of G.S. 143-215.1 pursuant to G.S. 143-212(6).
D. The above-cited :'.i:. -,barge is a violation of the nondischarge permit.
E. DM Farms r^n• ssessed civil penalties in this matter pursuant to G.S. 143-
215.6A(a)(2;. :t provides that a civil penalty of not more than ten thousand
dollars ($ l Cf; per violation may be assessed against a person for failing to act

in accordance with the terms, conditions or requirement of a permit required by G.S.
143-215.1.
F. The State's enforcement costs in this matter maybe assessed against DM Farms
pursuant to G.S. 143-215.3(x)(9) and G.S. 143B -2$2.1(b)(8).
G. The Director, Division of Water Quality, pursuant to delegation provided for by G.S
143-215.6A(h), has the authority to assess civil penalties in this master.
Based upon the above Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law, I make the following:
Accordingly, DM Farms is hereby assessed a civil penalty of:
$ s7- rV7 for discharging waste to the waters of the State in violation of
15A NCAC 2H.0217.
$ '.r" • 'ev TOTAL CIVIL PENALTY, which is o?o percent of the
maximum penalty authorized by G.S. 143-215.6A.
$ 539.65 Enforcement costs
$ a,S39. !gS' TOTAL AMOUNT DUE
As required by G.S. 143-215.6A(c), in determining the amount of the penalty I have
considered the factors listed in G.S. 143B -282.1(b), which are:
(1) The degree and extent of harm to the natural resources of the State, to the public
health, or to private property resulting from the violation;
(2) The duration and gravity of the violation;
(3) The effect on ground or surface water quantity or quality or on air quality;
(4) The cost of rectifying the damage;
(5) The amount of money saved by noncompliance;
(6) Whether the violation was committed willful3y or intentionally;
(7) The prior record of the violator in complying or failing to comply with programs over
which the Environmental Management Commission has regulatory authority; and
(8) The cost to the State of the enforcement procedures.
(Date) Preston Howard, Jr., P.E., Director
Division of Water Quality

c
.,�
�;, ���� �,�►;�.��.��::v�'IL�I�,��i�J�� A�.I���:::µk�h���.r ,�:vMv::
�.�..w-Y.�..........rrv-.�..:• �.�:::1:.:�:.�..M....�w::.��.:::,:'.'.'�'�*..w.w.:N:....�.�:..w;2:i+�.�ww...J:2'�3.::K...:Yk .. ., ... �2kY�v.«�++:''' "��"�
An o.rm S
Producer':
Location: S I rj �g w. PS o n [,o . pECEIVED
Telephon0910):�-89 - —1 a.9 cR fEB 05 1997,
Type Operation: foafro u,.,j - w e o.
Number of Animals: Wi O d so LO -s REG. Grr'i✓
(Design wry) 1 00 o
1400
The waste from your animal facility must be land pplied at a specified rate to prevent
pollution of surface and/or groundwater. The plant nutrients in the animal waste should
be used to reduce the amount of commercial fertilizer required for the crops in the fields
where the waste is to be applied. This waste utilization plan uses nitrogen as the limiting
nutrient. Waste should be analyzed before each application cycle. Annual soil tests are
strongly encouraged so that all plant nutrients can be balanced for realistic yields of the
crop to be grown.
Several factors are important in implementing your waste utilization plan in order to
maximize the fertilizer value of the waste and to ensure that it is applied in an
environmentally safe manner. Always apply waste based on the needs of the crop to be
grown and the nutrient content of the waste. Do not apply more nitrogen than the crop
can utilize. Soil types are important as they have different infiltration rates, leaching
potentials, cation exchange capacities, and available water holding capacities.. Normally
waste shall not be applied to land eroding at greater than S tons per acre per year. With
special precautions, waste may be applied to land eroding at up to 10 tons per acre per
year. Do not apply waste on saturated soils, when it is raining, or when the surface is
frozen. Either of these conditions may result in runoff to surface waters which is not
allowed under DEM regulations. Wind conditions should also be considered to avoid drift
and downwind odor problems. To maximize the value of nutrients for crop production
and to reduce the potential for pollution, the waste should be applied to a growing crop or
applied to bare ground not more than 30 days prior to planting. Injecting the waste or
disldng will conserve nutrients and reduce odor problems.
The estimated acres needed to apply the animal waste is based on typical nutrient content
for this type of facility. Acreage requirements should be based on the waste analysis
report from your waste management facility. Attached you will find information on
proper sampling techniques, preparation, and transfer of waste samples to the lab for
analysis.
This waste utilization plan, if carried out, meets the requirements for compliance with 15A
NCAC 21-0217 adopted by the Environmental Management Commission.

' �s�x` '?';:s; ,r;.t .�: % <.r�! r .z.5.:r x,a:;;;: �xc;; zza::;;�;:.,.�: z�.a�.��z�;,'•�..^^'ra..:.;:s,,..c#i
Amount of Waste &oduced er YeataaIlons,_ft3, tonna eta l
400 animal X� 1 (amt) waste/animaUyear =,�tqO amt.) waste/year.
4W8unt of Ptvailable Nitrogen (P-74Poduced Per Year
�.
` a�animals XL• lbs. PAN/anizaallyear �6Qbs. PAN/year. (PAN from N. C. Tech.
Guide Std. 533) %fit �► 5� r
19, co,?9 *rPA
Applying the above amount of waste is a big job. You should plan time and have
' appropriate equipment to apply the, waste in a timely manner.
The following acreage will be needed for waste application based on the crop to be grown
and surface application:
Table 1: ACRES OWNED BY PRODUCER
Tract Field Soil Crop Lbs. N Acres Lbs. N Month of
# No. Tvoe Per Ac. * Utilized Anolication
���T
•tli"a��
w i��
' r
Total M,h _I x•4150 l
* This N is from anin d! waste only. �f nutrients from other sources such as commercial
fertilizer are applied, they must be accounted for. N must be based an realisticyield
e,pectation.
NO The applicator is cautioned that P and X may he over applied while meeting the N
requirements Beginning in 1996 the Coastal Zone Management Act will require farmers in
some eastern counties of North Carolina to have a nuhient managEment plan that addresses
all nurrientx This plan only addresses Nitrogen
2

W
Ul
• `�.--I
T
+�.eJ2w;zkww:.k...�.1. ti�'u`YG,;:;QT^ YY1Y:'`''.,:•�t}y•3;.••'S�x`jia:`,'',:.4ybd.p$.'Y,i:,^•Y+:.2'�.i.;}•:,twa.�..ti:ti�-.w}...... Y.�
ii
Table 2: ACRES WITH AGREEMENT OR LONG TERM LEASE
(Agreement with adjacent landowner must be attached)
{Required only if operator does not own
adequate land [see Required Specification 21)
Traot; Field "Soil Crop Lbs. N Acres Lbs. N Month of
• See footnote for Table J. .
Totals from above Tables
Acres Lbs. N
Utilized
Table 1 -%0,150
Table 2
Total `t a • 5 'a (>I ISO
Amount of Produced ) (0Sf 9
Surplus or e$cit
NOTE: The Waste Utilization Flan must contain provisions for periodic land
application of sludge at agronomic rates The sludge will be nutrient rich and will
require precautionary measures to prevent overapplication of nutrients or other
element
3

r, .;,;.Yt�',.ryw..;:^''•...?`.'.+iTti:�?T:v�'+"':,""iih �� �� i1:. �.�., ,�
":,^•';�<';:�:.�.ss:aiz:;,;,,f.•:::w.,....,s�;,,tr„�.<w,»,.r..,...,•..,,w:a,..,.;.,..s<��a�a.�r.•„x:zr„ak::;a:;zu:�,.�x::�",: ,,.,max. apt. �,•.:asX3;�c�.��'..,w;...a,wz;;c`A,:is.;
See attached mup.showing the fields to be used for the utilization of waste water.
Application of Waste by Irrigation
Field Soil, Type Crop Application Application
Nn_ Rate iInARA Amount an.1
THIS TABLE IS NOT NEMED IF WASTE IS NOT BE NG API'LiF,U BY MMOATION, HOWEVER A SIIvIDALR TABLE WILL
BE NEEDI) FOR DRY LrI"M OR SLURRY,
Your facility is designed forlga days of temporary storage and -the temporary storage
must be removed on the average of once every MONTHS. In no instance should
the volume of waste being stored in your structure exceed Elevation OME 1E
Call the local.Natural Resources Conservation Service (formerly Soil.Conservntion
Service) or Soil and Water Conservation District office after you receive the waste
analysis report for assistance in determining the amount per acre to apply and theproper
application rate prior to, applying the waste.
4
AH
-IS
a 3 .�o�
M.,
• ~7
,� 5
THIS TABLE IS NOT NEMED IF WASTE IS NOT BE NG API'LiF,U BY MMOATION, HOWEVER A SIIvIDALR TABLE WILL
BE NEEDI) FOR DRY LrI"M OR SLURRY,
Your facility is designed forlga days of temporary storage and -the temporary storage
must be removed on the average of once every MONTHS. In no instance should
the volume of waste being stored in your structure exceed Elevation OME 1E
Call the local.Natural Resources Conservation Service (formerly Soil.Conservntion
Service) or Soil and Water Conservation District office after you receive the waste
analysis report for assistance in determining the amount per acre to apply and theproper
application rate prior to, applying the waste.
4

R
N.:t.aa:;,z .„z.: sa �; ,iM^'?I„,.,+.,'ixY".`"".r:`^'"iii;�vw��'�,?,"•y
:�;iz, �,• w '�',«Jaz::r„x:.»:a�.�:�azkzaa»:t;:a.,.z:z;aa::,.xr'iu���a��r��:a¢tzwx,.a�asx »�,x,a,� ��;:a;:.-i4.....:.,�,
REQUIRED SPECIFICATIONS
1. Animal waste shall not reach surface waters of the state by rrmof C drift, manmade
conveyances, direct application, or direct discharge during operation or land
application. Any discharge of waste which reaches surface water is prohibited. Illegal
discharges are subject to the assessment of civil penalties of $10,004 per day by the
Division of Environmental Management for every day the discharge continues.
2. The Field Office must have documentation in the design folder that the producer either
owns or has long term access to adequate land on which to properly apply the waste.
Tithe producer does not own adequate land to properly dispose of waste, he shall
provide NRCS with a copy of a written agreement (sample enclosed) with a landowner
who is within a reasonable proximity, allowing him/her the use of the land for waste
application for the life expectancy of the production facility. It is the responsibility of
the owner of the facility to secure an update of the Waste Utilization Plan when there
is a change in the operation, increase in the number of animals, method of utilization,
or available land.
3. Animal waste shall be applied to meet, but not exceed, the Nitrogen needs for realistic
crop yields based on soil type, available moisture, historical data, climate, conditions,
and level of management, unless there are regulations that restrict the rate of
application for'other nutrients.
4. Animal waste may be applied to land that has a Resource Manageinent System (RMS)
or an Alternative Conservation System (ACS).' If an ACS is used the soil loss shall be
no greater than 10 togs per acre per year and appropriate filter strips will be used
where runoff leaves the field. These filter strips win be in addition to "Buffers"
required by DEM. [See FOTG Standard 393 - Filter Strips and Standard 390
(Interim) - Riparian Forest Buffers.]
5. Odors can be reduced by injecting the waste or disking after waste application. Waste
should not be applied when the wind is blowing.
b. When animal waste is to be applied on acres subject to flooding, it will be soil
incorporated on conventionally tilled cropland. When apphed'to conservation tilled
crops or grassland, the waste may be broadcast provided the application does not
occur ding a•season prone to flooding. (See "Weather and Climate in North
Carolina" in the Technical Reference - Environment file for guidance.)
t

r.: R } `�.w1ii' iI ` zw c, VIIIr sz 5 a
'""'0..':;Y'+..22;'.:d;.:.,:k?.�t,...:.,':Y•
REQUMD SPECIFICATIONS
(continued)
7. Liquid waste shall be applied at rates not to exceed the soil infiltration rate such that
runoff does not occur offsite or to swfaee waters and in a method which does not
cause drift from the site during application. No ponding should occur in order to
control conditions conducive to odor or flies and provide uniformity of application..
S. Animal waste shall not be applied to saturated soils, during rainfall events, or when
the surface is frozen.
9. Animal waste shall be applied on actively growing crops in such a manner that no
more than 20 to 25 percent of the leaf area is covered.
10. Waste nutrients sballnot be applied in fall or winter for spring planted crops on soils
with a high potential for leaching. Waste nutrient loading rates on these soils should
be held to a minimum and a suitable winter cover crop planted to talte,up released
nutrients., Waste shall not be applied more than 30 days prior to planting ophe crop
soil
on bare soop'
le
Animal waste shall not be applied closer than 25 feet to surface water. This distance
may be reduced for waters that are not perennial provided adequate vegetative filter
strips are present. (See Standard 393 - Filter Strips)
12. Animal waste shall not be applied closer than 100 feet to wells.
13. Animal waste Shall not be applied closer than 200 feet of dwellings other than those
owned by the landowner.
14. Waste shall be applied in a manner,not to reach other property and public right-of-
ways.
15. Animal waste shall not be discharged into surface waters, drainageways or wetlands by
a discharge or by over -spraying. Animal waste may be applied to prior converted
wetlands provided they have been approved as a land application site by a "technical
specialist". Animal waste should not be applied on grassed waterways that •discharge
directly into water courses, and only then at agronomic rates provided the application
causes no runoff or drift from the site.

i.�.��t•,::sia.a:^x'iw:::;a•' ,... � ....,.....,..,�..a�»zz.z� �::..�.w.,-z^i.%a,.:,:::ti°M;<
REQUIRED SPECIFICATIONS
(continued)
16. Domestic and industrial waste from washdown facilities, showers, toilets, sinks, etc.,
shall not be discharged into the animal waste management system.
M
17. Lagoons and other uncovered waste containment structures must maintain a maximum
operating level to provide adequate storage for a 25 -year, 24-hour storm event in
addition to the one (1) foot mandatory freeboard
18. A protective cover of appropriate vegetation will be established on all disturbed areas
(lagoon embankments, berms, pipe nuns, etc.). If needed, special vegetation shall be
provided for these areas and shall be fenced, as necessary, to protect the vegetation.
Vegetation such as trees, shrubs, and other woody species, etc. are limited to areas
where considered appropriate. Lagoon areas should be kept mowed and accessible.
Lagoon berms and structures should be inspected regularly for evidence of erosion,
leakage, or discharge.
19. If animal production at the facility is to be suspended'or terminated, the owner is
responsible for obtaining and implementing a "closure plan" which will eliminate the
possibility of an illegal discharge, pollution and erosion.
20. Waste handling structures, piping, pumps, reels, etc., should be inspected on a regular
basis to prevent breakdowns, leaks_, and spills. A regular maintenance checklist should
be kept on site.
ti
7

..;z.......,.t:^ k"•'<;;-...:er �:.i=.;irf5�:`...r .'..:'Al.'. 6. :4e`Ju "'!Y;.k}.... Y w
SSL`.•,:iS;.K§'�,#.^.i:;2::k:YtdLu§.3i:'L$A32,�'4"IT:;:::•`.;.:bY:3t2;.:`•':;:,"';k:ttY�.•`�%�a;YaJ.^;.d,�.�
WASTE iff IZATION_I'L.AN_AMEMENT
Name of Farm: jLAA& IT
G uwzer/Manager Agreement 1
I (we) understand and will follow and implement the specification and the operation and
maintenance procedures established in the approved animal waste utilization plan for the
farm named above. I (we) know that any expansion to the existing design capacity of the
waste treatment and storage system or construction, of new facilities will require a new
certification to be submitted to the Division of Environment Management (DEM) before
the new animals are stocked. I (we) also understand that there must be no discharge of
animal waste from this system to surface wasters of the state from a storm event less
severe than the 25 -year, 24-hour storm The approved plan will be filed on-site at the
farm office and at the office of the local Soil and Water Conservation District and will be
available for review by DEM upon request.
Name of Facility Owner.o�.
(Please print)
Signature: Dat -
Name of Mana r( diffe t from owner)• t10E LYf%I
2-
Signature Date: 2A 1977
Name of Technical Specialist: (Please print) rot 5
Affiliation: A�-�� �.._ ,,,�; , �.� ✓rte_
Address (Agency): tv( f [ Q tc,_ 15 c '
Signal

a ��a
' �,/
.�,
w�
��
� �
2 : :
��i

'
I
I
iNO,'11'rifiii4 it At ICV. OW1 AtWW OJ '9M
I
1
'
I
3 � ti
# p0a��•B
1
��S�t�
t
•
E�
j ���
� p
p_
M
1
4
f
i
<
a
r
A
i
3q
p
asp
1`
;r 91 It
.�
r Wt RRtTf RDAD

sweTaM • a0.'L[N[
0.,L�,
STATIC . OP NORTH CAR0f"NA R -
111 COUNTY OF SAMPSON '
.. iTARRANTY DEED
THIS DEED, made this the .3� day of _ Dfi eAAA
1994, by and -between MURPHY FARMS, INC., a North '' Carolina
Corporation] party of the first part,. and WENDELL.H.. MURPHY, JR.,
-P.O. Sox 759, Rase Hill, NC•28458, patty.of �he'second part, f'
+ 'WITNESSETH • `
THAT said party of the first part, Por *and in consideration of
the Rum of TEN. DOLLARS ($10.00) and 'other good and valuable
considerations to it paid by -the' said party of the second part, the-!
rec'eip't of which is hereby acknowledged, has bargained and sold,11
And by these: presents doeg.hereby.grint,'bargain, sell and convey!'
unto the party of the second pert, and.his'heirs and assigns, that;
certain• tract or parcel, of •-land, situate, lying and being in;
Taylor'.s Bridge Township, Sampson County,.North Carolina,.and being
further described as-follows:-
SIX
s•follows: SIX RUNS'NORTH (344.64 ACRES)
Those .certain tract .'or parcels of land in '
V71,W s R-1T�wn�a', i n, 'Sampson County, -
Norlh Carolina, described as follows:,,
(a) • 19'i.93 acres,. more, or .less, composed of
two contiguous' tracts known as *A.J. JOHNSON. .
TRACT" Containing 173.05 acres, more or less,
and , 1C. J. MERRM : TRACr*, containing 22.88
acres, more or iess,•said lands being shown
and delineated on .MAP. OF 'PROPERTY OF
INTERNATIONAL PAPER. COMPANY, eititled A.J.
JOHNSON NO. ' 4 ALM' C.J. tCRRITT TRACTS,
aurv- yVerl by W.B. Ilill., Jr., Vzy, 1955, which
• map is :duly recorded in- Map Book .3 at Page
331, Sampson C(wnt j ' Nbiic Registry, and is f
incorporated •herclu t►y roference for greater,
certainty of description and.location of said,
lands.
{b) 148.71- acres, more or. less, known as
*GEORGE MERRITr TRACT•*, said lands being, shown
and - delineated on' .MAP- OF PROPERTY OF
INTERNATIONAL PAPER COMPANY, entitled "GEORGE
MERRITT TrAr.T", surva. *d by R.P. McMeekin,
Octubsr 1956,' which '.map is dw4y recorded in
tap Aook.3 at Page. 175;, Sampson County Public
Registry, and is .4ncorporAted herein by
reference for greatbr certainty of description
and location of said ` ands.
The .above lands being' known - as *SI:; RUNS
NORTH° and said lands are conveyed subject to
IP, TII-3ERLANiSS OPERATING COMPANY,. LTD thinning ,
contract: .NC SIS 82-4002.

Q
TO HAVE AND TO HOLD the.aforesaid tract or parcel of land and
all privilege' and.appurtenances thereunto belonging to him. the
party of the second part, and his heirs and assigns, in fee simple
forever, ;
AND said party of the First part covenants that'it is seized
of said premises in fee simple; that the same are free and.clear
from any and all encumbrances, that it'does hereby warrant and will'
forever defend the titie to the same against the lawful claims of
all persons whomsoever.'
I24 WITNESS WHEREOF, 'the .'said. party of the first part has
caused this instrument to be signed in its corporate name by its
duly author. izgd officers and its seal to be hereunto affixed by
authority of its 86a'rd.cif Directors, this the n
day of t �E�►:,•�f12 ,. , 1994,
MURPHY FARMS, INC'.
f SEAL
BY: (SEAL)
PRESIDENT"
U; '
01,
eel
STATE OF,NORTH CAROLINA
COUM OF.DUPLIN
Z, _ t_XtE•_ /"71 /� , • notary. Public of the State
and County aforesaid, certify that
,personally •came before me.this day and acknowledged that —he.IS
the Secretary of MURPHY FARMS, INC., &•North Carolina
corporation, and that by'authority duly given and'as the act of the
corporation, the foregoing instrument was signed in. its name by its
President,' sealed with its corporate seal and attested by
as its Secretary.
...•,...,,, Witness my hand and notarial seal, this the �'-- day
'•�'� 1994.
lee 0
•* r U
•o G� ' NOTARY PUBLIC
Ll LE •�
My.• j*ission Expires:

.
STATE OF NORTH CAROLINA'
`
COUNTY of SAMPSON
The foregoing
certificate,of :
a Notary Public of Duplin
County, North Carolina, is certified
to be correct. This instrument
was presented for,registration
this day'and hour'and duly,
recorded in the office of the 1
Register of Deeds of Sampson Ccurkty, North Carolina, in Book
page
. This '] LLQ+`. day
of'. ] 9 -1J , at
o'clock. m.
i 1
$Y:.. -.r i
Register of Deeds
•.Dejputy/ Register of Deeds
Recorded and verifLed I
, 1
•8410SON COUNTr 91-84+98
UATF OF
NpapuNA
_ Real Estate
Gad i Excise Tax

c
July 10, 1997
FARMS
Mr. Ed Buchan
NC Div. of Water Quality/Fayetteville Region
Wachovia Bldg., Ste. 714
Fayetteville, NC 28301-5043
FAX [phone]
Dear Mr. Buchan,
P.O. Box 309 • Magnolia, N.C. 28453
X x gx4X7
[phone]
RC�VLF-i- 0
- in1. 2 5 1997
FAY, --'r kid L' E
RSG. OFF V
After meeting you at our Mag 4 Sow Farm around 2pm this afternoon, 1 immediately
inspected the area where you indicated there was run-off from a spray field into
a stream.
My inspection revealed some ponding at the bottom of the field but I could find no
evidence of any run-off into the stream. Some effluent had crested the berm we
constructed to prevent run-off from leaving the field and had proceeded toward the stream
under a pile of stumps but did not reach the stream.
After my inspection, 1 contacted Jeff Turner and Garth Boyd at Murphy Family Farms
and we all proceeded to inspect the area at approximately 3pm. We took pictures
and collected water samples upstream and down from the ponded area. We have
taken the samples to Raleigh and expect to have the results tomorrow. We will
forward these to you upon our receipt.
Additionally, our records show that this irrigation event was 2 hours in duration over
a 300'x 300' field or a .5 inch application rate. This was the first time this field had
been sprayed and it had recently been planted.
I have attached copies of the pictures for your review. Please call if you have any questions.
Sin rely Yours,
Bruce Evans
Murphy Family Farms Land & Nutrient Management

P.Q. Box 309 Magnolia, N.C. 28453
(9�0� 9 fi4M
FARMS ) 28
9
July 24, 9997
Mr. Kerr T. Stevens � ^ r-- ---
NC Div. of Water Quality/Fayetteville Region
Wachovia Bldg., Ste, 714
Fayetteville, NC 28301-5043 1991
FAX [phone]
Dear Mr. Stevens,
This letter is in response to your letter of July 21, 1997 informing us of your consideration
of sending a recommendation for enforcement action to the Director of the Division of
Water Quality. We believe there are several mitigating factors which make such an action
unnecessary.
In recognition of the slope of this field we had constructed a berm of 6 -12" at the base of
the slope to prevent any discharge from the field. This field had been tilled and planted
within a week of the event on July 10 and this was our first irrigation of this held. Our operator
erroneously assumed that this newly tilled field, coupled with the .5 inch application he was
administering; presented no discharge threat. We now know that this field has a hard soil
layer just below the subsoil and our earlier tilling helped set the stage for this discharge by
making this field more susceptible to erosion.
Our policy is for our operators to inspect fields at start-up, mid -point and shutdown of any
irrigation event. This unfortunately was not done in this instance as our operator mistakenly
believed there was no threat. We have addresed this by directing our operators that all fields
will receive all inspections during every irrigation event.
Within minutes of receiving the call from Ed Buchan, I was at the site inspecting the field and
shortly after my initial review had several other representatives on site attempting to ascertain
what had happened. I have enclosed a copy of the letter I sent Ed Buchan and have included
a copy of the results from the water samples we took.
We have removed the field from which the discharge took place from our Nutrient Utilization
Plan and will not irrigate this field any more.
This incident has had a profound effect on our entire operation. I assure you that we are
committed to operating in a manner consistent with total compliance of all regulations. We
realize that our continued operation is dependent on this. We feel that, while we are not
perfect, we have taken extra efforts and have shown that we are trying to do the right thing.
Sincerely 2rs,
Bruce Evans
Murphy Family Farms Land & Nutrient Management

JUL-10-97 05:26 Pm MURPHY FAMILY FARMS
7jo-97 rnARi4 -
.VW be.44wk. C"'Aow^
910269645M
AA tq 17 —jo -5 '1 S. a IV Px
Mal.'"aAmid,
.1.4 R *04 I A b
7-10 -q7 /A4
�%,
OIL."
4110
,77- 10 7
A y 414(aL frvrk w U40
Y) of a-- b e,4&,- & JA Pet
44 -
P.02

_t1ites4 Iris.
3909 Beryl Road, Ralellgla, NC 27607
pL: [phone] fa= [phone]
NL`NNYC!9M,7I NCDWc&rt03MI
Report Results To:
Company: i2P M . + XA4S .
Address:
DOSE_ _91L4, AJC—
Attn:
JLAttn: GPrtTrf '60yD -_
Phone: Fax:
Sampled by (signature):
# � , i
7� z ,1
Chain of Gtntody
Bill To:
R(:G. 0f
Tritest W -OI# W 7 _ I/ C Ct --
Project Reference:
Project Number:
Purchase Order #:
0 Standard Report Delivery
❑ Rush Report Delivery Wsurcharge)
RAM woke, w s1ea No wbr rvuvr 6r an Ihaaey
Requested Due Date:
rc:: :Y4
IB (]escr)ptio�
�-
+rY1'i�Yt
`f —
:t•
Stait'[)ate,
,_
Q '� � End [)aloe "?1;
K-
MaMx�
._*,. r s+r. R d _ i'-M-ilY� g,'-fi'.�", • 4• '�
'Analyses fZeque�std: ,' F . r
.1•'. r }"'t
"
Tri;
sampirs
l�}Kr.�!:1`r . ..aY r? N�'•� .'Y. .'24
.1.� d
rt:
Tme'
: - J� .
„
'`�`
.., - H av_lx 14'+rn.,�• -:Y.k e'er-v"Y r.."+^ih �{..i:
- a `i.:.
Mr6 SPMYFI &-b
111,01q Z
ccPs-TRE��t
s�sr
Stni
K� AW3 UZ-1
Mkd SP,KA-YFI CLD
7//O/q7
.t4 ..
Receipt Conditions (Lab Use Onty):
by( )
R (sg�s�
�ar��e
rmee�
E�Lic4.{,
! f �O �]
�7 p
17 4t2'C 0TemP= •C
Res. Chlorine UAbsent ❑Present ❑nla
R by (sprwkwe)
Rked by (sq -ft-)
Dale
Time
Acid preserv. <? ©Yes ❑No ❑rwa
Rokup ad by (swwdLee)
Removed by (siprW")
Dift
T

TRITEST, INC.
3909 Beryl Road
Raleigh, NC 27607
Telephone: [phone]
Fax: [phone]
NC/WW Cert.#: 067
L a b o rat o r y Report
--- Prepared for ---
GARTH BOYD
Murphy Farms
P.O. Box 759
Hwy 117 S.
Rose Hill, NC 28458
Project ID: 01
Project Info: SURFACE WATER
RECEIVED
,101. 2 5 1997
TEV V. LLL:
REG. 0fr i --Z :.
Page 1 of 1
Report Date: 7/18/97
Date Received: 7/10/97
Work Order #: 9707-11002
Cust. Code: MU2111
Cust. P.O.#(:
Vo. Sample ID
Date Sampled
Time Sampled Matrix
Condition
1 MAG 4 SPRAYFIELD UPSTRM 7/10/1997
15:15 SW
Condition
4:t2°C
MAG 4
SPRAYFIELD
DNSTRM 7/10/1.997
15:15
Date
Test Performed
Method
Results
Tech
Analyzed Qual
Total Kjeldahl Nitr./Water
EPA 351.X
0.94 mg/L
ELC
7/18/97
Ammonia in Water
EPA 350.X
a0.02 mg/L
ELC
7/14/97
Fecal Coliforms/MF
SM 9222D
510 CFU/100mL
KEB
7/14/97
No.
Sample
ID
Date Sampled
Time Sampled
Matrix
Condition
'2
MAG 4
SPRAYFIELD
DNSTRM 7/10/1.997
15:15
SW
4t2°C
r
Report certifi d by:
for Tritest, Inc.
Date
Test Performed
Method
Results
Tech
Analyzed Qual
Total Kjeldahl Nitr./Water
EPA 351.X
2.30 mg/L
ELC
7/18/97
Ammonia in Water
EPA 350.X
c0.02 mg/L
ELC
7/14/97
Fecal Coliforms/MF
SM 9222D
190 CFU/100mL
KEB
7/14/97
r
Report certifi d by:
for Tritest, Inc.

State of North Carolina
Department of Environment,
Health and Natural Resources •
Fayetteville Regional Office
AAWOM% WIV
James B. Hunt, Jr., Governor p E H N R
Jonathan B, Howes, Secretary
DIVISION OF WATER QUALITY
July 21, 1997
Mr. James Sauls Jr.
DM Farms Mag4 Sow Farm
P O Box 1076
Rose Hill, NC 28458
SUBJECT: Notice of Violation
Administrative Code 15A NCAC 2H.0217
DM Farms Mag4 Sow Farm
Registration No. 82-77
Sampson County
Dear Mr. Sauls,
You are hereby notified that, having been deemed permitted to have a
nondischarge permit for the subject animal waste disposal system pursuant, to 15A
NCAC 211 .0217, you have been found to be in violation of your 2H.0217 permit based
on the following.
During an inspection of the subject farm on July 10, 1997 staff of the Division of
Water Quality Central Office and the Fayetteville Regional Office observed a discharge
of waste. The discharge was traced from a field utilized for land application of swine
waste to an Unnamed Tributary of Six -Runs Creek, Class C Sw Waters. The above
inspection was prompted by staff observing what appeared to be waste in the tributary
from SR 1944.
The inspection revealed that waste had been applied to the field in a manner that
resulted in the discharge. Based on information obtained from farm staff at the time of
the inspection, 0.5 inches of wastewater had been applied to the field.
A discharge of waste. as noted above is a violation of 15A NCAC 2H .0217,
"Permitting By Regulation" that states, in part,
Wachovia Building, Suite 714, Fayetteville � FAX [phone]
04
North Carolina 28301-53 N%q C An Equal Opportunity Affirmative Action Employer
Voice 910-486-1541 P5n recycled/ 10% post -consumer paper

Page 2
Mr. Sauls
7/21/97
(a) The following nondischule facilities are deemed to be permitted pursuant to
G.S. 143-215. 1 (d) and it shall not be necessary for the Division to issue
individual permit for construction or operation of the following facilities:
(1) Animal waste management systems for which waste does not reach the
surface waters by runoff, drift, direct application or direct discharge
during operation or land application and which meet the following criteria:
1n addition to violating 15A NCAC 2H.0217, you are also considered to be in
violation of N C G S 143-215.1(a), which states in part that:.
"No person shall do. any of the following things or carry out any of the following
Activities until or unless such person shall have applied for and shall received
from the Commission a permit therefor and shall complied with such conditions,
if any, as are prescribed by such permit :
(1) Make any outlets into the waters of the State
Also, the purpose of this letter is to inform you that;
(1) All unpermitted discharges of waste from your facility must cease
immediately,
(2) That all actions necessary to prevent further discharges of waste from this
facility must be initiated immediately,
(3) That further correspondence addressing this issue can be expected.
As you already know this is the second documented discharge of waste from the
"Mag 4 Sow Farm' into waters of the State, the first of which was documented on
November 25, 1996. As a result of that documented violation, enforcement actions were
recommended as well as a modification of the Waste Utilization Plan (Plan) for the
farm to address waste runoff.
A review of the most recent version of the Plan for the farm reveals that the
section entitled "Required Specifications" states in part,
(1) Animal waste shall not reach surface waters of the state by runoff, drift,
manmade conveyances, direct application, or direct discharge during operation
or hand appUwdo e. Any discharge of waste which reaches surface water is
prohibited. Illegal discharges are subject to the assessment.of civil penalties of
$10,000 per day by the Division of Environmental Management for every day
the discharge continues.

Page 3
Mr. Sauls
7121197
It is the opinion of this office that the discharge of waste as previously noted, is
also a violation of this portion of your Plan.
(7) Liquid waste shall be applied at rates not to exceed the soil infiltration rate
such that runoff does not occur offsite or to surface waters and in a method
which does not cause drift from the site during application...
It is the opinion of this office that the discharge of waste as previously noted, is
also a violation of this portion of your Plan.
The Waste Utilization Plan Agreement signed by the farm owner, manager,
technical specialist and corporate affiliate reveals that those persons had sufficient
knowledge of the terms and conditions of the Plan to have taken the necessary action to
prevent this second documented release of waste into the waters of the state.
By allowing waste to again be discharged to the waters of the State, we have no
choice but to ask that you again revise your Waste Utilization Plan to this time insure
that further discharges of waste do not occur from this farm. We also ask that you
evaluate the sloped portions of field #2 and determine if the continued use of these
areas is prudent in light of the history of discharges and steep grade of these sections.
Your evaluation and revision of the Plan should be submitted to this office on or
before September 24, 1997. It is strongly recommended that should the heavily sloped
portions of field # 2 be utilized during the review period and prior to approval of your
revised Plan by the Division, that farm staff be stationed at the field during each waste
application event to prevent waste from being discharged to the waters of the State.
Failure to comply with the above conditions may result in the facility losing it's
deemed permitted status and being required to obtain an individual nondischarge permit
for the facility. In addition, please he aware that this notice does not prevent the
Division of Water Quality from taking enforcement actions for this or any past or future
violations and the Division of Water Quality has the authority to assess a civil penalty
of not more than $10,000.00 per day per violation.
As requested by Dr. Garth Boyd, please find enclosed a copy of the lab results
from samples taken at the site : on July 10, 1997 and copies of a few photographs taken
at the site during the investigation.

f
Page 4
Mr. Sauls
7121197
If you have any questions concerning this matter, please do not hesitate to
contact either myself or Mr. Ed Buchan, Environmental Engineer, at [phone].
Sincerely;
Kerr T. Stevens
Regional Supervisor
cc: Sue Homewood- Compliance Group
Wilson Spencer - Sampson Co. NRCS
Audrey Oxendine - DSWC Fayetteville Office
Mike Lewandowski - Permits & Engineering Group
Central Files - Raleigh
Dr. Garth Boyd - Murphy Farms, Inc.
Enclosure

09-14-31 11:30 MICROBAC ENVIRON LABORATORY 359 P02
EL
4•
MICRO SAC ENVIRONMENTAL LABORATORY, INC. e
817 Castle Hayne St., Miyoue-villi:. North Carolina 29303
Phone (9I D) 864-1920 - Fax (91 I)) 864-8774
NC Leh ID (ill - N(' 1 uh li)07714 - tit.' I.ah II) If 9)()2(17 - USDA Lab 10 # 3787
CLIENT:"Iir-#A/ ..^ I)A'n-. RI-.CEIVED; R`-612- 7 -SAMPLE T)A•il1 ;R J
ADDRESS: _. -- sAMP'LED BY: _PICKED UP BY:
SAMPLECODF: .7r
(.'*ONTA(-'T PERSON: trb_iSdG-Ad- iL1:i 1:ItI NC'1�:r
SAMPLE I.D. 1.049�-�,A'Wd..l y3A)03JWOKKALT1110RIZ DAY:
31 'f
Aaslyala I Tcct>/(].itc I 1 _.....�.. 2 I 4 -
Ammonia as N (mWL) _ I
Ch to gins (mdL)
Feeat Coiilown(per 100 ml
Nltruto m
Nitraes 8 Nitrile (mg j)
Oil & Careams (MAI
Phenol _
,Phoaphorus (m )-
Solids, Sus ndad
_Solids. Total (mg&) _ -- - --
Total Kjaleahl Nitro2on (rngn.j
Aluminum
Arsaftic fpm) —
BoAum
Cadmium m
Chromium, Total (ppm) -- --_
Coppor (Ppm) _ _ Cyanide(ppm) _.. .
Iran _
Load (ppm) _... ....,_ _ _ .—.......
Mar Moe
Nickel (Ppm)
_ Silver
Sodium
Zinc (mm)
PAGI: _L (')1--_

Microbac Laboratories, Inc.
FAYETTEVILLE DIVISION
017 CASTLU "YNR STaS2T
FAYETTEVILLE, NC 28303
[phone] / [phone] (FAX)
AIR • FUEL WATER * FOOD •
CERTIFICATE OF ANALYSIS
NC #11
NC 437714
USDA #3787
WASTES
CERT 019933
CLIENT: NC DEHNR DATE REC D: 07/10/97 SAMPLED: 07/10/97
ADDRESS: Wachovia Building, Suite 714 SAMPLED BY: E. Buchan
Fayetteville, NC 28301 DELIVERED BY: E. Buchan
CONTACT PERSON: Mr. Ed Buchan SAMPLE CODE: Stream, grab
ACCOUNT NUMBER: #KNO03 REFERENCE: MAG #4
SAMPLE ID: 1. Upstream of field ditch - ID #97WU73889
2. Downstream of field ditch - ID #97WD73890
3. DATA REVIEWED BY:
4. DATE REPORTED: 07/15/97
ANALYSIS banoD 1 2 3 4
ttttt+t+titin#tttitttit+#+#++t++tttttitttttttttttttttt}++tttttttttttttt#tt+ttit+tt#t#tits
COLIFORM, FECAL (per 100 ml) SM18 9222D 541 61261
COMMENTS: < - Less than
> - Greater than
PAGE 1 OF 1
JUL 2 t 19,07
NFV!l �..
The data and other tnlormatlon contained On this, and other accompanying documents, represent only the sample(s) analyzed and is M E M B E R
rendered upon the condition that it is not to be reproduced wholly or in part for advertising or other purposes without written approval
from the laboratory.`;' 'sl
USDA -EPA -NIOSH Testing Food Sanitation Consulting Chemical and Microbiological Analyses and Research �''�

Microbac Laboratories, Inc.
FAYETTEVILLE DIVISION NC #11
817 CASTLE RAYNE STREET NC #37714
FAYETTEVILLE, NC 28303 USDA #3787
[phone] / [phone] (FAX)
AIR • FUEL WATER • FOOD • WASTES
CERTIFICATE OF ANALYSIS
CLIENT: NC DEHNR
ADDRESS: Wachovia Building, Suite 714
Fayetteville, NC 28381
CONTACT PERSON: Mr. Ed Buchan
ACCOUNT NUMBER: #KN003
SAMPLE ID: 1. Downstream * - ID #97WD73891
2. Upstream ** - ID #97WU73892
3.
4.
CERT #19934
DATE REC*D: 07/10/97 SAMPLED: 07/10/97
SAMPLED BY: E. Buchan
DELIVERED BY: E. Buchan
SAMPLE CODE: Stream, grab
REFERENCE: MAG #4
DATA REVIEWED BY:
DATE REPORTED: 07/15/97
ANALYSIS b9=0D 1 2 3 4
COLIFORM, FECAL (per 100 ml) SM18 9222D 154545 400
COMMENTS: * Downstream of confluene point w/UT to Six Runs Creek
++ Upstream of confluene point w/UT to Six Runs Creek
< - Less than
> - Greater than
RECF- t�
JUL 2 1 1997
PAGE 1 OF 1
The data and other Information conlained on This, and other accompanying documents, represent only the sampfe(s) analyzed and is
rendered upon the condition that if is not to be reproduced wholly or in pan for advenising or other purposes without written approval
from the laboratory.
USDA -EPA -NIOSH Testing Food Sanitation Consu=ting Chemical and Microbiologicaf Analyses and Research
MEMBER

I
f
�1 .` � ��� � 1Y �i�� � ,� �� •��;� �1� `^y ° ���~Ir..� „i,.l... 1....+ . I„ M • f •� l " �
gam.. -.g � ��' �,. :t �.y'j4��r ¢• ,� __ „ :»•,� �,:. � s�. i7y ��6F "tl'.' 1%`a. t�I r '�'•."' � .5 � �.
�J ,� �'`"'. ^�.r �•,',-� � jf _• `� T'� � ' � �1' �'?,1�,e5;„;�.� � •�,�t-`�Fy�� Y�ati •f�/ � '4.�+`
K � y
��" •--�,t �� �` � T �t t°:� y,�F LfiA [�A +`�S i Errf �_ {��ti�9 y i'i
C' ``} !t•.;jr A r'' ` Hltt ! 1% I�ti��ij Y �s ' 1fil�'3G
I�•t tl ej 4t4�5t'
3 , � _ �` � -k# ' .'•. � ^�V1Y.+4 ' ^� r pg - ��,r ; 1'� �a-r�� '..a rAP s +atl i •i J K 9
�... f� r ; / 31 5�� _ c �� :1i ;iy� �'.f�S if + Wil! •{ • �f ,,� °� v+ j r
'�'' • �`� ' � ��"",""'"� ����, ,�)1 �v'i �; �,, �1�i,�+�'f irr ,����yi 4ytj�y�t����;�:.�''�y, i 'fir'
� y •ti `.W""r,..."+�,:-�� � °�r.., �� ,�.1 a ¢t;%�'�5,1 r!i f `�-f � y�L 'yt`3,.�JM� ��.
'fit
fix. � �^ 'fir -'7 � ���• [� " �j °�!��;Ylll h� ? � � 1 `I�� f .+ /
�Y.f� � 1 � � � � �iHr,t � +`',{ 1 i. J t •`i'r(;�' y h.
��tti: '`+r ''!t-�� fF,�'"""`r-� , r• 1Wc / �' -e' It'� •r- y;.f ,'�,• '
'" � �",�`•- � r+. � yr: t `;� 1�...� ` �„ - t. ni' $ f r :s f' ��'F 1 /`
'n.i �,"�� 1 D. t;�-. J.�iir�",I��., i �V"�'!��l+s�i-`,� � 1 r� 7+ r�"- i ,}.y � f Z�7 A�F'1 � fi k «:-•�� '��5�' {�p�y^a y� ., f4. �' � If
1�'-�� v w �r fi��.',,,,�?s �•,�ji �� `9,�', ...�c•t �i�.. ��y�n )e-�. V ��I.ri�x��A lst�� 't;�7y'j� %'� # t..�l
�.�}'. t':. ✓•ti'"+'�i': :rf1 r�f�<.�� I' ,i ' s. ,•.�'�b^I (_. _..�Ar.. !.���i+[n�., .•41' ne.
� / �- a,�r��,1'•.•b'�a•^;�, �'.' i° •`��?'i ��. -'""�h t � i �,fr,
.. „� -`fir cF` r. / xr��. ''•� �fj ��q,�""-t•���/''±tom �` i. �s�l �..._f,,,,r��, 11+ 1
+ - 1•�',,w �� , ,
,ft�iL fit• �y r'�a � .
M � � I" .Et i/ 1 y �•. .moi r + ,• 1 iV1

'•.. �, 'State of North Carolina
Department of Environment,
Health 'and Natural Resources
Division.of Water Quality
James B:,.Hunt, Jr., Governor
Jonathan B. Howes, Secretary
A. Preston Howard, Jr., P.E., Director
June -6, 1997
CERTIFIEDMAIL
RETURN_RECEIPT REQUESTED
James Sauls Jr.
DM Farms Mag 4 Sow Farm
PO Box 1076
Rose Hill, NC 28458
Dear Mr. Sauls:-
�EHN1=?L
RECEIVED
,AUL 1 61997
FAYETTEVILLE
REG.OiM:
SUBJECT: Assessment of Civil
Penalties for Violation(s) of
NCAC 2H .0217.
Farm* 82-77
Sampson County.
File No. DD 97-002
This letter transmits notice of a civil penalty assessed against DM Farms in the amount of
$2,539.65 including $539.65 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 pursuant to N.C.G.S: 143-215.6A(h). Any
continuing violation(s) may the subject of a new enforcement action, including an additional
penalty.
Within thirty days of receipt of this notice, you must do one of the following:
1. Submit payment of the penalty:
Payment should be made directly to the order of the Department of
Environment, Health, and Natural Resources (do not include waiver
form.). Payment of the penalty will not foreclose further enforcement
action for any continuing or new-violation(s).
Please submit payment to the attention of:
Mr. Steve W. Tedder
Water Quality Section Chief
Division of Water Quality
P.O. Box 29535
Raleigh, North Carolina 27626-0535
KIM
P.O. Box 29535, Raleigh, North Carolina 27626-0535 Telephone [phone] FAX [phone]
An Equal Opportunity Affirmative Action Employer 50% recycled/ 10% post -consumer paper

2. Submit a written request for remission or mitigation including a '
detailed ,justification for such request:
A request for remission or mitigation is limited to consideration of the
reasonableness of the amount of the penalty and is not the proper procedure
for contesting the accuracy of any of the statements contained in the
assessment letter. Because a remission request forecloses the option of an
administrative hearing, such a request must be accompanied by a waiver of
your right to an administrative hearing and a stipulation that there are no
factual or legal issues in dispute. You must execute and return to this office
the attached waiver and stipulation form and a detailed statement which you
believe establishes whether:
(a) one or more of the civil penalty assessment factors in G.S. 143B -
282.1(b) were wrongfully 4pplied to the detriment of the petitioner;
(b) the violator promptly abated continuing environmental damage
resulting from the violation;
(c) the violation was inadvertent or a result of an accident;
(d) the violator had been assessed civil penalties for any previous
violations;
(e) payment of the civil penalty will prevent payment for the remaining
necessary remedial actions.
Please submit this information to the attention of:
Mr: Steve W. Tedder.
Water Quality Section Chief/DWQ
P.O. Box 29535
Raleigh, North Carolina 27626-0535
K'
3. Submit a written request for an administrative hearing:
If you wish to contest any portion of the civil penalty assessment, you must
request an administrative hearing. This request must be in the form of a
written petition to the Office of Administrative Hearings and must conform
to Chapter 150B of the North Carolina General Statutes. You must:
File your original petition with the:.
Office of Administrative Hearings
P.O. Drawer 27447
Raleigh, North Carolina 27611-7447
and
Mail or hand -deliver a Copy 'of the petition to:
Mr. Richard Whisnant
Office of General Counsel _
NCDEHNR
Post Office Box 27687
Raleigh, NC 27611

Failure to exercise one of the options above within th_,irty days, as evidenced by a
date stamp (not a postmark) indicating when we received your response, will result in this
matter being referred to the Attorney General's Office with a request to initiate a civil action
to collect the penalty. Please be advised that additional assessments may be levied for
future violations which occur after the review period of this assessment.
If you have any questions, please contact Mr. Shannon Langley at [phone],
extension 581.
Sincerely,
A. Preston Howard, Jr., P.E.
ATTACHMENTS
cc: Fayetteville Regional Supervisor w/ attachments
Compliance/Enforcement File w/ attachments
Central Files w/ attachments .
Public Information Officer w/attachments

STATE OF NORTH CAROLINA ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT
COMMISSION
COUNTY OF
IN THE MATTER OF ASSESSMENT ) WAIVER OF RIGHT TO AN
OF CIVIL PENALTIES AGAINST ) ADMINISTRATIVE HEARING AND
PERMIT NO. ) STIPULATION OF FACTS
FILE 'NO.
Having been assessed civil penalties totalling for
-iolation(s) as set forth in the assessment document of the Dire^.tor of the Division of Water Quality
dated, , the undersigned, desiring to seek remission of the civil
penalties, does hereby waive the right to an administrative hearing in the above -stated matter and does
stipulate that the facts are as alleged in the assessment document.
This the day of , 19•_•...
SIGNATURE
001Q%:&*I
TELEPHONE

STATE OF NORTH CAROLINA
COUNTY OF SAMPSON
IN THE MATTER OF
DM FARMS
MAGNOLIA 4 FARM
FOR VIOLATIONS OF PERMIT
15A NCAC 2H.0217
NORTH CAROLINA
ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT COMMISSION
File No. DD 97-002
FINDINGS AND DECISION
AND ASSESSMENT OF
CIVIL. PENALTIES
Acting pursuant to North Carolina General Statute (G.S.) 143-215.6A, I, A. Preston
Howard, Jr., P.E.., Director of the Division of Water Quality (DWQ), make the following:
II.
FINDINGS OF FACT:
A. DM Farms owns and operates a concentrated animal feeding operation in Sampson
County known as the Magnolia 4 Sow Farm.
B .. DM Farms / The Magnolia 4 Sow Farm was deemed permitted as a nondischarge
facility on April 1, 1995; in accordance.with 15A NCAC 2H.0217.
C. On November 25, 1996, DWQ staff observed a discharge of wastewater from the
aforementioned swine facility's spray fields to an unnamed. tributary to Six -Runs
Creek, which are Class C -SW waters of the State within the Cape Fear River Basin.
D. DM Farms had no valid permit for the above described activity.
E. The cost to the State of the enforcement procedures in this matter totaled $539.65.
Based upon the above Findings of Fact, I make the following:
CONCLUSIONS OF LAW:
A. DM Farms is a "person" within the meaning of G.S. 143-215.6A pursuant to G.S.
143-212(4).
B . A permit for this animal waste management system is required in accordance with 15A
NCAC 2H .0217 and G.S. 143-215.1.
C. The unnamed tributary to Six -Runs Creek constitutes waters of the State within the
meaning of G.S. 143-215.1 pursuant to .G.S. 143-212(6).
D. The above-cited discharge is a violation of the nondischarge permit.
E. DM Farms may be assessed civil penalties in this matter pursuant to G.S. 143-
215.6A(a)(2), which provides that a civil penaity-of not more than ten thousand
dollars ($10,000.00) per violation may be assessed against a person for failing to act

•r 1
in accordance with the terms, conditions or requirement of a permit required by G.S.
143-215.1.
F. The State's enforcement costs in this matter may be assessed against DM Farms
pursuant to G.S. 143-215.3(a)(9) and G.S. 143B -282.1(b)(8).
G. The Director, Division of Water Quality, pursuant to delegation provided for by G.S.
143-215.6A(h), has the authority to assess civil penalties in this matter.
Based upon the above Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law, I make the following:
III. DECISION.-
Accordingly,
ECISION:
Accordingly, DM Farms is hereby assessed a civil penalty of:
$ rrj opo for discharging waste to the waters of the State in violation of
15A NCAC 2H.0217.
$ TOTAL CIVIL PENALTY, which is ao percent of the
maximum penalty authorized by G.S. 143-215.6A.
$ 539.65 Enforcement costs
$ ,2S39. &S 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. 14313-282.1(b), which are:
(1) The degree and extent of harm to the natural resources of the State, to the public
health, or to private property resulting from the violation;
(2) The duration and gravity of the violation;
(3) The effect on ground or surface water quantity or quality or on air quality;
(4) The cost of rectifying the damage;
(5) The amount of money saved by noncompliance;
(6) ' Whether the violation was committed willfully or intentionally;
(7) The prior record of the violator in complying or failing to comply with programs over
which the Environmental Management Commission has regulatory authority; and
(8) The cost to the State of the enforcement procedures.
Af
(Date) Preston Howard, Jr., P.E., Director
"Division of Water Quality

09-14-99 11:20 MICROBAC ENVIRON LABORATORY 050 P02
EL
16MI RROBAC ENVIRONMENTAL LABORATORY, INC. {
817 Castle Hayne St., Fayette. i11c. North Carolina 28303
Phone [phone] - Fax [phone]
NC Lab Ill 1111 - NC. Lab TM37714 - U 1_ah 11) 11 990267 - USDA Lab ID #1 37117
c:I.¢.111`: � -- I)A'11: RI;[.'1 IVSD: SAMPLE DATE.: 4
ADDRFSS: SAM14.){I) RY: t&,a ., —_PICKFD IJP DY: r Lte...r
SAMhl.liCODF: S GA Al 6
(A NTACTPERSON: �b LI✓c Awe✓ IU:I 7:Ks?NC:1?;
SAMPLE I.D. 1. �T '"' �`� �'� �r wOKK AU1110RV n BY:
ZI wr r�^ 0 W D } 7 X10 .
Ammonia as N (rnplL)
= Chlorine _(mdL)
COD [mglL) _
eacai'Coli(orm (Der 100 ml), I
Nitrate d Midte m I_ I- _. .
Phos horue m
Solids, Total m
Total Kjefdahl NitrogenLmg&)
Aluminum (ppm)
Arsenic (ppm? _
chromium Total m
Cyanide (ppm)
Iron
_Lead (RM) �. r......� _�
Nickel (ppm)
Silver (oam)
Zinc pr^) __.. I-
..
.

JUL-10-97 05:28 PM MURPHY FAMILY FARMS 9102896455 P.01
4
DAX.
9
+ P.O. Box 309 Magnolia, 1
xA"x26iPW7 1VE®
FARMS(910) 289-6439
1 U L I 11991
FAYETTEVILLE
,July 10, 1997 RECE1
REG. OFFICE
VED
Mr, Ed Buchan ""t 1111111 1997
NC Div. of Water Quaigy/Fayettoville Reglon
Wachovia Bldg., Ste. 714 FAYEn'EVILLE
Fayetteville, NC 28301-5043 REG. OFFICE
FAX [phone]
Dear Mr. Buchan,
After meeting you at our Mag 4 Sow Farm around 2pm this afternoon, I immediately
inspected the area where you indicated there was run-off from a spray field into
a stream.
My inspection revealed some ponding at the bottom of the field but I could find no
evidence of any run-off into the stream. Some effluent had crested the berm we
constructed to prevent run-off from leaving the field and had proceeded toward the stream
under a pile of stumps but did not reach the stream.
After my inspection, I contacted Jeff Turner and Garth Boyd at Murphy Family Farms
and we all proceeded to inspect the area at approximately Spm. We took pictures
and collected water samples upstream and down from the ponded area, We have
taken the samples to Raleigh and expect to have the results tomorrow. We will
forward these to you upon our receipt.
Additionally, our records show that this Irrigation event was 2 hours in duration over
a 300'x 300' field or a .5 inch application rate. This was the first time this field had
been sprayed and it had recently been planted.
I have attached copies of the pictures for your review. Please call if you have any questions.
Sin rely Yours,
ruce Evans
Murphy Family Farms Land & Nutrient Management

State of North Carolina
Department of Environment,
Health and Natural Resources
Division of Water Quality
James B. Hunt, Jr., Governor
Jonathan B. Howes, Secretary
A. Preston Howard, Jr., P.E., Director
Attn.: David Hulbert
DM Farms
P.O, Box 309
Magnolia, NC 28453
Dear Mr. Hulbert:
July 8, 1997 ' 'y , "
J U L 1 4 1991
FAYETTEVJ Ld_E
REG. OFFICE
Subject: Remission Request of
Civil Penalty Assessment
DM Farms
Sampson County
DD 97.002
This letter is to acknowledge your request for remission of the civil penalty levied against
the subject facility. This request will be reviewed and you will be notified when a decision is
made concerning the request.
If you have any questions, please call Mr. Shannon Langley.at [phone], ext. 581.
cc: Fayetteville-Regional-Office-w/attachmerits�
Enforcement/Comphance
Linda Forehand w/3 attachments
A
Sincerely,
Robert L. Sledge,
Compliance Group
P.O. Box 29535, Raleigh, North Carolina 27626-0535 Telephone [phone] Fax [phone]
An Equal Opportunity Affirmative Action Employer 50% recycled/10 % post -consumer paper

1r
1A
DAAgii:L. P.O. Box 309 • Magnolia, N.C. 28453
VT 0, 2896
FARMS {91}439
July 2, 1997
Mr. Steve Tedder
Water Quality Section Chief/DWQ
P.O. Box 29535
Raleigh, North Carolina 27626-0535
Dear Mr. Tedder:
We are requesting remission or mitigation of the civil penalty assessed against DM
Farms Mag 4 Sow Farm (Farm #'82-77, File No. DD 97-002) in your letter dated
June 6, 1997. This request is based on the fact that the violation was inadvertent
and that we promptly abated continuing environmental damage resulting from this
inadvertent discharge. We do not, however, believe that an actual discharge took
place. It is our understanding that, contrary to your Finding of Fact, letter C., no
discharge was observed by your staff but that water samples were taken from the
unnamed stream.
I have enclosed copies of our correspondence with Mr. Kerr T. Stevens which
showed our efforts to promptly prevent any field runoff and operate in total
compliance with all regulations.
Thank you for your consideration. Please call if you have any questions.
Sincerely yours,
L� ".,4 A'-�
David Hulbert
DM Farms
9ECEIVED
JUL 7 1997
WATER QUALITY SECTION
OPERATION6 BRANCH

STATE OF NORTH CAROLINA ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT
COMMISSION
COUNTY OF SAMPSON
IN THE MATTER OF ASSESSMENT ) WAIVER OF RIGHT TO AN
OF CIVIL PENALTIES AGAINST ) ADMINISTRATIVE HEARING AND
PERMIT NO. 15A NCAC 2H.0217 ) STIPULATION OF FACTS
FILE'NO. DD 97-002
Having been assessed civil penalties totalling $2+539.65
for
violation(s) as set forth in the assessment document of the Director of the Division of Water Quality
dated, JUNE 6, 1997 , the undersigned, desiring to seek remission of the civil
penalties, does hereby waive the right to -an administrative hearing in the above -stated matter and does
stipulate that the facts are as alleged in the assessment document. .
This the 2ND day of __ Xly _t 19_g7 .
'81GNATURE
ADDRESS
DM Farms
692 Bonham Road
Magnolia, NC 28453
TELEPHONE
910-289--7298

M,
_M U R P R Y
F A M E L V F A R M S
December 9, 1996
Mr. Kerr T. Stevens
NC Div. of Water Quality/Fayetteville Region
Wachovia Bldg., Ste. 714
Fayetteville, N.C. 28301-5043
FAX [phone]
Dear Mr. Stevens,
I received your December 5th letter on Saturday, December 7th. I am
very concerned and somewhat confused because the content of the letter differs
somewhat from the impression I was left with after the on-site visit I had with Ed
Buchan on Wednesday, November 27th. Therefore, the purpose for this letter is
to first seek more information and secondly to address the issues raised in your
letter.
First, to enhance our understanding could you please provide me with:
1. A copy of the on site report submitted by Ed Buchan.
2. A copy of the report being submitted to the DWQ Compliance Group and
the recommendations from your office.
3. A copy of the recommendations from your office to the Director of the
DWQ for revocation of deemed permitted status of our farm. -
Now, to address your concerns. We are seriously committed to
environmentally responsible pork production and will go to considerable lengths
to correct this isolated incident. Specifically:
1. We are immediately implementing a Standard Operating Procedure of
having the operator check the spray fields every four hours during an
irrigation event. If inspection reveals any run off or ponding, irrigation will
be terminated immediately.
PoSi Office Box 759, Rose Hill, North Carolina 28458, [phone], FAX [phone]

2. We will immediately modify our application rate on the sloping sprayfield
at Mag 4 to ensure runoff will not occur.
3. On Friday, November 29th I contacted Dave Little in the Sampson County
NRCS office to seek assistance with a design for terracing the slopes at
Mag 4. He is scheduled to visit the farm this week to initiate the process.
We feel that terracing will impede any potential runoff.
4. As a fail safe measure we will use a bulldozer to construct berms at Mag 4
at the edge of any spray field susceptible to run off. This will prevent
effluent from entering the waters of the state. Completion of this job will
be no later than December 20, 1996.
5. We will modify and forward to you within 60 days our certified animal
waste management plan to address application rate on sloped areas as
requested.
will give you a call soon to discuss this matter.
Sincerely ours,
iruce Evans
Murphy Family Farms Land and Nutrient Management
BE:mst
HAUS E R51STMETTERISTEVEN S. DOC

F A M I L Y F A R M S
12/12/96
Mr. Kerr T. Stevens
N.C. Director of Water Quality/Fayetteville Region
Wachovia Building Site 714
Fayetteville, NC 28301-5043
FAX: [phone]
Dear Mr. Stevens,
I spoke with Mr. Wilson Spencer today of the Sampson County NRCS office. He
and Dave Little had conferred and have set a different date for visiting Mag 4 to
prepare a terrace plan. The original meeting was to take place this week. The new
date has been set for January 7. They are heavily prior committed to performing
cost -share work before the end of the year. If you have any questions, please call
Wilson directly at 910-592-7963.
Sincerely u s,
1,
Bruce Evans
Murphy Family arms land and Nutrient Management
BE/jks
H 1USERSL,"MNMLSiEVENS.DOC
Post Office Box 759, Rose Hill, North Carolina 28458, [phone], FAX [phone]

State of North Carolina
Department of Environment,
Health and Natural Resources
Fayetteville Regional Office
James B. Hunt, Jr., Governor
Jonathan B. Howes, Secretary
Mr. Bruce Evans
Murphy Farms
692 Bonham Road
Magnolia, NC 28453
IDIEHNF:Z
DIVISION OF WATER QUALITY
December 5, 1996
Subject: Notice of Violation
Notice of Intent to Revoke Deemed Permit
Magnolia 4 Swine Farm
82-77
Sampson County
Dear Mr. Evans:
You are hereby notified that, having been deemed permitted to have a nondischarge permit for the
subject animal waste disposal system pursuant to 15A NCAC 2H .0217, you have been found to be
in violation of your 2H .0217 Permit.
In response to citizen complaint on November 25, 1996, staff from the Fayetteville Regional Office
of the Division of Water Quality performed an inspection of your farm located off SR1944. The
inspection revealed that animal waste had been applied on two separate fields in such a manner that a
significant amount of waste material was allowed to runoff into a nearby creek. This creek is an
Unnamed Tributary to Six Runs Creek and is considered waters of the State and is classified as Class
"C -SW" waters. It was also noted that severe erosion problems (i.e. rills) existed in many areas of
the spray fields which probably compounded the runoff problems. In addition, it was evident that
waste had been applied on steeply sloped sections of the spray field which are also susceptible to
drainage problems. To avoid discharge problems in the future, it may become necessary to perform
some land grading work on the spray fields and adjust the recommended application rates. Please be
reminded that by allowing a discharge to take place without the appropriate permit, you are in
Wachovia Building, Suite 714, Fayetteville fowl FAX [phone]
North Carolina 28301-5043 N Vf C An Equal Opportunity Affirmative Action Employer
voice 910-486-1541 �__ , ,,... 50% recycled/10% post -consumer pager

1
1. Date of Inspection(s): November 25, 1996
2. Regional Office:
3. Name of Owner Of Property: MuMhv�, Inc. (CjWy of Deed attached)
4. Name of Operator: Mr. Bruce Evans
Magnolia, NC 28453
6. Phone Number: [phone]
7. Description of Facility Location, Map excerpt attached.
West side of SR 1944, a0roximately 1 mile North of intersection of SR 1945 and
SR 1244,
8. Date this facility began operation: The farm has been in full oneration_since uril
of 1995.
construction -
based on + m mi . from ►i Bruce . i of Mulphy Farms,
10. Has the facility registered with DWQ? YES NO_
If yes, date of registration NIA
11. Does the facility have an approved Animal Waste Management Plan YES-& NO
Is one required? YESX NO—
Date Approved: 3113195
12. Has this facility received a CAFO Designation? YES_ NO -2L
If yes, date issued:
13. Type of Operation: Swine, Sow-- Farrow to Wean

14.
Number 1 type oflivestock:Thewwere-approsim=ly 4400 sows Drcsgul at the time ' {
the initial inspection, As with any sow farm. there ire also w-canling pim
picsent at the farm in addition to the sows. The exact number of weanlings==t
'!
15. Length of time animals have been, are, or will be stabled, or confined and fed or
maintained in any 12 month period. Twelye_(12) months_
11 1. { 11 !. 1 1.1 I• 11 '.1 1 I• 11 1
4! '.! 1 ! •. - e 111 { . !! � 1
1 1111 ! _11 1 i•In :' 1!! _!• e_!! a
1 1 1 . 11 • � : 41. - � 1 ! ' + _! � ' !! _ � e e_# � � !1 1 - 1 f ',1
_1 1 _T 1 !1 1 ! _! : 1 ' 1 14 ' { _I ' ! `I1.'. 1 1 ! 1 1! ' 551 { I 1 !
I .!
! '1TW13K11M1rTWM {1'1 11.1 !J 11 1 l_e_! A{� 1 !' 11 1 !
(7. Type of Waste Management System: Swine are kol-in total confinemot free stall
barns with slotted floors-over—flushin&Xits. Waste is filished its ! ':.+ ' 4 from m /,1 Dim
into WilStC lagoon system, The lagoon syste!f / 11 1 1 ( of 1w1 (2)Aag=s from
which - 1 . 7 ' can be ! _ !! 1 ',1 _I 1 . ' ! + _ r .! _1!! • • 1 ! 12ir&s tQ12i1 byd=s andby! Wraygd on
18. Description of other animal operations in immediate vicinity and proximity to same or
other surface waters: It was noted that a Melville #1 swine farm was located off SR1243
about 0.5 miles SE from the Mag4 facility. This farm is owned by ME. Tim Barnette
and Us facility applies waste on different �fields. lthouit-is-upstream frpm The Maa4
application site. It did not appear that any waste was being -discharged front the Melville
Farm m 11/25/96.1
14. Proximity of facility to neighboring houses, wells, etc.: No residences are know, t,Q,be in
close proximity -to -the farm.
20. Approximate depth. of ground water table in the area of the facility or discharge: M
21. Proximity of facility to surface waters: Facility - (Cdge of lagoons) is located
approximately -50- feet from a unnamed_ intermittent tribuLia Jo Six -Runs Creek. Class "C-
M ,

Animal22. discharged. ,/.!
Witnesses:1 :_ !._! PWO-WQFay=Ule Regional X1.1 (9 10) :i
-4541.
Ricky Revels, DWQ-WQ FUV,=ille Regional Office (910) 486--1541,
24. 11 or dischargesoccurred in response1 a stor7n
year, houIr storm? YES.Itis the "inion of the writer that dischargcs of waste haye
occurred ! the past during waste a11 111 events. Such a conglusion is based
1! the -condition-of-t!of-the sprayfield which was badly eroded in !_e J sts and did I1
have a well esta1lished covercmp. In addition, may portions 1 1 1 the spLiW
w= ' .! ' • 1 1 ' i and as the photos dMict, large amountsof top soil and sand -ha
wa I. 1 1 1 a 1 into Ibe,wood linc .,! 1: adjacent a!ds- -These--combined--facIM lead
themselves 1 creatinty sey run-off pr{blems which have Umbably led to dischuM
in--the-past !1 !. response to hour Y1r11 1 important to
note thatthe lagoonsdid have more _I ._! _! " minimum !m' 1 1 1 and stmee of 19"
1 rin _.! ! jl • 1 1 1
25. What is the degree and extent of harm to the natural resources of the State, to public
health,or to private property resulting from the violation?: The discharge has caused the
introduction of nutrients into the receiving stream' that will cause or add to thesno sibility
of algal blomSand accelerated eutronhication of the slow moving waters of the receiving
stream. Also, samples taken, indicate rlcyjjWd fg&aj cgjifQm jrjcjs doym 9mm of The
faces

� � I
5
29. What is the amount of money saved by noncompliance?: Based on observations made
waste._ , Although, if enough waste was over-annlied. it may_ haves owed for fewer
ging events in the future and therefore less man hours consumed.
30. Was the violation committed willfully or intentionally?:
YES _ NOS
Explain:
been more careful in how much and where the waste was being Mlicd. it does not
appear that they intended for the waste to reach surface waters.
31. What is the prior record of the violator in complying or failing to comply with programs
over which Environmental Management Commission has regulatory authority?:
Regional files contained no previous violations for this farm.
32. What is the cost to the State for the enforcement procedures?:
Regional Costs are as follows:
Photo, film and developing:
$
6.00
Mileage: $0.20 per mile for 100 miles:
$
20.00
Fecal Coliform ($22.00 per sample) * 3:
$
66.00
Copies (Sampson County Court House)
$
0.75
Ed Buchan @ $20.251hr
3 hours - Drive Time
2 hours - Investigation
6 hours - Report Development
11 hours taW
$
222.75
Ricky Revels @ $17.821hr
3 hours'- Drive Time
2 hours - Investigation
5 hours LaW
$
89.10
Kerr T. Stevens - 1 hour (Supervisory Review)
$
35.05
Central Office Review
$
100.00
Total $ 539.65
33. Type or general nature of business: Swine,�ow Farrow IQ Won Qp tion
34. What is the violator's degree of cooperation or recalcitrance:
Staff from Murphy Farms, Inc. have hcrn y= cooperative and have taken steps
to Uy a.ndpievent further discharges from hap<nening in the future.

r
35. Are there any Mitigating Circumstances?: XQ
36. Assessment Factors:
gin.M! imp i.'! • X10 !sMM=•! !._'' II !
b. Receiving Stream : Unnamed Tributary to Six -Runs Creek
c. Damage Yes _ No -X- (Based on observations at the time of the investigation)
If YES, include report from Wildlife Resources Commission.
38. Recommendations Made to Owner/Operator: 24 hours after the initial investigation.
1- Immediately cease Dumping waste on the fields.
2- Take immediate action to prevent any future discharge of waste.
39. Recommendations for further DWQ Action:
- Notice of Violation (Forwarded Decembcr 5. 19961
- Enforcement Action
Modify existing_CANNE
-_ Reinspection

I
RUN
nq
I
RUN

4'
I

��I... +'ly 7 .! p�h���,� 5y':f ,�j� �F:tiS� a M h is � �• ° j ! t•
�.a,„W $yy' JS". IT��F ,ay ��� li' � s������ R t•`� J4
�w,�. fm:��S�C` `>=�"'�'9k� �r yy`.e�.e,..,�.e �iy��'Ci1�' '�� itif �•y.: — •-rn p-^..:: T:" -';: ,. - �}.[j�t�.
� ,� �ki'+•��"fi, .x w gp,ya i� ?rM1 a ,� ;tk' aAa °iL , +_, °z --q j
ONO
'.Ca � Ul`L i�?"'r3 y'.�, $.�.kr. s'� � .!'. r ...�i4• -'f r� .
r'.

I
di'

SITE SKETCH
(Note: Not to Scale) y
� f fielYi ��C � 1 ;fir
TO
RurG �rfC� 5etnr+jC.J
� Recriyi.� r
..
S eah,
Pr;,ww F2Pce�v`.nD�j
Z
f
t
#
D
��
(Sw�.p1e 1� ftp^ AF
!
L � r
J r {
1 r
4. r
r
54,��c111 �
� I
J.
-Co Furr —
1
1

Microbac Laboratories, Inc.
MICROBAC ENVIRONMENTAL LABORATORY NC #11
817 CASTLE HAYNE STREET NC #37714
FAYETTEVILLE, NC 28303 USDA #3787
[phone] / [phone] (FAX)
AIR • FUEL • WATER a FOOD z * WASTES
CERTIFICATE OF ANALYSIS
CERT #18225
ENV, MANAGErAD-jr �
FAYETTEv,LLE REG. C"FlCE'
CLIENT: NC DEM DATE RECD: 11/25/96 SAMPLED: 11/25/96
ADDRESS: Wachovia Building, Suite 714 SAMPLED BY: E. Buchan
Fayetteville, NC 28301 DELIVERED BY: E. Buchan
CONTACT PERSON: Mr. E. Buchan SAMPLE CODE: WW, Stream, Grab
ACCOUNT NUMBER: #KN003 REFERENCE: Murphy's Farm
SAMPLE ID: 1. Field Discharge 8 Crk- ID #96WE116742
2. Upstream - ID #96WU116743
3. Downstream - ID #96WD116744 DATA REVIEWED BY:
4. DATE REPORTED: 12/02/96
ANALYSIS METHOD 1 2 3 4
OOLIFORM, FECAL (per 100 ml)
COMMENTS:
< - Less than
> a Greater than
SM18 9222D 31000 140 3100
PAGE 1 OF 1
The data and other inform ilon contained on this, and other a—mpanying documents, represent only the sample(s) analyzed and is MEMBER
rendered upon the condPoon that R is not to be reproduced wholly or in part for advertising or other purposes wlthout written approval
from the laboratory.
1 IQAA COA_►IHYQL T..��1.... C...1 Q.... N..�i�w f.�.,.,.UI.... ntiw—I....1 .....1 111.....L.1,.1..,. L...l A....I........ .....i 0...........M 1

March 1, 1995
POST OFFICE BOX 759 • ROSE HILL. NORTH CAROLINA 28068
[phone]
Mr. Wendell H. Murphy, Jr.
PO Box 1076
Rose Hill, NC 28458
Re: Swine Farm Certification ;
Dear Mr. Murphy:
Enclosed for your records is a copy of the final certification for
your swine farm along with a copy of your waste utilization plan.
Please be aware that you must keep a copy of this certification and
the waste utilization plan at_the�arm site.
Your farm is subject to inspection by the Division of Environmental
Management at any time. Failure to have this information at the
farm site or failure to follow the waste utilization plan puts you
in violation of the State of North Carolina Non -Discharge
Regulations (15A-NCAC-2H, Section .0200, Subsection .0217) and
makes you subject to a Notice of Violation or fine 'from the
Division of Environmental Management.
If you have any questions regarding this certification, please call
me at [phone] ext. 4629.
Sincerely:
A40ggn-
M. Kevin Weston
Engineering Technician
cc: Kim Patram, construction Dept.
Sampson Soil and Water Conservation
0
n

FROM : MAG LAND MGT.
March 1, 1995
PHONE NO. : 910 289 7298
POST OFFICE BOX 759 • ROSE HILL, NORTH CAROLINA 28458
Dec. 03 1996 04:51PM P1
Department of Environment, Health and Natural Resources
Division of Environmental Management
Water Quality Section, Planning Branch
PO Box 29535
Raliegh, NC 27626-0535
Attn: Mr. Steve Tedder, Chief
RE: DM Frms - Magnolia 4 - Swine Facility Certification
Sampson County, NC
Dear Mr. Tedder:
Enclosed is the certification form for -the above referenced swine
farm. The area required for spray irrigation of lagoon effluent
has not been sprigged. By this letter, the Owner certifies that.
the area required for spray irrigation will be sprigged or planted
with the crops as called for in the Waste Utilization Plan within
180 days of-hte stocking date of the farm: The lagoon -effluent
will be applied with the owners reel type of irrigation equipment.
Name of Technical Specialist: M. Kevin Weston
Signature: 12 Ltlr. Date:
Name of Landnowner: DM Farms
Signature: r bate: 3
cc: DM Farms
Kim Patram, Murphy Farms Construction Dept.
R

. C O U N T Y
u
y e
M.I:Im
NA
�S
ps
0
:A
PHONE NO. 910 289 7298 Dec. 03 1996 04:53PM P1
a
' r
U
1 w,
+'Wh" ti •
s ► O
lop
�r
a
AO
0

WW
FROM MAG LPM MGT.
PHONE NO. : 910 289 7298 Dec. 16 1996 03:18PM P1
DEC i�r fJ J
NUTRIENT UTILIZATION PLAN
--------------- ------ ENV,--
FAYEMV�LLE OFFICE
Owners name --:MAG 4 - DM Farms County,Bampson
Mail Address -%PO Box 759 Rose Hili, NC
Type of production unit----.Farrow-Wean
Number of animal units -----e 4400
Type of waste facility ----- %Anaerobic Lagoon
Temporary storage period --- 180 days
Method of application ------ %Irrigation
Amount of animal.effluent produced-------------=- 26814 tons/year
Amount of plant available N produced by animals—, 17820 lbs./year
Commercial N to apply on planned acreage -------- 0 lbs./year
Your animal nutrient utilization plan has been specifically
.,developed for your swine operation. The plan is based on the
soil types, crops to be grown, and method of application for
%your particular operation. The effluent must tie land applied at a
specified rate to prevent pollution of surface•and/or ground
water. The plant nutrients in the animal waste should be used to
reduce the amount of commercial fertilizer required for the crops
where the waste is to be applied. This nutrient utilization plan
uses nitrogen as'the limiting nutrient. Waste should be
analyzed before.each application cycle and annual soil tests
are encouraged so that all plant nutrients can be balanced for
realistic yields of the crop to be grown.
Several factors are important in implementing your nutrient
utilization -plan in order to maximize the fertilizer value of
the waste and to ensure that it is applied in an
environmentally safe manner. Always apply effluent based on the
needs of the crop to be grown and the nutrient content of the
waste. Do not apply more nitrogen than the crop can utilize.
Soil types are important as they have different infiltration
rates and leaching potential. Effluent shall -not be applied to
land eroding at greater than 5 tons per acre per year. Do not
apply material on saturated soils or on land when the surface is
-frozen. Either of these conditions may result in runoff to.
surface waters. Wind conditions should also be considered to
avoid drift and downwind odor problems. To maximize the value
of nutrients for crop production and to reduce the potential
for pollution, the waste should be applied to a growing crop or
not more than 30 days prior•to planting. Soil incorporation
of effluent will conserve nutrients and reduce odor problems.

FROM MAG LAND MGT.
PHONE NO. : 910 299 7298
Dec. 03 1996 04:53PM P2
Page 2
The acres needed to apply the animal, waste is based on typical
nutrient content for this type of facility. Annual acreage
requirements may be more or less based on the nutrient analysis
report for your nutrient management facility.
YOUR NUTRIENT UTILIZATION PLAN IS BASED ON THE FOLLOWINGS
Tract
Field
Soil
Crop
Yield
Lbs. N
Acres
Lbs. N
Month to
No.
No.
Type
.Code
./Acre
/Unit
Used
Apply
i MEMCBM
■vi---
Pu2mmw
LSas�i3
CSk`�aGSrs
CQP.CiL3.
ipiaeC!
Ccea�-
—�CCCLO
unci
any
Au-BoB
K
N/A
100.00
40.0
4000
S -APRIL
unci
4
BoB
B
3.8
50.00
4.0
760
MAR -OCT'
uncl
3
BoB
B
3.8
50.00
20.0
3800
MAR -OCT
unci
2
Au-BoR
B
4.-1
50.00
53.0
10865
MAR -OCT
uncl
1
Au
B
4.7
50.00
4.5
1057.5
MAR -OCT
Available Nitrogen
----- ----- ----- ----- ------
Total 121.5 20483
(includes commercial) 17620
.Surplus Or Deficit -2663
Crop codecs Crop -unit
A-Barley-bu .
B-Bermudagrass(gcaze)-tons
C-Bermudagrase(hay)-tons
D==Corn(grain)-bu.
E-Corn(silage)-tons
F -Cotton -lbs. lint
G-Foscue(graze)-tons
H-Fescue(hay)-tons
I-Oats-bu.
3@Rye-bu.
K -Small grain(graze)-acre
L -Small graln(hay)-acre
M-Sorghum(grain)-cwt.
W=Wheat-..bu.
Y-Fescue(pasture)-tons
Z-Beemudagrase(pasture)-tone

n •1 n
RDM MAG LAND MGT. PHONE NO. : 910 289 7299 Dec. 16 1996 03:19PM P3
Page 3
Your Nutrient Utilization Plan is designed in accordance with all
application laws regarding the actual application of effluent.
a. Effluent shall not be.applied closer than 25 feet to surface
water. For non -perennial streams, this distance may be
reduced provided adequate vegetative filter strips are present
b. Effluent shall not be applied to.land eroding greater than 5
tons per acre -per year.
c. Effluent shall not be applied closer than 100 feet from
water wells for human consumption.
d. Effluent shall not be applied closer than 200 feet of dwelling
other -than those owned by the landuser.
e. Effluent shall be applied at rates that do not exceed the.soil
infiltration rate so that runoff does not occur.
Your soil types are listed below with the MAXIMUM application
rates. You should never exceed these amounts and depending
on soil and weather conditions, application rates may need to be
reduced.
SOIL TYPE
W' 2=zaOsatNo=
APPLICATION RATES
Any deviation from these points is a direct violation and should
be avoided.

FROM : MAG LAND MGT. PHONE NO. : 910 299 7298 Dec. 03 1996 04:54PM P3
Page 4
If more commercial fertilizer is used than shown in this plan,
then additional acres of land may be needed. A three to fifteen
feet wide permanent grass filter strip should be seeded along all
ditches in fields that receive animal waste.
Additional commentsc
--------------------
� r .
Prepared byc Titles Dates fZ -CY 5
,0 Jai
.Concurred in by c Date
Produce
I understand that I must own or.have acceSG,to equipment,
primarily irrigation equipment, to land apply the animal effluent
described in this nutrient utilization plan. This equipment must
available at the appropriate pumping time such that no discharge
occurs from the .lagoon in a'25 -year 1 -day storm event.""i also
certify that the waste will be applied on the land according.to
this plan at the appropriate times and at rates that no runoff
occurs.
SM F�410W� /
Data
41 Producer
Technical Specialiste m Dates '2-;7-415

FROM MAG LANA MGT.
PHONE -NO. 910 289 7298 Dec. 03 1996 04:54PM P4
�rA GA %A "C 1

Vulluoail
STATE.OF NORTH CAROLINA
COUNTY OF SAMPSON
• �$RA!iT�_D1�ED I •
I
THIS DEED, made this the. 3e day of _T%dc IF.-^ /
1.994, by and between MURPHY CARMS, INC., a, North Carolina;
Corporation; party of the first part,. and WENDELL.H.. MURPHY, JR.,
P.O. Dox 759, Rose Hill, NC•28458, party.of the second part;
+-'WITNESSETH
THAT said party of the first part, for -and in consideration of
the Rum of TEN it
{$10.00) and 'other good and valuable.
considerations to it paid by the said party of the second part, the
rec'elpt of which is hereby acknowledged, has bargained and soid,;1i
and by these presents does.hereby.grant,'bargain, sell and convey
unto the -party of the second part, and.his'heirs and assigns, that;.
certain• tract or parcel of'.1and, situate, lying and being in.
i
Taylor's Bridge Township, Sampson'County,.North Carolina, .and beingl
further described as -follows,.,.,
SIX RUNS'NORTH (344.54 ACRES)
Those .certain tract. .or parcels of land in
Ta}rl nr I s Rri."H�o Tnwns;�i n, ' Samoson County,
North Carolina, described as follows:
acres, .mora •-ar less, composed of
two contiduous'tracts known as "A.J. JOHNSON. .
TRACT" conrainiliq 173.05 arses, more or less,
and "C.J. N RRITT.TRACT'.", containing 22.88 '
acres, more or less,, • said 'lands being ;shown
and delineated on -MAP OF PROPERTY OF :.
INTERNATIONAL PAPER COMPANY, entitled A.J.
JOHNSON N0. 4 A, G'.J. M F.RITT TRACTS,
surveyed by W.B, I1il•1, Jr., N,ay, 1955, which
map is :duly recorded in. Map Book .3 at ° Page
131, Sampson rnunty'Public Registry, and is
incorporated -herein by reference for. greater .
certainty of description and.location of said,
lands.
(o) 148.71 acres, more or, less, known as
I
"GEORGE NEPRm TPACT", said lands being. shown
!
and delineated on MAP- OF PROPERTY OF
INTERNATIONAL PAPER COMPANY, entitled "GEORGE
MERRI'.rT T ACT", su] vV!Lvd by R. Q. McMeekin,
Octob#,.r. 1955, wench map is cloy recorded in
VaP Book. 3 at Page. 175,• • Sampson County Public
•
Registry, and is ..incorporated herein by
reference for greafr certainty of description
and location of said lands.
N[4TtR GR�¢r.
•
MrsTkR�GRttKt
The .above lands' being* known. as "SIL RUNS
NORTH" and said lards are conveyed subject to
IP. TII�MERLANDS OPERATING COMPANY,. LTD thinning .
contract: NC SIS 82=41302.

TO HAVE AND TO HOLD. the aforesaid tractor parcel of land and
all privileges 'and.appurten"ances thereunto belonging to him,.the
party of the second part-, and his heirs and assigns, in fee simple
forever. .
AND said party of the -first part covenants that'it is seized
of said premises in fee simple; that the same are free and clear
from any and all encumbrances, that it -does hereby warrant and will'
forever defend the'title to the same against the lawful claims of
.all persons whomsoever.
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, 'the.'said. party of the first part has
caused this instrument to be signed in its corporate name by its
duly authorized officers and its seal to be hereunto affixed by
authority of .its Beard of Directors, this the � o
day of I Ca EA.Etz 1994.
SECR%TAIZY
MURPHY FARMS, INC'.
BY: t?LC fir' {SEALI
PRESIDENT'
STATE OF NORTH CAROLINA
COUNTY OF.DUPLIN
I, D/jc e •O,_� Notary. Public of the State
and County aforesaid, certify that
personally came before me,this day and acknowledged that —he -is
the Secretary of MURPHY FARMS, INC., a•North Carolina
.corporation, and that by'authority duly given and'as the act of the
corporation', the foregoing instrument was signed in, its name by its
President,' sealed with its corporate sea). and attested by
as its Secretary.
Witness my hand and notarial seal, this the day
ftf:drr 1994.
*TA ri
: woe NOTARY PUBLIC
�%;a•••.II M •'Unmission Expires:

�t
1
w N a
Ilk
t / �
Q L/
25
[ 1 p
a U
..,4s Far-rrt � x
$V9_,
` V,J
'a� �►++as' ' 1P
+� .;t i S
A. It
p
ow ��„!•
5
J � /40 • j�V�y
M r-� lIss
On C9i1Tj ,. • Cl S�,'CiE�lt ` • • 5----�`/�. Z5
�U♦/
I +,'�- rte, � Watson
e �
� 1 1 • I _ d r',a � a ��
�,• ! .. !�•N �r . '. � 1 Ill !!!
0 1 C+\`�_ GAIT � �Jl fw���si + r ���~mss• /td ! � Ma
roe
41
00
Ito
`.Orl
100 I�
400 ,..
x r`1J
1
J CU
i ='� � • - x � ++ •,� ria r- . �. J/

STATE OF
NORTH CAROLINA
• VA11,8 A.4 39
•. COUNTY OF SAMPSON� � '
The foregoing certificate •ofI+lf ,
a Notary
Public of Duplin County, North Carolina, is certified
to be correct. This instrument was presented for registration.
this day'and-hour
and duly recorded in the office of the
Register
of Deeds of Sampson .County, forth Carolina, in gook
��� •, Page
This .� day of , 19,, at
+�
o1clock
fi.
BY:. i
Register
of Deeds Deputy/8 Register of Deeds
Recorded
and verified: ,
Sp�1PSON COUNTY 0i-Ei-9b
6'19
$283.00
•
STATE 0F'
NARpUNA =� ,. Real Estate
E Excise Tax

J
BRUCE J. TERRIS
CAROLYN SMITH PRAVLIK
MONICA WAGNER
KATHLEEN L. MILLIAN
ROBERT D. PARRISH
I ERRIS, PRAVLIK & WAGNER
1121 12TH STREET, N.W.
WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005.4x32
[phone]
[e-mail]
[e-mail]
FAX [phone]
December 8, 1997
CERTIFIED MAIL, RF -TURN RECEIPT REQUESTED
Carol M. Browner (Z 068 877 325)
Administrator
V.S. Environmental Protection r%gen y
401 M Street, S.W., A-100
Washington, D.C. 20460
Wayne McDevitt, Director (Z 068 877 326)
N.C. Department of Environment and Natural Resources
Division of Environmental Management
P.O. Box 29535
Raleigh, N.C. 27626
Wendell H. Murphy, Jr. (Z 338 924 652)
P.O. Box 759
Rose Hill, N.C. 28458
PATRICIA L. HURST
SARAH A. ADAMS
LYNN E. CUNNINGHAM
DAVID G. BOOKBINDER
Of Counsel
RE"CE-D VF
01FICE OF GENERAL C304a.
ia'd1�Ca�TyiFf1 i H�ALTN
AN -0 NA74URAL PE30IJRCES
RECr- 'Y
DEC "Vi i
ATL
Nan-Dsch r;,o Camp;innce Ent.
Re: Operation of a Concentrated Animal Feeding Operation ("CAFO")
without an NPDES Permit in Violation of Clean Water Act
Dear Ms. Browner, Mr. McDevitt and Mr. Murphy, Jr.:
Section 505(b) of the Federal Water Pollution Control Act (hereafter the "Act"), 33 U.S.C.
1365(b), requires that, 60 days prior to the filing of a citizen's suit in federal district court under
Section 505(a)(1) of the Act, notice must be given to the alleged violator, the U.S. Environmental
Protection Agency, and the State in which the alleged violations occur of the citizen's intent to
bring suit for the alleged violations.
The American Canoe Association, Inc. (7432 Alban Station Blvd., Suite B-226, Springfield,
Virginia 22150, 703-451-0141), hereby places you on notice, pursuant to Section 505(b) of the
Act, 33 U.S.C. 1365(b), that it believes that D.M. Farms' Magnolia 4 Sow Farm (Facility No. 82-
77) (hereafter "Mag 4 Sow Farm") is in violation of Sections 301, 308 and 402 of the Act
because it has violated and continues to violate "an effluent standard or limitation" as defined
by Section 505(f) of the Act, 33 U.S.C. 1365(f), by failing to obtain a National Pollutant Discharge
Elimination System ("NPDES") permit when an NPDES permit is required because the Mag 4
Sow Farm is a concentrated animal feed operation ("CAFO") that has discharged swine waste
into receiving waters. Mag 4 Sow Farm's failureto obtain an NPDES permit denies citizens the
right to participation in the permitting process and to publicly available monitoring data on the
Mag 4 Sow Farm's compliance with the Act. By this letter, we are notifying Mr. Murphy, Jr., of

Ms. Browner, Mr. McDevitt and Mr: Murphy, Jr,
December 8, 1997
Page 2
ACA's intention to sue him in his personal capacity as the record owner of the land on which the
Mag 4 Sow Tann operates.
The discharge of pollutants to the waters of the United States is prohibited except in
accordance with the provisions of the Clean Water Act. 33 U.S.C. 1311(a). Section 402 of the
Act empowers EPA or the state to issue an NPDES permit authorizing the discharge of pollutants
from point sources into navigable waters. 33 U.S.C. 1342. A "point source" is defined as "any
discernable, confined, and discrete conveyance, including but not limited to any * * *
concentrated animal feeding operation * * * from which pollutants are or may be discharged."
33 U.S.C. 1362(14). Therefore, "[c)oncentrated animal feeding operations are point sources
subled 16-thc- (NPDES permit pro^:-a�-,, ,n r'.F.R. 122:23.
An animal feeding operation is a CAFO if (a) there are more than 2,500 adult swine; (b)
the swine are confined and maintained for a total of 45 days or more in any 12 -month period;
and (c) crops are not sustained in the normal growing season over any portion of the lot or
facility. 40 C.F.R. 122.23. Our review of information available. through documents on fie with
the North Carolina Department of Environment and Natural Resources ("DENR") indicates that
the Mag 4 Sow Farm is a CAFO.
Our review of DENR's records also indicates that the Mag 4 Sow Farm has discharged
pollutants to navigable waters in violation.of the Act. Records on file with DENR show that the
Mag 4 Sow Farm has discharged swine waste to waters of the United.Siates on at least the
following two occasions: On November 25, 1996, in response to a citizen complaint, DENR staff
inspected the Mag 4 Sow Farm and observed a significant amount of swine waste running off
of a sprayfield into a unnamed tributary of Six Runs Creek, which flows to the Black River.
These waterways have been designated by DENR as "Outstanding Resource Waters" deserving
of special regulatory protection. Samples taken of the discharge contained 31,000 colonies/100
mi of fecal coliform bacteria. Samples taken of the receiving waterway immediately downstream
of the discharge contained 3,100 colonies/100 ml of fecal coliform bacteria. Based on this and
other evidence, DENR found on June 3, 1997, that the Mag 4 Sow Farm had discharged
pollutants to the unnamed tributary of Six Runs Creek.
On July 10, 1997, DENR staff again inspected the Mag 4 Sow Farm and found a
significant amount of swine waste running from a sprayfield into the unnamed tributary of Six
Runs Creek. Samples of the discharge contained 61,261 colonies/100 ml of fecal coliform
bacteria. Samples taken of the receiving waterway immediately downstream of the discharge
contained 154,545 colonies/100 ml of fecal coliform bacteria. 'DENR staff estimated that the Mag
4 Sow Farm discharged on July 10, 1997, approximately 13,500 gallons of swine waste to the
unnamed tributary of Six Runs Creek. Based on this history of discharges at the Mag 4 Sow
Farm, it is likely that the discharges will continue in the future.
The Mag 4 Sow Farm is therefore a point source which needs an NPDES permit because
it is a CAFO from which pollutants are discharged to waters of the United States. Because the
Mag 4 Sow Farm has failed to obtain an NPDES permit, it is in violation of the Clean Water Act.
Each day that the Mag 4 Sow Farm fails to obtain the required NPDES permit is a new violation
of the Act.

Ms. Browner, Mr. McDevitt and Mr. Murphy, Jr.
December 8, 1997
Page 3
The American Canoe Association further places you on notice, pursuant to Section 505(b)
of the Act, 33 U.S.C. 1366(b), that it believes that the Mag 4 Sow Farm is in violation of Sections
301, 308 and 402 of the Act because it has violated and continues to violate "an effluent
standard or limitation" as defined by Section 505(f) of the Act, 33 U.S.C. 1365(f), by allowing the
unpermitted discharge of swine waste into receiving waters at least in the two instances
enumerated above. Based on the history of violations at the Mag 4 Sow Farm, it is likely that
discharges of swine waste other than the two enumerated above have occurred in the past.
Moreover, we believe that additional unlawful discharges of swine waste will occur in the future.
t
We intend, at the close of the 60 -day notice period, or shortly thereafter, to file a citizen
suit under Section 505(a)(1) of the Act for all violations of the Act, including discharge violations
other than those described above and for all violations that occur after your receipt of this letter.
We do not believe that it is necessary to provide you with further notice before pursuing legal
action for these additional violations.
ACA intends to seek penalties for the Mag 4 Sow Farm's failure to obtain an NPDES
permit and for its illegal discharges. It also intends to seek an injunction requiring the Mag 4
Sow Farm to apply for and obtain an NPDES permit and to end its discharges. If the Mag.4 Sow
Farm fails to obtain an NPDES permit after a reasonable amount of time and/or continues its
discharges, ACA intends to seek an injunction prohibiting the Mag 4-8ow Farm's continued
operation.
If you are interested in attempting to settle this matter, we encourage you to contact us
as soon as possible. We will need a substantial amount of information and documentation
before substantive settlement discussions can begin. We believe that it would be in everyone's
best interest if this information exchange begins immediately after your receipt of this letter.
SincertL.6u
ly,
cirst
Counsel for
American Canoe Association, Inc.
cc: John Hankinson, Jr. (Z 338 924 653)
Regional Administrator
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
Region 4
345 Courtland Street, N.E.
Atlanta, Georgia 30365

Ms. Browner, Mr. McDevitt and Mr. Murphy, Jr.
December 8, 1997
Page 4
Donald Olsen (Z 338 924 654)
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
401 M Street, S.W. (2243A)
Washington, D.C. 20460

row, y�,st:u.cra
TERRIS, PRAVLIK & WAGNER.
BRUCE J. TEERRIS
1121 12TH STREET, N.W.
CAROLYN SMITH PRAVLIK WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005.4632
MONICA WAGNER
. / �, (2021 882.2100
KATHLEEN L. MILLIAN
RECEI
8� ��37�[e-mail]
ROBERT D. PARRISH
ir7 �[e-mail]
FAX [phone]
.Ia 0 7 1995
FAYT
GT�IIt_ Z December 8, 1997
REG. Orr-iu-
CERTIFIED MAIL, RETURN RECEIPT REQUESTED
Carol M. Browner (Z 068 877 325)
Administrator
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency,
i! V Vnn
401 M Street, S.W.
Washington, D.C. 20460
Wayne McDevitt, Director (Z 068 877 326)
N.C. Department of Environment and
Natural Resources
Division of Environmental Management
P.O. Box 29535
Raleigh, N.C. 27626
Wendell H. Murphy, Sr. (Z 068 877 329)
Registered Agent
Murphy Farms, Inc.
d/b/a Murphy Family Fam}s
4134 South U.S. 117 Hwy.
Rose Hill, N.C. 28458
PATRIC;A L. HURST
SARAH A. ADAMS
LYNN E. CUNNINGHAM
DAVID G. BOOKBINDER
Of Counsel
:.i IV
OFFicz 4i' Cc.N4FA1. COVINSEL
DEO 1.5 1997
Reef C. Ivey, II (Z 068 y=ALi;-� 1
Registered Agent A1~40 NA U % L RESOURCES
D.M. Farms of Rose Hill, L.L.C.
t-7 Lb_A4.vQ4 Ccu�l U.S. 4 -1w
! 1 1 4TVy
Rose Hill, N.C. 28458
Wendell H. Murphy, Jr.
James Sauls, Jr.
D. Bruce Evans
D.M. Farms of Rose Hill, L.L.C.
Post Office Box 1076 (Z 068 877 354)
Post Office Box 759 (Z 338 924 650)
Rose Hill, N.C. 28458
Wendell H. Murphy, Jr. (Z 338 924 651)
James Souls, Jr.
D. Bruce Evans
D.M. Farms of Rose Hill, L.L.C.
Post Office Box 309
Magnolia, N.C. 28453
Wendell H. Murphy, Jr. (Z 338 924 652)
Wendell H. Murphy, Sr. (Z 068 877 330) Post Office Box 759
Murphy Farms, Inc. Rose Hill, N.C. 28458
d/b/a Murphy Family Farms
Post Office Box 759
Rose Hill, N.C. 28458 i
Re: Operation of a Concentrated Animal Feeding Operation ("CAFO")
without an NPDES Permit in Violation of Clean Water Act
Dear Ms. Browner, Mr. McDevitt, Mr. Murphy, Sr.,
Mr. Murphy, Jr., Mr. Ivey, Mr. Sauls and Mr. Evans:
. Section 505(b) of the Federal Water Pollution Control Act (hereafter the "Act"), 33 U.S.C.
1365(b), requires that, 60 days prior to the filing of a citizen's suit in federal district court under
Section 505(a)(1) of the Act, notice must be given to the alleged violator, the U.S. Environmental
Protection Agency, and the State in which the alleged violations occur of the citizen's intent to
bring suit for the alleged violations.

Ms. Browner, Mr. McDevitt, Mr. Murphy, Sr,,
Mr. Murphy, Jr., Mr. Ivey, Mr. Sauls and Mr. Evans
December 8, 1997
Page 2
The Professional Paddlesports Association (U.S. 27 and Hornbeck Road, P.O. Box 248,
Butler, Kentucky 41006, 606-472-2205), hereby places you on notice, pursuant to Section 505(b)
of the Act, 33 U.S.C. 1365(b), that it believes that D.M. Farms' Magnolia 4 Sow Farm (Facility
No. 82-77) (hereafter "Mag 4 Sow Faun") is in violation of Sections 301, 308 and 402 of the Act
because it has violated and continues to violate "an effluent standard or limitation" as defined
by Section 505(f) of the Act, 33 U.S.C. 1365(f), by failing to obtain a National Pollutant Discharge
Elimination System ("NPDES") permit when an NPDES permit is required because the Mag 4
Sow Farm is a concentrated animal feeding operation ("CAFO") that has discharged swine waste
into receiving waters. Mag 4 Sow Farm's failure to obtain an NPDES permit denies citizens the
right to participation in the permitting process and to publicly available monitoring data on the
4 Scw Farm's compliance with the Act.
The discharge of pollutants to the waters of the United States is prohibited except in
accordance with the provisions of the Clean Water Act. 33 U.S.C. 1311(a). Section 402 of the
Act empowers EPA or the state to issue an NPDES permit authorizing the discharge of pollutants
from point sources into navigable waters. 33 U.S.C. 1342. A "point source" is defined as "any
discernable, confined, and discrete conveyance, including but not limited to any * * *
concentrated animal feeding operation * * * from which pollutants are or may be discharged."
33 U.S.C. 1362(14). Therefore, "(c)oncentrated animal feeding operations are point sources
subject to the NPDES permit program." 40 C.F.R. 122.23.
An animal feeding operation is a CAFO if (a) there are more than 2,500 adult swine; (b)
the swine are confined and maintained for a total of 45 days or more in any 12-month period;
and (c) crops are not sustained in the normal growing season over any portion of the lot or
facility. 40 C.F.R. 122.23. Our review of information available through documents on file with
the North Carolina Department of Environment and Natural Resources ("DENR") indicates that
the Mag 4 Sow Farm is a CAFO.
Our review of DENR's records also indicates that the Mag 4 Sow Farm has discharged
pollutants to navigable waters in violation of the Act. Records on file with DENR show that the
Mag 4 Sow Farm has discharged swine waste to waters of the United States on at least the
following two occasions: On November 25, 1996, in response to a citizen complaint, DENR staff
inspected the Mag 4 Sow Farm and observed a significant amount of swine waste running off
of a sprayfield into a unnamed tributary of Six Runs Creek, which flows to the Black River.
These waterways have been designated by DENR as "Outstanding Resource Waters" deserving
of special regulatory protection. Samples taken of the discharge contained 31,000 colonies1100
ml of fecal coliform bacteria. Samples taken of the receiving waterway immediately downstream
of the discharge contained 3,100 colonies1100 ml of fecal coliform bacteria. Based on this and
other evidence, DENR found on June 3, 1997, that the Mag 4 Sow Farm had discharged
pollutants to the unnamed tributary of Six Runs Creek.
On July 10, 1997, DENR staff again inspected the Mag 4 Sow Farm and found a
significant amount of swine waste running from a sprayfield into the unnamed tributary of Six
Runs Creek. Samples of the discharge contained 61,261 colonies/100 ml of fecal coliform
bacteria. Samples taken of the receiving waterway immediately downstream of the discharge
contained 154,545 colonies/100 ml of fecal coliform bacteria. DENR staff estimated that the Mag
4 Sow Farm discharged on July 10, 1997, approximately 13,500 gallons of swine waste to the

Ms. Browner, Mr. McDevitt, Mr. Murphy, Sr.,
Mr, Murphy, Jr., Mr. Ivey, Mr. Sauls and Mr. Evans
December 8, 1997
Page 3
unnamed tributary of Six Runs Creek. Based on this history of discharges at the Mag 4 Sow
Farm, it is likely that the discharges will continue in the future.
The Mag 4 Sow Farm is therefore a point source which needs an NPDES permit because
it is a CAFO from which pollutants are or may be discharged to waters of the United States.
Because the Mag 4 Sow Farm has failed to obtain an NPDES permit, it is in violation of the
Clean Water Act. Each day that the Mag 4 Sow Farm fails to obtain the required NPDES. permit
is a new violation of the Act.
The Professional Paddlesports Association further places you on notice, pursuant to
Secticn 505(b) of the Act, 33 U.S.C. 1365(b), that it believes that the Mag 4 Sow Farm is in
violation of Sections 301, 308 and 402 of the Act because it has violated and continues to violate
"an effluent standard or limitation" as defined by Section 505(f) of the Act, 33 U.S.C. 1365(f), by
allowing the unpermitted discharge of swine waste into receiving waters at least in the two
instances enumerated above. Based on the history of violations at the Mag 4 Sow Farm, it is
likely that discharges of swine waste other than the two enumerated above have occurred in the
past. Moreover, we believe that additional unlawful discharges of swine waste will occur in the
future.
*
We intend, at the close of the 60 -day notice period, or shortly thereafter, to file a citizen
suit under Section 505(a)(1) of the Act for all violations of the Act, including discharge violations
other than those described above and for all violations that occur after your receipt of this letter.
We do not believe that it is necessary to provide you with further notice before pursuing legal
action for these additional violations.
PPA intends to seek penalties for the Mag 4 Sow Farm's failure to obtain an NPDES
permit and for its illegal discharges. It also intends to seek an injunction requiring the Mag 4
Sow Farm to apply for and obtain an NPDES permit and to end its discharges. If the Mag 4 Sow
Farm fails to obtain an NPDES permit after a reasonable amount of time and/or continues its
discharges, PPA intends to seek an injunction prohibiting the Mag 4 Sow Farm's continued
operation.
If you are interested in attempting to settle this matter, we encourage you to contact us
as soon as possible. We will need a substantial amount of information and documentation
before substantive settlement discussions can begin. We believe that it would be in everyone's
best interest if this information exchange begins immediately after your receipt of this letter.
Sincerely,
(ghceia L. Hurst
Counsel for Professional Paddlesports
Association

Ms. Browner, Mr. McDevitt, Mr. Murphy, Sr,,
Mr. Murphy, Jr., Mr. Ivey, Mr. Sauls and Mr. Evans
December 8, 1997
Page 4
cc: John Hankinson, Jr. (Z 338 924 653)
Regional Administrator
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
Region 4
345 Courtland Street, N.E.
Atlanta, Georgia 30365
Donald Olsen (Z 338 924 654)
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
401 M Street, S.W. (2243A)
Washington, D.C. 20460
r
Ms. Browner, Mr. McDevitt, Mr. Murphy, Sr,,
Mr. Murphy, Jr., Mr. Ivey, Mr. Sauls and Mr. Evans
December 8, 1997
Page 4
cc: John Hankinson, Jr. (Z 338 924 653)
Regional Administrator
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
Region 4
345 Courtland Street, N.E.
Atlanta, Georgia 30365
Donald Olsen (Z 338 924 654)
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
401 M Street, S.W. (2243A)
Washington, D.C. 20460

FROM : MRG LAND MGT. PHONE NO. : 910 289 7298 Dec. 16811996 03:14PM P1
GR rTp
DEC 16 I-8
ENV, MANAGEMENT
� 'C
Magnolia Pyramid -� Land Managemenf�ffcv ��_LE REG. OFFICE
FAX COVER SHEET
TO: '
ATTENTION:.
FROM: « �a
DATE:
NUMBER OF PAGES INCLUDING COVER SHEET:
REMARKS: 4
A
TO RECEr EW. if you do not receive all pages, please contact
Bruce Evans at telephone # [phone]

FROM : MAG LAND MGT.
March 1, 1995
PHONE NO. : 910 289 7298 Dec. 16 1996 03:15PM P2
POST OFFICE BOX 759 • ROSE HILL, NORTH CAROLINA 2845a
(al 9) 289-2111
Mr. Wendell H. Murphy, Jr.
PO Box 1076
Rose Hill, NC 26458
Re: Swine Farm Certification !
Dear Mr. Murphy:
9
Enclosed for your records is a copy of the final certification for
your swine farm along with a copy of your waste utilization plan.
Please be aware that you must keep a copy of this certification and
the waste utilization pian at the farm site.
Your farm is subject to inspection by the Division of Environmental
Management at any time. Failure to have this information at the
farm site or failure to follow the waste utilization plan puts you
in violation of the State of North Carolina Non -Discharge
Regulations (15A-NCAC-2H, Section .0200, Subsection .0217) •and
makes you subject to a Notice of violation or fine from the w
Division of Environmental. Management.
If you have any questions regarding this certification, please call
me at [phone] ext. 4629.
Sincerely:
M. Kevin Weston
Engineering Technician
cc: Kim Patram, Construction Dept.
Sampson Soil and Water Conservation

FROM : MAG LAND MGT. PHONE NO. 910 289 729E Dec. 16 1996 03:16PM P1
AxrKXL WASTK IOSAGEIMT PLAN C2RTIFICATI0V POR XW OR BIPANDED FEEDLOTS
please retuxa the completed farm to ths' Di.vioion of Ravirommental !fans;pemeUt at
the 4ddreas on tbo revers• aide of this form.
Mame of farm (Plea$epr
Hint) s Magnolia 4
Address: 076
• ose l Phone No. -
County
Farm location: Latitude and Longitudas SI'1R: 4 _ � (required)_ Also,
please attach a copy of a county road slap with location identified.
Type of operation (swine, layer, dairy, etc.):
Design capacity (number *e aniza1z) A400 Sow Farrow E-5 wean
Average size of operation' (12 month population avg.)s
Average acreage needed for land application of waste (acres): 19180
�a Qae II�ga�rac. rese;acs�rs a■aaa e�onwsnt�syc�erwwMpY�tr wwfillLs of awarEGlsw re�swwca�zorcas�r�tsow Ra�acws
Technical Specialist cartification
As a technical_, specialist designated by the North Carolina soil and Nater
Conservation Coriaissipn, pursuant to'15A NCAC 6F .0005, 1 certify that the new or
expanded animal wastA managemenit system as installed for the -farm named above
has an animal waste- management plan that meets the design, construction,
operation and maintenance standards and specifications'.; of. the Division of
Environmental Management: and the USDA -;-Soil Conservation Service and/or the North
Carolina Soil and Water Conservation: commission pursuant to ISA NCAC 2H.0217 and
ISA NCAC 6F .0001-.0005, The following elements and their corresponding minimum
criteria- have..been verified by sae or other designated technical specialists and
are included in the plan as applicable:,minimeam separations (buff ars) i liners or
equivalent for lagoons or waste storage ponds, waste storage capacity; adequate
quantity and amount of land for,waste,utilization (or use of third party); access
or ownership of proper waste application equipment; schedule for timing of
applications;.application.rates:'loading r4-";.end:the, eontatol of --,the discharge
of pollutants from stprmwater runofi4events'l""''s, vexe:tbaa::the'25-year► 24�hour
storm. 3 =
Name of Teahnica]. [please '..Print). "' J:'
Af f filiations ' IJIMc ati:.
Address (Xe c, -y) ► Phone No..
Signature:
gaaaaeggas sadtaayt tC.anav=pre s�w�wti�isi�r�sfivoei ��'��I�p NRo}ss���fam p a$2min w:a 13 at
owraasr/tsanaQar. AQrsaimeat.. ' .. •:, ,; . .. ; . ; , •°. ::.:.,, . ,:......... _ .• .. r .., '.• . '
I (we) unc erst$nd. the•, QR acioa and maintenance. 'progeauresmgstablished in' Che
approved asiimal„mase getaeitt plea for.the farrc'`rsee� above and will implement
these proceduriis'. I (we) know that any additional .expans.i.ocn; , to, the existing
design capacity. of the, °%f8ste :treatment d6d storaga systema or;rarsstxuetiaa a slew
facilities will.,reQyi,r9 ca .newc'.cartification '&&kbe'`sbbiiitted; tc-,the"I)ivisiosz of
Environmental 'Management before the new anituas are stocked. I (we) also
understand that there must be no discharge of animal waste from this system to
surface waters of the state either through a man-made Conveyance or through
runeff'from a storm event less severe than the 25 -year, 24-hour storm. 'The
approved plan Will be filed at the -farm and at the office of the local Soil and
Water Conservation District_
of
Signatures
of
(Please
di
Print):
Date:
nt from owner (please print): MCC
Dace:
change in land ownership requires notification or ew ertffication
k
f • Che approved . plan , is„changed) to be submitted to the Division of
vironmental Management within 60 days of a title transfer.
DEM USE ONLY a ACNF-wo
R
1i

C O U N T Y
LI.09/vo
r�
. sWs�
r
0
�ft
J
O/
O
' P
v
I
. sWs�
r
0
�ft
J
O/
O
' P
v
I
K
�
f3
i
O
' P
v

WW
NUTRIENT UTILIZATION PLAN
Owners name --:MAG 4 - DM Farms County:Sampson
Mail Address -,PO Box 759 Rose Hill, NC
Type of production unit----:Farrow-wean
Number of animal units-----: 4400
Type of waste facility -----:Anaerobic Lagoon
Temporary storage period---: 180 days
Method of application ------:Irrigation
Amount of animal effluent produced----- ------ 26814 tons/year
Amount of plant available N produced by animals-: 17820 lbs./year
Commercial N to apply on planned acreage--------: 0 lbs./year

P. 1
* ERROR REPORT ( DEC.16.1996 3:20PM ) * * *
TTI ENVIRONMENTAL MGMT
FILE PERS. NAME ADDRESS MODE TIME PAGE RESULT
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
501 910 269 7298 RS 1'41" P. 1 E
PAGE NOT RECEIVE QUICK SERVICE CODE
P. 1 0-01
# : BATCH C : CONFIDENTIAL $ : TRANSFER P : POLLING
M MEMORY L s SEND LATER @ FORWARDING E : ECM
S STANDARD D : DETAIL F FINE 7 : REDUCTION

�✓1_f X11 RP H Y-/
F A M I L Y F A R M S
12/12/96
Mr. Kerr T. Stevens
N.C. Director of Water Quality/Fayetteville Region
Wachovia Building Site 714
Fayetteville, NC 28301-5043
FAX: [phone]
Dear Mr. Stevens,
�'P a r s" � E� � Ut" C% a
DEC 16 1996
��l-(. �ENT
REG.
0FF10E
I spoke with Mr. Wilson Spencer today of the Sampson County NRCS office. He
and Dave Little had conferred and have set a different date for visiting Mag 4 to
prepare a terrace plan. The original meeting was to take place this week. The new
date has been set for January 7. They are heavily prior committed to performing
cost -share work before the end of the year. If you have any questions, please call
Wilson directly at 910-592-7963.
Sincerely u s,
4�� a ;W
Bruce Evans
Murphy Family arms Land and Nutrient Management
BE/jks
HAUSEMSTALNMWEVENS. DOC
Post Office Box 759, Rose Hill, North Carolina 28458, [phone], FAX [phone]

12/09/96 MON 15:28 FAX [phone] MURPHY FARMS INC.
i
DEC
R ^ 9 998
��Q
q
MURPHY ENV. MANAGEMENT
FAMILY FA R MI 8 FAYETTEVILLE REG. OFFK.�_
December 9, 1996
Mr. Kerr T, Stevens
NC Div. of Water Quallty/Fayetteville Region
Wachovia Bldg., Ste. 714
Fayetteville, N.C. 28301-5043
FAX [phone]
Dear Mr. Stevens,
I received your December 5th letter on Saturday, December 7th. I am
very concerned and somewhat confused because the content of the letter differs
somewhat from the impression I was left with after, the on-site visit I had with Ed
Buchan on Wednesday, November 27th. Therefore, the purpose for this letter is
to first seek more information and secondly to address the issues raised in your
letter.
First, to enhance our understanding could you please provide me with:
1. A copy of the on site report submitted by Ed Buchan.
2. A copy of the report being submitted to the DWQ Compliance Group and
the recommendations from your office.
3. A copy of the recommendations from your office to the Director of the
DWQ for revocation of deemed permitted status of our farm.
Now, to address your concerns. We are seriously committed to
environmentally responsible pork production and will go to considerable lengths
to correct this isolated incident. Specifically:
1. We are immediately implementing a Standard Operating Procedure of
having the operator check the spray fields every four hours during an
Irrigation event. If inspection reveals any run off or ponding, Irrigation will
be terminated immediately.
Post Office Box 759, Rose Hill, North Carolina 28458, [phone], FAX [phone]
[a 002

12/09/96 MON 15:29 FAX [phone] MURPHY FARMS INC.
2. We will immediately modify our application Irate on the sloping sprayfield
at Mag 4 to ensure runoff will not occur. ;
3. On Friday, November 29th I contacted Dade Little in the Sampson County
NRCS office to seek assistance with a design for terracing the slopes at
Mag 4. He is scheduled to visit the farm this week to Initiate the process.
We feel that terracing will impede any potehtial runoff.
4. As a fall safe measure we will use a bulldozer to construct berms at Mag 4
at the edge of any spray field susceptible to run off. This will prevent
effluent from entering the waters of the state_ Completion of this job will
be no later than December 20, 1996,
5. We will modify and forward to you within fig days our certified animal
waste management plan to address application rate on sloped areas as
requested.
I will give you a call soon to discuss this mater.
Sincerely ours,
race Evans
Murphy Family Farms Land and Nutrient Management
BE:mst
H:ws2F [e-mail]
Q003

�L
MICROBAC ENVIRONMENTAL LABORATORY, INC.
817 Castle Hayne SL, Fayetteville, North Carolina 28303
Phone [phone] - Fax (9 10) MA -8774
CHAIN OF CUSTODY RECORD
PAGE OF
P.D. 0 arta NAME 1 tt J !�jPRujEcTiu)cA-ncK
i �G.f
WATER COMPOSITE SAMPLING DATA
by J
+a
ALITOMATtc
DISCRETE BEG M DIM. TEM?
.
SAAPrs
1
SEM REPORT TO: CX- G2_ Q ` �'j-
SFa� r�$3o
Z -Z S/
EtcY itG a L t
RIME( qI 0 ) ,r s ` !
TIME DATE DATE TOTAL FLOW
CONTD&KLJS TBS_ TIME TECH
I ICROBAC DIVt"
Seolple Chert Sarp1, Torr¢
Method d Shrprlw t
Tarte
Chad TarrQ
'C 'C
Dere Time
FLOW FLOW RUM
FiiOP'ORT10fED LAfTERVAL MLS15ampb tlea^Vlsa
LAB L0.
SAMPLE ND.
SAMPLE OESCAFTION 1 LOCATION
COU 9=
DATE TIME
SAMPLE TYPE
COMP C~ MATM
NO.OF
CONTAINIM
TYPE /
ANALYSES AEOLESTFD
-
RerarquishW br ice_ e)
rNM
PRESERVATIVE
Received by (SoB)
Date
rime
51
1
1 6
Re"uWvd by: (fie)
Data
Tosle
Received ($'9natuel
Date
rime
%
8
f
rLbW�IS�eV�r O �G��
aL
ut i sc,G.nr�t—
r `
<<
3
C8&-�:fVt&lCer Pt 1);+-k
2_30fik
i
r,
L`• T +0 SrtC &AS Ct
s'�rc mow. � canrr l.ic,w ce
yw
. U <I 5%R-
[I
_37P -A.
.
PUP �C
f
A Med by. pvaftaw
Data
TEM
by J
rune
1
0(e.-
_
2
10�
K i
RdnWislwl by MW=M)
Date
Tarte
Fleceived b)r. )
Date
rune
3
4
RerarquishW br ice_ e)
Daft
Tine
Received by (SoB)
Date
rime
51
1
1 6
Re"uWvd by: (fie)
Data
Tosle
Received ($'9natuel
Date
rime
%
8
Comments or Special Hazards:

FROM : MAG LAND MGT.
PHONE NO. : 910 289 7298 Dec. 16 1996 03:19PM P2
Page 2
The acres needed to apply the animal waste is based on typical
nutrient content for this type of Facility. Annual acreage
requirements may be more or less based on the nutrient analysis
report for your nutrient management facility.
YOUR NUTRIENT UTILIZATION PLAN IS BASED ON THE P'OLLOWINOt
Tract
Field
Soil
Crop
Yield
Lbs. N
Acres
Lbs. N
Month to
No.
No.
Type
Code
/Acre
/Unit
Used
Apply
=====
=;=aWc
.==W==
=Mecca
—!=Mew
�rvaac
unci
any
Au-BoB
K
N/A
100.00
40.0
4000
S -APRIL
unci
4
BoB
B
3.8
50.00
4.0
760
MAR -OCT
unci
3
BoB
B
3.8
50.00
20.0
3800
MAR -OCT
unci
2
Au-BoB
B
4.1
50.00
53.0
10865
MAR -OCT
unci
1
Au
B
4.7
50.00
4.5
1057.5
MAR -OCT
Total
121.5
20483
Available Nitrogen
(includes commercial)
17820
.Surplus Or
Deficit
-2663
Crop codes, Crop -unit
A-Barley-bu.
B-Bermudegrase(graze)-tons
C=Bermudagrass(hay)-tons
D-Corn(grain)-bu.
E-Corn(silage)-tons
F -Cotton -lbs, lint
G-Fescue(graze)-tons
H-Fescue(hay)-tons.
I=Oats-bu.
J =Rye-bu.
K=Small grain(graze)-acre
L -Small grain(hay)-acre
M-Sorghum(grain)-cwt.
W-Wheat-bu.
Y-Fescue(pasture)-tons
Z-Bermudagrass(pasture)-tons

FROM : MAG LAND MGT.
PHONE NO. : 910 289 7298
Dec. 16 1996 03:20PM P4
Page 4
If more commercial fertilizer is used than shown in this plan,
then additional acres of land may be needed. A three to fifteen
feet wide permanent grass filter strip should be seeded along all
ditches in fields that receive -animal waste.
Additional comments:
Prepared by:
� / 1
N,O
Title: Date; A_:a7. 15
.� NCe¢.`vr�d
Concurred in by: I Date. ;L
Produce
I underetand that I must own or have access to equipment,
primarily irrigation equipment, to land apply the animal effluent
described in this nutrient utiliZation plan. This equipment must
available at the appropriate pumping time such that no discharge
occurs from,the lagoon in a 25 -year 1 -day storm event.'',''I also
certify that the Waste will be applied on the land according to
this plan at the appropriate times and at rater that no runoff
occurs.
SM FAQ
''L Q_-_ Date :
Producer
Technical Specialist:
Date:

Microbac Laboratories, Inc.
MICROBAC ENVIROHMEI,(TAL LABORATORY i#11
817 CASTLE RAYNE STREET t4C #37714
FAYET'TEV.ILLE, MC 28303 USDA #3787
[phone] / [phone] (IJAX)
AIR • FUEL • WATER • FOOD • WASTES ,
CERTIFICATE OF ANALYSIS
"CERT.. #18225
C:LTENT: NC DEM ]ATE RECD: 11./25/96 SAMPLED: 3.1./2.5/96
ADDRESS: Wachovia Building, Suite 714 SAMPLED BY: E. Buchan
Fayetteville, NC 26301 DELIVERED BY: E. Buchan
CONTACT PERSON: Mr. E. Buchan SAMPLE CODE: WW, Stream, Grab
ACCOUNT .NUMBER:: -#tit Ha- - ..... _ _ REk R C�:=Mur�si hr's F+artY{' z
SAMPLE,ID: 1. Field Discharge 0 Crk- ID #96WE116742
2. Upstream - ID #96WU116743
3. Downstream - ID #96WD116744 DATA REVIEWED BY:
4. DATE REPORTED: 1.2/02/96
4
-i�,i-+++,k++++++k+++4. k k*#+i'-k+#+•}+4 i+4k i,+i-0++i++4++-Ir ++-k J+-1-++i+i-4 4, 1 4,44+k+ -k k -L4-4 k* 4 t- I;+*4.1 I & i 13 i
ANALYSIS METHOD 1, 2 3 4
+++##++#ak+#++*-k+++++++++#++*+++++#*k+##+#**##*##+*++++*+++**++++++++++++-+++.++++++-k+a-.++-k+-I ,b
COLIFORM, FECAL (per 104 ml) SM18 9222D `i-( 1.31000 194 3140
-1 COMMENTS:, -.t6 -R-Less .than .
> = Greater than
tl 1 fS�
PAGE 1 OF I
3
The data and other Information contained on this. and other accompanying documents, represent only the sample(s) analyzed and is MEMBER
rendered upon the condition that It Is not to be reproduced wholly or In part for advartiaing or other purposes without written approval
from the laboratory.
USDA -EPA -NIOSH Tasting Food Sanitation Consulting Chemical and Microbiological Analyses and Research

b
Microbac Laboratories, Inc.
FAYETTEVIL,LE DIVISION
817. CATTLE HAYNE STREET
FAYETTEVILLE, NC 28303
[phone] / (910) 564--6774 (FAX)
AIR • FUEL •, WATER 9 FOOD
CERTIFICATE OF ANALYSIS
Pic f! .1.1,
HC #37714
USDA #3707
WASTES -
CERT"#19934
CT.,TFNT: NC DRHNR DATE RECrn: 67/10/97 ,SAMPT,RD:,. 07/1, i%97
ADDRESS: Wachovia Building, Suite 714 SAMPLED BY: E. Buchan
Fayetteville, NC 20301 DELIVERED BY: E. Buchan
CONTACT PERSON; Mr. Ed Buchan . SAMPLE CODE: Stream, grab
ACCOUNT NUMBER:_ _.fl<NQQ3 REFERENCE: NAG #4
SAMPLE TD: I. Downstream * - ID 497WD73891
5
2. Upstream *+ ID #97WU73892 j
3. DATA; REVIEWED BY
A. `,D;�TE REPORTED: 07/11i/97
++++++4,4+++,F++ +���--k 'i,++4-&ah•i!-#+4++4+++*+f4++-kk44+-L#+ + &•t,F14,4-#++i-11 A -4 -4 -++++*+t -i+ -yr++++
ANALYsbETHOD2 3 4
t 1
+++*#+++*++++++{fir++++#++#,+++++-4+++*++++++++1*+}j#i+++++++++++++1-+++++4-+++++{++++
j
COLIFORM, FECAk� (per 100 ml) SM18 9222D�'; 1159545 400
kW
A
COMMENTS: Downstream of confluene 'pLbintN/UT to Six Runs Creek
+ Upstream of contl:uene po - t) WUT to Six Runs Greek
Less than -
-��. > "Greater than
RECEA/M
JUL 2 11997,
..� � '` RSFAYG TTEVlLLE�_,o ..
. OFFICE
,X
�1PAGE 1 Or 1
The data and other Information contained on this, and other accompanying documents, represent only the sample(s) analyzed and Is MEMBER
rendered upon the condition that It Is not to be reproduced wholly or In part for advenislnQ or other purposes without written approval
from the taboratory.
USDA -EPA -NIOSH Testing Food Sanitation Consulting Chemical and Microbiological Analyses and Research

Microbac Laboratories.'Inc.
•-'FAY'EITEVILLE DIVISION NC #11
12'-'CMSTL2 KAY'Drl!Z ETRETT rix_ #37711
FAYETTEVILLE, NG 28303 USDA #3787
[phone] / • (910) 864=x6.774 (FAX)
AIR FUELS'_.• WATER FOOD WASTES.
CERTIFICATE;4F-ANALYSIS VERT #19933
CLTENT: NC DEHNR r"J 13A'TF RECrD: 07/10/97 SAMPTAD:07/ Ilk 97
ADDRESS: Wachovia -Building, Suite 714 !SAMPLED BY: E. Buchan
Fayetteville, NC 28301 "* DELIVERED BY: E. Buchan
CONTACT PERSON: Mr. Ed Buchan SAMPLE CODE: Stream, grab
_ - ACCOUNT UUMBER:­-41(N003 . � -+. -- `. - •� � • (2E�.ER�II�E i tqG
SAMPLE ID: 1. UpStream of field ditch - ID #9,7WU73889
.2. Downstream of field ditch.- ID #97WD73890
3. DATA REVIEWED BY: �I
r+
4. DATE. REPORTED: 07/1.5/97
�, +,►#+++•s,4***+*sa,r+-t-+k+iis krh+�ki•It- +Ir+i+k4.++4, k-k'k4-'k ++r-k+A-4 -k .4-kA.4,Ar 'Ir 4 -k .4 1.1
ANALYSIS METHOD 1 2 � � 4
' COLIFORM, FECAL 1pe-Ir: 114 ml) SM1.8{ 9222D 541 6125
.1 R
COMMENTS: Less that
?�, d Greeter than
,. rS
Ott
f { AUL 11997
FAVETTEVILLE
r ' F REC.OFFICE'
PAGE 1 OF i
The data and other Information contained on this, and other accompanying documents, represent only the sample{s} analyzed and Is MEMBER
rendered upon the oonditlon that k Is not to be reproduced wholly or In part for advertising or other purposes without written approval
from the laboratory, '
USDA -EPA -NIOSH Testing Food Sanitatlon Consulting Chemical and Microbiological Analyses and Research

'State of North Carolina
Department of Environment,
Health and Natural Resources-'-,"",
Fayetteville Regional Office
James B. Hunt, Jr., Governor
Jonathan B. Howes, Secretary
.July 15, 1997
Mr. Bruce Evans
692 Bonham Road
Magnolia, NC 28453
SUBJECT: Operation Review Corrective Action Recommendation
Melville Farm #2
Facility No. 82-29
Sampson County
Dear Mr. Evans,
e��
IDEHNF:Z
On July 9, an Operation Review was conducted on Melville Farm #2, facility no. 82-29. This Review,
undertaken in accordance with G.S. 143-215.1 OD, is one of two visits scheduled for all registered livestock
operations during the 1997 calendar year. The Division of Water Quality will conduct a second site inspection.
During the Review, it was determined that waste was not being discharged to the waters of the State,
and the animal waste collection, treatment, storage and disposal systems were operated under the responsible
charge of a certified operator. However, the following management deficiencies were discovered and noted for
corrective action: waste utilization plan needs to be written for farm; repair all leaks to flush tanks; erosion was
seen on lagoon wail closest to hog house; repair erosion so surface runoff from houses does not go into
lagoon; reseed bare spots on lagoon; remove trees from lagoon slope; mow inside slope of lagoon; remove
weeds from spray field; and resprig bermuda in late fall or early sprig at DM Farm Sec. 1 Site 4 where sludge is
going to be applied from Dell Farm. These management deficiencies need to be addressed and corrected.
_..:_,.,: ,you-are.,encouraged to contact your certified technical specialist if -additional -assistance is needed. During
ensuing reviews, these same deficiencies will be re-examined to determine if corrective actions were
implemented. _
In order for your facility to remain in compliance with environmental regulations, animal waste cannot be
discharged into the waters of the State, and the animal waste collection, treatment, storage and disposal
systems must be properly maintained and operated under the responsible charge of a certified operator.
Please remember that you are required to obtain and implement an approved animal waste
management plan by the end of this year. The plan must be certified either a designated technical specialist or
a professional engineer. For additional assistance with the plan, please contact your local Soil and Water
Conservation District Office or local Cooperative Extension Service Office.
Wachovia Building, Sulte-7144,Fayetteville WI *FAX [phone] t f
North Carolina 28301-5043 � CAn Equal Opportunity Affirmative Action Employer
Voice 910-486-1541 50% recycled/ 10% post -consumer paper

The Division of Soil and Water Conservation appreciates your cooperation with this Operation Review.
Please do not hesitate. to; call, me at 9.101486-1541 if you have any questions, concerns or need additional
information.
Sincerely,
Lt qu��I
Scott Faircloth
Environmental Specialist II
cc: Sampson Soil and Water Conservation District
Ed Buchan, DWQ Environmental Engineer
Carroll .Pierce
Murphy Family Farms
DSWC Regional Files
M

DSWC Animal Feedlot Operation Review
DWQ Animal Feedlot Operation Site Inspection; -yT
10 Routine O Complaint O Follow-up of DWO inspection 0 Follow-up of DSWC review O Other
Facility Number —�
Farrn Status: tb Registered.. ❑ Applied for Permit
Certified ❑ Permitted
Date of Inspection
Time of Inspection t 10:IV i 24 hr. (hh:mm)
Total Time fin fraction of hours
( ex. 1.25 for l hr Ia min)) Spent on Review -�
or Inspection (includes travel and processing)
© Not Operational I Date Last Operated: .....................................................................,...............................................
Faun Narnet �.11�.��.f�... �" �.C!�.. .......... County:.........SgM J0Y1......................................................
........................................................ ..
Owner Name:.... Vli.� .......... !`!1..!�...... j MS ... Phone No :..................... 5-311210
Facility Contact: ..Jf�......... EqAf\S.............................. Title:........ (� . 4 \............................. Phone No:..... .,1... ``.... ....... ........
Mailing Address: +\ �.. '�.b !............................................... .(A!Y\%..:k0. 1n...... L.......a °�.1. ..........................
Onsite Representative:.. � C' .......,..6(z�.............................................................. Integrator:....... 1..,...(R(M5.......................................
Certified Operator:........ jay*& ...................... wcsml�_. ....................... I ................ Operator Certification Number:.., ..���L� .............
Location of Farm: Prom Wcmfmi �A kf 4 M ] fa l m '1i )l
........................................................................................................................................................................................................................................ –
CiOSS ..
Latitude Longitude
Type of Operation Design h. Current Design Current Design' Current
Swine Cppacity'; Population . Poultry Capacity Population Cattle Capacity Population
❑ rWean to Feeder ❑Layer ❑Dairy
Feeder to Finish JE1 Non -Layer I ❑ Non -Dairy
❑ Farrow to Wean
❑ Farrow to Feeder Total Design Capacity .
❑ Farrow to Finish
Total SSLW
❑ Other
Numbet of Lagoons 7 HoldmglPonds ❑ Subsurface Drains Present 110 Lagoon Area I❑ Spray Field Area f .
�.
_General
1. Are there any buffers that need maintenance/improvement? ❑ Yes 0 No
2. Is any discharge observed from any part of the operation? ❑ Yes M No
Discharge originated at: ❑ Lagoon ❑ Spray Field ❑ Other
a. If discharge is observed, was the conveyance tnan-made? ❑ Yes � No
b, If discharge is observed, did it reach Surface Water? (If yes, notify DWQ) El Yes Na
c. If discharge is observed, what is the estimated flow in gal/min:'
d. Does discharUe bypass a la*oons Stem? (If e, notify DWQ) Yes No
3. Is there evidence of past discharge from any part of the operation? ❑ Yes No
4. Were there any adverse impacts to the waters of the State other than from a discharge? ❑ Yes [� No
5. Does any part of the waste management system (other than Iagoons/holding ponds) require ❑ Yes 'No
mai ntenance/intlirovement? / ,
4/30/97 Continued on buck

Facility Number:. a —
6. Is facility not in compliance with any applicable setback criteria in effect at the time of design?
7. Did the facility fail to have a certified operator in responsible charge?
8. Are there lagoons or storage ponds on site which need to -be properly closed?
Structures (Lagoons and/or Holding Pend
9. Is storage capacity (freeboard plus storm storage) less than adequate?
Freeboardft Structure 1 Structure Structure 3 Structure 4
Freeboard(ft):
............. ....................................................................................................................................
10. Is seepage observed from any of the structures?
11. Is erosion, or any other threats to the integrity of any of the structures observed?
❑ Yes[ No
❑ Yes [ No
❑ Yes [ No
❑ Yes [ No
Structure 5 Structure 6
] Yes []No
Yes ❑ No
12.
Do any of the structures need maintenance/improvement?
9q Yes
❑ No
(If any of questions 9-12 was answered yes, and the situation poses
an immediate public health or environmental threat, notify DWQ)
13.
Do any of the structures lack adequate minimum or maximum liquid level markers?
❑ Yes
:[X No
Waste Application
14.
Is there physical evidence of over application?
❑ Yes
No
(If in excess of
Wp�MF runoff entering waters of the State, notify DrWQ)�rr
15.
Crop type .......IM �yjr.......65).......G 7� .d ................58.1).......11..! .i. .......U.l,................................................................................
16.
Do the receiving crops differ with those designated in the Animal Waste, Management Plan (AWMP)?
❑ Yes
❑ No
17.
Does the facility have a lack of adequate acreage for land application?
? ❑ Yes
❑ No
18.
Does the receiving crop need improvement?
j .Yes
❑ No
19.
Is there a lack of available waste application equipment?
❑ Yes
j No
20.
Does facility require a follow-up visit by same agency?
❑ Yes
l[ No
21.
Did Reviewer/Inspector fail to discuss review/inspection with on-site representative?
❑ Yes
No
For Certified Facilities Only
22. Does the facility fail to have a copy of the Animal Waste Management Plan readily available? ❑ Yes ❑ No
,...._23—Vere any additional problems noted which cause noncompliance of the Certified'AWMPT' ' " ❑ Yes ❑ No
24. Does record keeping need improvement? ❑ Yes ❑ No
� t11—
Ilk
I
11 Zafi';flt, Y 1cm raids tb be wf tit-tyn -fib, �aem
cf
o516N yJci551- 'N 6n
. 54� � r�no� � t5"�s does not
�ac� � r� �. hal
e�Cz� lxtfe Spv�S 6
Reviewer/Inspector Name�1
Reviewer/Inspector Signature:
rr. rr..:+
ho� �oaa�f.5 ���afl' Q,fpS�o
�p r`nt� 1rx9C0�1

State of North Carolina
'Department of Envlronment,
Health and Natural �Resources, ,
Fayetteville Regional Office
James B. Hunt, Jr., Governor
Jonathan B. Howes, Secretary
July 15, 1997
Mr. Bruce Evans
692 Bonham Road
Magnolia, NC 28453
SUBJECT: Operation Review Corrective Action Recommendation
Melville Farm #1
Facility No. 82-27
Sampson County
Dear Mr. Evans,
e��
EDEF.HNF;Z
On July 9, an Operation Review was conducted on Melville Farm #1, facility no. 82-27. This Review,
undertaken in accordance with G.S. 143-215.1 OD, is one of two visits scheduled for all registered livestock
operations during the 1997 calendar year. The Division of Water Quality will conduct a second site inspection.
During the Review, it was determined that waste was not being discharged to the waters of the State,
and the animal waste collection, treatment, storage and disposal systems were operated under the responsible
charge of a certified operator. However, the following management deficiencies were discovered and noted for
corrective action: waste utilization plan needs to be written for farm; repair all over -filling and leaking flush
tanks; repair erosion on lagoon walls; remove trees from the back slope of the lagoon under technical
specialist supervision; remove weeds from spray field; and resprig bermuda in late fall or early spring at DM
Farm Sec. 1 Site 4 where sludge is going to be applied from Dell Farm. These management deficiencies need
to be addressed and corrected. You are encouraged to contact your certified technical specialist if additional
assistance is needed. During ensuing reviews, these same deficiencies will be re-examined to determine if
-corrective actions were implemented.
In order for your facility to remain in compliance with environmental regulations, animal waste cannot be
discharged into the waters of the State, and the animal waste collection, treatment, storage and disposal
systems must be properly maintained and operated under the responsible charge of a certified operator.
Please remember that you are required to obtain and implement an approved animal waste
management plan by the end of this year. The plan must be certified either a designated technical specialist or
a professional engineer. For additional assistance with the plan, please contact your local Soil and Water
Conservation District Office or local Cooperative Extension Service Office.
Wachovia Bulldln9% 'Sulte 714, Fayetteville `wl FAX 910-4$6=0tt
North Carolina 28301-5043 lltf An Equal Opportunity Affirmative Action Employer
Voice 910-486-1541 50% recycled/ 109/6 post -consumer paper

The Division of Soil and Water Conservation appreciates your cooperation with this Operation Review.
Please do not hesitate to call me at 9101486-1541 if you have any questions, concerns or need additional
information. _
Sincerely,
Scott Faircloth
Environmental Specialist 11
cc. Sampson Soil and Water Conservation District
Ed Buchan, DWQ Environmental Engineer
Carroll Pierce
Murphy Family Farms
DSWC Regional Files

�] DSWC Animal Feedlot Operation Review
DWQ Animal Feedlot Operation Site, Inspection,
1Q Routine O Complaint O Follow-up of DWQ inspection Q Follow-up of DS«'C review O Other I
Facility Number
Farm Status: ❑ Registered ❑ Applied for Permit
❑ Certified ❑ Permitted
Date of Inspection
Time orf Inspection L_BLQ2_J 24 hr. (hh:mm)
Total Time (in fraction of hours
(ex:1.25 for I hr 1; min)) Spent on Review
or Inspection (includes travel and processing)
DNot Operational Date Last Operated: ...............................................................S..................
..�i.�... g.... 1..Qt.f!1.... ..'... County:'1.!npvN......................................................
Farm Name: .....
r C r
OwnerName:..... ` 1• 1�....... N'l. lJ. ......1.1..1�....................................... .. Phone No: -R-a..19.1......................... ............
....
Facility Contact: ... ...�1�.4.�L'.......�yAM.............................. Title:.... ....... F.f�1!�..�.�.......................... Phone No:......a�q.... �.�.��.................
MailingAddress:.......0.... 011,..!V�!i"....... bu�................................................... ...!"I�l...d.i1.�1......... x...................................... .. .�. .....
Onsite Representative: ...lr.m....... S Integrator:....... �1.. ..................................................
Certified Operator :.......Jams .......................................... .... ...... ........ Operator Certirication Number:........ .. �.no.............
Location of Farm: rtm WkUUOSS �Q �R M(tor M 1S 1 m �e f U0'( +k
C... � �0 5........Q.r........ ��................................................................................................................................................................................................ .
Latitude Longitude �• ��:�
Type of Operation:Design .' .Current `F Design Current '
SwineCapacity ,Population Poultry Capacity Population
❑ Wean to Feeder
Feeder to Finish a
❑ Farrow to Wean
❑ Farrow to Feeder
❑ Farrow to Finish
❑ Other
Design -Current
Cattle 'Capacity Population .:-..
❑ Dairy
❑ Non -Dairy
Number of.Lagoans;/ Holding Ponds q ❑ Subsurface Drains Present' ❑ Lagoon Area 10 Spray Field Area
General
1, Are there any buffers that need maintenance/improvement? ❑ Yes [ No
2. is any discharge observed from any part of the operation? ❑ Yes ( No
Discharge originated at; ❑ Lagoon ❑ Spray Field ❑ Other
a. If di,schar-e is observed, was the conveyance man-made:'❑Yes � No
h. If discharge is observed, did it reach Surface Wa(er? (Il' yes, notify DWQ) ❑ Yes No
c. lfdischar�_e is ohservetl, what is the cstittiated flow in gaUmin?
d. Dues discharge bypass a lagoon system? (Ifye;, notify DWQ) ❑Yes No
3. Is there evidence of past discharge frorn any part of the operation? ❑ Yes No
4. Were there any adverse impacts to the waters of the State other than from a discharge? ❑ Yes [1 No
5. Does any part of the waste management system (other than lagoons/holding ponds) require ❑ Yes f ` No
m�tinten:tnce/itriprovement'? r' ,
4/3Q/97 Confirured ou hack

Facility Number: —
6. Is facility not in compliance with any applicable setback criteria in effect at the time of design'?
7. Did the facility fail to have a certified operator in responsible charge?
8. Are there lagoons or storage ponds on site which need to be properly closed?
Structures (Lagoons and/or Holding_Ponds
9. Is storage capacity (freeboard plus storm storage) less than adequate?
Freeboard (ft): Structure I Structure 2 Stnlcture 3 Structure 4
.................31.'1.................................. ...................................... ........ I., .......... .......
10. Is seepage observed from any of the structures?
11. Is erosion, or any other threats to the integrity of any of the structures observed?
12. Do any of the structures need maintenance/improvement?
(If any of questions 9-12 was answered yes, and the situation poses
an immediate public health or environmental threat, notify DWQ)
13. Do any of the structures lack adequate minimum or maximum liquid level markers?
Waste Application
14. Is there physical evidence of over application?
(If in excess of WMP, or runoff entering waters of the Sta notify DWQ)
15. Crop type f 5!11 �..... f 455......�?.�Q 1 ................ J ' .......�1. ! .l][ ......!11..q .!...........................
❑ Yes j] No
❑ Yes I( No
❑ Yes No
❑ Yes 0 No
Structure 5 Structure 6
16. Do the receiving crops differ with those designated in the Animal Waste Management Plan (AWMP)?
17. Does the,facility have a lack of adequate acreage for land application?
18. Does the receiving crop need improvement?
19, is there a lack of available waste application equipment?
20. Does facility require a follow-up visit by same agency?
2I. Did Reviewer/Inspector fail to discuss review/inspection with on-site representative?
For Certitied Facilities Only
22. Does the facility fail to have a copy of the Animal Waste Management Plan readily available?
23. Were any additional problems noted,which cause -noncompliance of the Certified AWMP?
24. Does record keeping need improvement?
( Yes
❑ No
[� Yes
❑ No
NYes
❑ No
❑ Yes No
❑ Yes No
? ❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes
❑ No
Yes
❑ No
❑ Yes]
No
❑ Yes
l No
❑ Yes
No
[:]Yes ❑ No
[]Yes [I N6'
❑ Yes ❑ No
�feed5 +b hayc tot�w Viae wf,'RT\ 'Fb( Ta><�.
)LAS - k5k +Mk5
1;
o,;r ��cos+an n �n �o� Wec1�5 lr, ka�r'5 ad��15e(�
f\ .\Ikk��oC�55 of �e s n `�z 14 O r\ wa h QNd rv\0 11 �Te
+Ukl 5 zeta i5'�' �u��iV�Sfon
I 5 rq _D w,11� k, li mds)
I� UN 04
�Pmk fl' w tM� w�csc Sl��� z is alnz �o 7777,A7
Reviewer/Inspector Name s
Reviewer/lnspector Signature: Date:
eC' Mvic nn of Wnlnr tMaUhr Wnfnr 1! A Inft—

State of North Carolina
Department of Environment,
Health and Natural Resources
Fayettevllle Regional Office
James B. Hunt, Jr., Governor
Jonathan B. Howes, Secretary
July 15, 1997
Mr. Bruce Evans
692 Bonham Road
Magnolia, NC 28453
SUBJECT: Operation Review Corrective Action Recommendation
Dell Farm
Facility No. 82-33
Sampson County
Dear Mr. Evans,
E:)EiHNFZ
On July 9, an Operation Review was conducted on Dell Farm, facility no. 82-33. This Review,
undertaken in accordance with G.S. 143-215.1 OD, is one of two visits scheduled for all registered livestock
operations during the 1997 calendar year. The Division of Water Quality will conduct a second site inspection.
During the Review, it was determined that waste was not being discharged to the waters of the State,
.and the animal waste collection, treatment, storage and disposal systems -were operated under the responsible
charge of a certified operator. However, the following management deficiencies were discovered and noted for
corrective action: waste utilization plan needs to be written for farm; repair leaks on flush tanks; needs to
properly close smaller two lagoons under technical specialist supervision when the new lagoon is constructed;
repair erosion that was seen on two places on back slope of lagoon behind hog house; Murphy's has
approximately twenty-two acres in spray field behind lagoon in crab grass; need to remove crab grass and
plant millet in spray field; watch ponding of waste in two places of spray field; take soil test once a year on
spray fields; and take waste sample of lagoon every 120 days (three times a year). These management
deficiencies need to be addressed and corrected.. You.are encouraged to contact your certified technical
specialist if additional assistance is needed. During ensuing reviews, these same deficiencies will be re-
examined to determine if corrective actions were implemented.
In order for your facility to remain in compliance with environmental regulations, animal waste cannot be
discharged into the waters of the State, and the animal waste collection, treatment, storage and disposal
systems must be properly maintained and -operated under the responsible charge of a certified operator.
Please remember that you are required to obtain and implement an approved animal waste
management plan by the end of this year. The plan must be certified either a designated technical specialist or
a professional engineer. For additional assistance with the plan, please contact your local Soil and Water
Conservation District Office or local Cooperative Extension Service Office.
Wdchovla BuIlding-Suite 714, Fayetteville ��� t FAX 910=486-0707
North Carolina 28301-5043 ftM/ C An Equal Opportunity Affirmative Action Employer
Voice 910-486-1541 50% recycled/10% post -consumer paper

The Division of Soil and Water Conservation appreciates your cooperation with this Operation Review.
Please do not hesitate to call me at 9101486-1541 if you have any questions, concerns or need additional
information.
Sincerely,
� q oil o
Scott Faircloth
Environmental Specialist II
cc: Sampson Soil and Water Conservation District
Ed Buchan, DWQ Environmental Engineer
Carroll Pierce
Murphy Family Farms
DSWC Regional Files
7

j� DSWC Animal Feedlot Operation Review
❑ DWQ Animal. Feedlot. Operation Site Inspection
10 Routine O Comnlaint O Follow -uv of DWQ inspection O Follow -un of DS%VC review O Other
Facility Number
Farm Status:Registered [3Applied for Permit
Certified ❑ Permitted
Date of Inspection
Time of Inspection
24 hr, (hh:mm)
total Titne (in fraction of hours
.- (ex:1..25 for 1 hr 15 min)) Spent on Review
or Inspection (includes travel and processing)
10 Not Operational- I Date Last Operated:....................................................................X-1.................................I..".........cCuttnty• ....................Farm Name:C.........i4.C�.......................................................................................... , •..........,{l�Il......................,...............................
C �11 I ii��QQII
OwnerName:.....1.!.1� �. .......f..41!!!.1��........ ... !................................................... Phone No:..,..,.. ., �.1.I !?................,.................................
. �...1�. [ �"
Facility Contact: . SAIL. !)(� ......................................... Title:....Irli!. 1 e ........................:.............. Phone Nb:..... ! ,1..... 0......................
MailingAddress: .... ...1J ........ �.fl�.....1�.1....................1»�k.(��}.,��l.�.V.%i...T......�...... ...........�.f1.�,.................................................. ..........................
y
Onsite Rep resentative:....��......... r..b �5.......... .., ...... Integrator:.....,. ��.!llJ....:.....Li+�l..I�% .... ..l.u!l??.................
.
Certified Operator:....... a. � 5. ..gqu.� 11........... ...... Operator Certification Number •.2UN................
Location of Farm: Frbyv\ wGvtflm K i K 1g 41 fafM 15 1YV\*, t kfi \ P WJ crw.
... ... .. ....
........... * ........ * ......
.
Latitude Longitude
Type of Operation Design � Current w:A; Design Current 'Design Current r
=Swine "t CapacUy; Population .:' Poultry Capacity Population Cattle Capacity Population
❑ Wean to Feeder
Layer ❑Dairy
#xi Feeder to Finish :M ❑ Non -Layer ❑ Non -Dairy
❑ Farrow to Wean
❑ Farrow to Feeder Total Design Capacity
❑ Farrow to Finish r
,Y Total SSLW .
❑
u,
Other
Subsurface Drains Presetti ❑ Lagoon Area I0 Spray Field Area
General
1. Are there any buffers that need maintenance/improvement? ❑ Yes 0 No
2. Is any c[ischarlTe observed from any part of the operation? ❑ Yes 0 No
Discharge originated at: ❑ Lagoon ❑ Spray Field ❑ Other
a. It'dischar�,e is observed, was the conveyance man-made? ❑ Yes [ No
b. If discharge is observed, slid it reach Surface Water? (If yes, notify DWQ) ❑ Yes [ ] No
c. If dischar,e is observed, what is the estimated flow in gal/min?
d, hoes discharge bypass a lagoon system'' (If yes, notify DWQ) ❑ Yes � No
3. Is there evidence of past discharge from any part of the operation? ❑ Yes O No
4. Were there any adverse impacts to the waters of the State other than from a discharge'? ❑ Yes No
S. Does any part of the waste management system (other than lagoons/holding ponds) require ❑ Yes [ No
maintenance/intlrrovement?
4/30/97
Continuedon hack

Facility Number: �-
6. Is facility not in compliance with any applicable setback criteria in effect at the time of design? ❑ Yes ( No
7. Did the facility fail to have a certified operator in responsible charge? ❑ Yes [ No
$. Are there lagoons or storage ponds on site which need to be properly closed? Yes ❑ Nd
Structures (Lagoons and/or Holding Ponds
9. Is storage capacity (freeboard plus storm storage) less than adequate?
Cl Yes
0 No
Freeboard (ft): Structure I tru4Lure 2 Structure 3 Structure 4 Structure 5
mall L o6�
Structure 6
10. Is seepage observed from any of the structures?
Yes
❑ No
11. Is erosion, or any other threats to the integrity of any of the structures observed?
Yes
[:]No
12. Do any of the structures need maintenance/improvement?
, Yes
❑ No
(If any of questions 9-12 was answered yes, and the situation poses
I
an immediate public health or environmental threat, notify DWQ)
13. Do any of the structures lack adequate minimum or maximum liquid level markers?
❑ Yes
No
I
i'aste Apolication
14. Is there physical evidence of over application?
❑ Yes
No
(If in excess of WMP, or runoff entering waters of the State, notify DWQ)
ctl e
15. Crop type ..................................................... �. ............................... .................................................................... .........................
,.................................
16. Do the receiving crops differ with those designated in the Animal Waste Management Plan (AWMP)?
❑ No
17. Does the facility have a lack of adequate acreage for land application?
❑ Yes
[:]No
1$, Does the receiving crop need improvement? 0 Yes [_-]No
19. Is there a lack of available waste application equipment? ❑ Yes No
20. Does facility require a follow-up visit by same agency? ❑ Yes j No
2l. Did Reviewer/Inspector fail to discuss review/inspection with on-site representative? ❑ Yes (j No
For Certified Facilities Only
22. Does the facility fail to have a copy of the Animal Waste Management Plan readily available? ❑ Yes ❑ No
23. Were any additional-problems,noted which cause noncompliance of the Certified AWMP?-Yes ❑ No
24. Does record keeping need improvement? ❑ Yesl❑ No
1jm5 t S�m�1c ��ct�l I�,U r�gy5 3 fimt,, n'�-Pr 1
�- ��1a1`�h� tis i5 in �"he ��lkesS OF but`r�;n ons
'1 a
.9
Ia il0 - �iz4a+r ltA5
\dM1�ac--� ��
�I aus is A a
hAAS M �'Al 0164\� M&W4
or , }-Q'f M.
krq�. 61 a
0 V) nti -5 QjAi J
�ar1 ju 0 " ols.
a r� 1k Clb)s � 1u Doris
�y
Reviewer/Inspector Name
Reviewer/Inspector Signature:
C% 1(\ UOSIbN
)N);(,� I(LINN
i�
Date:
a 1)
1 -f lie I u�o
Lig h
Cos
6n;�i
cc: Division of Water Quality, Water Quality Section, Facility Assessment Unit J 1 4/30/97
rt�5�

Producer: In' 'J�kGW
DM
Location:.5R 191-4 5
Saw• �s o,--\ C&
CEIVEED
Telephone: '3. FEB 0,5 1997
Type Operation: Farr -o - w e FA -f ETTF-°.lilal-E
REG. C)pricli
Number of Animals: H+ 4 C5 So s --
{Design Capacity} C)00 F� *� S� �•
1.,! d d ►^� � r'S G r
The waste from your animal facility must be land pplied at a specified rate to prevent
pollution of surface and/or groundwater. The plant nutrients in the animal waste should
be used to reduce the amount of commercial fertilizer required for the crops in the. fields
where the waste is to be applied. This waste utilization plan uses nitrogen as the limiting
nutrient. Waste should be analyzed before each application cycle. Annual soil tests are
strongly encouraged so that all plant nutrients can be balanced for realistic yields of the
crop to be grown.
Several factors are important in implementing your waste utilization pian in order to
maximize the fertilizer value of the waste and to ensure that it is applied in an
environmentally safe manner. Always apply waste based on the needs of the crop to be
grown and the nutrient content of the waste. Do not apply more nitrogen than the crop
can utilize. Soil types are important as they have different infiltration rates, leaching
potentials, cation exchange capacities, and available water holding capacities.. Normally
waste shall not be applied to land eroding at greater than 5 tons per acre per year. With
special precautions, waste may be applied to land eroding at up to 10 tons per acre per
year. Do not apply waste off saturated soils, when it is raining, or when the surface is
frozen. Either of these conditions may result in runoff to surface waters which is not
allowed under DEM regulations. Wind conditions should also be considered to avoid drift
and downwind odor problems. To maximize the value of nutrients for crop production
and to reduce the potential for pollution, the waste should be applied to a growing crop or
applied to bare ground not more than 30 days prior to planting. Injecting the waste or
disking will conserve nutrients and reduce odor problems.
The estimated acres needed to apply the animal waste is based on typical nutrient content
for this type of facility. Acreage requirements should be based on the waste analysis
report from your waste management facility. Attached you will find information on
proper sampling techniques, preparation, and transfer of waste samples to the lab for
analysis.
This waste utilization plan, if carried out, meets the requirements for compliance with 15A
NCAC 2RO217 adopted by the Environmental Management Commission.

Amount o� Waste Produced Per Year(gallons,�t3_tons, etc.)
'BUD animals Xd• 1 (a ) waste/animal/year =�flQam .) waste/year.
unt of Pta"vailable Nitrogen (PAJ Produced Per Year
boo �• 3v
DOanimaIs XS�,Ibs. PAN/animallyear=a3,y6Qbs. PAN/year. (PAN from N. C. Tech.
Guide Std. 633)
Applying the above amount of waste is a big job. You should plan time and have
appropriate equipment to apply the waste in a timely manner.
The following acreage will be needed for waste application based on the crop to be grown
and surface application:
Table 1: ACRES OWNED BY PRODUCER
Tract Field Soil Crop Lbs: N Acres Lbs. N Month of
# No. Tvoe Per Ac_ * Utilized Aunlication
Total , 1-7a,5
*. This N is from animal waste only. If nutrients from other sources such as commercial
fertilizer are applied, they must be accounted for. N must be based on realistic Vfield
expectation.
NOTE. The applicator is cautioned that P and X maybe over applied while meeting the N
requirements. Beginning in 1996 the Coastal Zone Management A ct will require farmers in
some eastern counties of North Carolina to have a nutrient management plan that addresses
all nutrients. This plan only addresses Nitrogen.
2
OffN Asp
• M 7 .. ... MT 1
` c
9 =
Fow.• 6
Total , 1-7a,5
*. This N is from animal waste only. If nutrients from other sources such as commercial
fertilizer are applied, they must be accounted for. N must be based on realistic Vfield
expectation.
NOTE. The applicator is cautioned that P and X maybe over applied while meeting the N
requirements. Beginning in 1996 the Coastal Zone Management A ct will require farmers in
some eastern counties of North Carolina to have a nutrient management plan that addresses
all nutrients. This plan only addresses Nitrogen.
2

Table 2: ACRES WITH AGREEMENT OR LONG TERM LEASE
(Agreement with adjacent landowner must be attached)
(Required only if operator does not own
adequate land (see Required Specification 2])
Traol Field -Soil Crap Lbs, N Acres Lbs. N Month of
# No. Typ e Per Ac. * Utilized Application
Total
* See footnote far Table 1.
Totals from above Tables
Acres Lbs. N
Utilized
Table 1
Table 2
Total
Amount of N
Surplus or e
. 5
3.0 1 1.50
1a•5
�a X50
Produced
fic:
G? 9
t {
NOTE: The Waste Utilization Plan must contain provisions for periodic land
application of sludge at agronomic rates. The sludge will be nutrient rich and will
require precautionary.measures to prevent over application of nutrients or other
elements.
3

�W
µ II..h
See attached map showing the fields to be used for the utilization of waste water.
Application of Waste by Irrigation
Field Soil Type Crop Application Application
No. Rate (In/Hr) Amount (In.)
1 3'
A
a 3 '-i 5
l3e{�
Ma,�q
• �
r
THIS TABLE IS NOT NEEDED IF WASPS IS NOT BEING APPLIED BY IRRIGATION, HOWEVER A SIMILAR TABLE WILL
BE NE 3DED FOR DRY LITTER OR SLURRY.
Your facility is designed for I?b days of temporary storage and the temporary storage
must be removed on the average of once everyMONTHS. In no instance should
the volume of waste being stored in your structure exceed Elevation *M f s .pr. �aw�c.
Call the local.Natural Resources Conservation Service (Formerly Soil. Conservation
Service) or Soil and Water Conservation District office after you receive the waste
analysis report for assistance in determining the amount per acre to apply and the proper
application rate prior to- applying the waste.

T TJ�ZW
REQUIRED SPECIFICATIONS
Animal waste shall not reach surface waters of the state by runofl� drift, manmade
conveyances, direct application, or direct discharge during operation or land.
application. Any discharge of waste which reaches surface water is prohibited. Illegal
discharges are subject to the assessment of civil penalties of $10,000 per day by the
Division of Environmental Management for every day the discharge continues.
2. The Field Office must have documentation in the design folder that the producer either
owns or has long term access to adequate land on which to properly apply the waste.
If the producer does not own adequate land to properly dispose of waste, he shall
provide NRCS with a copy of a written agreement (sample enclosed) with a landowner
who is within a reasosiable proximity, allowing him/her the use of the land for waste
application for the life expectancy of the production facility. It is the responsibility of
the owner of the facility to secure an update of the Waste Utilization Plan when there
•
is a change in the operation, increase in the number of animals, method of utilization,
or available land.
3. Animal waste shall be applied to meet, but not exceed, the Nitrogen needs for realistic
crop yields based on soil type, available moisture, historical data, climate. conditions,
and level of management, unless there are regulations that restrict the rate of
application for'other nutrients.
4. Animal waste may be applied to land that has a Resource Management System (RMS)
or an Alternative Conservation System (ACS). If an ACS is used the soil loss shall be
no greater than 10 tons per acre per year and appropriate filter strips will be used
where runoff leaves the field. These filter strips will be in addition to 'Buffers"
required by DEM. [See FOTG Standard 393 - Filter Strips and Standard 390
(Interim) - Riparian Forest Buffers.)
S. Odors can be reduced by injecting the waste or disking after waste application. Waste
should not be applied when the wind is blowing.
& When animal waste is to be applied on acres subject to flooding, it will be soil
incorporated on conventionally tilled cropland. When applied to conservation tilled
crops or grassland, the waste may be broadcast provided the application does not
occur during a•season prone to flooding. (See "Weather and Climate in North .
Carolina" in the Technical Reference - Environment file for guidance.)

..,•.�.:..� ::..:...:.....:...::: �<<}:::�:;:�:,�r ::. T Tri T �r nTmu,
REQUIRED SPECIFICATIONS
(continued)
7. Liquid waste shall be applied at rates not to exceed the soil infiltration rate such that
runoff does not occur offsite or to surface waters and in a method which does not
cause drift from the site during application. No ponding should occur in order to
control conditions conducive to odor or flies and provide uniformity of application..
8. Animal waste shall not be applied to saturated soils, during rainfall events, or when
the surface is frozen.
9. Animal waste shall be applied on actively growing crops in such a manner that no
more than 20 to 25 percent of the leaf area is covered.
10. Waste nutrients shall not be applied in fall or winter for spring planted crops on soils
with a high potential for leaching. Waste nutrient loading rates on these soils should
be held to a minimum and a suitable winter cover crop planted to take up released
nutrients. - Waste shall not be applied more than 30 days prior to planting of the crop
on bare soil.
11. Animal waste shall not be applied closer than 25 feet to surface water. This distance
may be reduced for waters that are not perennial provided adequate vegetative filter
strips are present. (See Standard 393 - Filter Strips)
12. Animal waste shall not be applied closer than 100 feet to wells.
13. Animal waste shall not be applied closer than 200 feet of dwellings other than those
owned by the landowner.
14. Waste shall be applied in a manner. not to reach other property and public right-of-
ways.
15. Animal waste shall not be discharged into surface waters, drainageways or wetlands by
a discharge or by over -spraying. Animal waste may be applied to prior converted
wetlands provided they have been approved as a land application site by a "technical
specialist". Animal waste should not be applied on grassed waterways that discharge
directly into water courses, and only then at agronomic rates provided the application
causes no nuiolfor drift from the site.
6

T�A� x ,�■■�yr{l' :Z,AFiY113:'i.., .. ':ii�iMu.i}`^ti;^:�iii•�':� i':
REQUIRED SPECIFICATIONS
(continued)
16. Domestic and industrial waste from washdown facilities, showers, toilets, sinks, etc.,
shall not be discharged into the animal waste management system.
17. Lagoons and other uncovered waste containment structures must maintain a maximum
operating level to provide adequate storage for a 25 -year, 24-hour storm event in
addition to the one (1) foot mandatory freeboard.
18. A protective cover of appropriate vegetation will be established on all disturbed areas
(lagoon embankments, berms, pipe runs; etc.). If needed, special vegetation shall be
provided for these areas and shall be fenced, as necessary, to protect the vegetation.
Vegetation such as trees, shrubs,, and other woody species, etc. are limited to areas
where considered appropriate. Lagoon areas should be kept mowed and accessible.
Lagoon berms .and structures should be inspected regularly for evidence of erosion,
leakage, or discharge.
19. If animal production at the facility is to be suspended'or terminated, the owner is
responsible for obtaining and implementing a "closure plan" which will eliminate the
possibility of an illegal discharge, pollution and erosion.
20. Waste handling structures, piping, pumps, reels, etc., should be inspected on a regular
basis to prevent breakdowns, leaks, and spills. A regular maintenance checklist should
be kept on site.

WASTE UTILIZATION PLAN AGREEMENT
Name of Farm: /v� AyaT_
Owner/Manager Agreement
..
I (we) understand and will follow and implement the specification and the operation and
maintenance procedures established in the approved animal waste utilization plan for the
far as named above. I (we) know that any exImnsion to the. existing design capacity of the,
waste treatment and storage system or consti-tiction' of new facilities vAR require a new '
cdrtification to be submitted to the Division of Environment Management (DEM) before
the new animals are stocked. I (we) also understand that there must be no discharge of
animal waste from this system to surface wasters of the state from a storm event less
severe than the 25 -year, 24-hour storm. The approved plan will be fled on-site at the
farm office and at the office of the local Soil and Water Conservation District and will be
available for review by DEM upon request.
Name of Facility Owner: S
(Please print)
� .
Signature: ti/%e// Dat
Name of Mamnaager( diffe t from owner), �IACC��s
Signature Date: 2 -
Name of Technical Specialist: (Please print) r I G s�
r
Affiliation: r [ -o��• 1 ��-S
Address (Agency):
Signal
75 '�_'

'1�' r 3.�r'�at `.j�,r1t ,h] i tyf.•+ 1+_ r i -0,' •' � y � '\ .
'kfr!`tl
r.. 1 '�:'..3.i:'�h' r .f: �w.r. �I'r.0 .. i' ,,, r . .r/ r�.. `. { �`1J'fiLa"..ee:�ttij•'`J , v
11;11 f 'r� ' ,rri f 1 �• { ` - _ r } r _ t ] ,gni r+� -r• f 7�l
1 rt`,+I , n'4�
,. E'!' �t%',•; i,.• -t
'\ V .`�.�W r ,�t, F ° r rir 1 f i•w" f 1., �.-: ••,:
-,tl,:�nl.��•.r.:')- i�yA�' ,,f .r' rl S+, i.,F 1 i,fV, 1 r
1'"/rill♦. \, tt 't r t r° it r. t. -� 1S i s�,,rr• 1� +.� .r � K-
/r/i l ,�,'� f;';. F � �� t i ]i�l ' r i J=•S��-/.r jt} � . w ' �f. �.-:•t
i. •/ r �' �� /. i,•� ., _''r'_"' ..ter
�R t r' i 1 '•' d ,
'• �� yi°7 � �� ' 1 fir' , �,1 "' ',' � ti,;` , , t �I
ri z !l 11 tit ,
.. �'r 1� Wit• L r ,4 i� f. r' +F•„F !1 - t� XYL
p �.r,r` ,'h �IC•1 R,.jl f%t J t 1.,•r�i a r r ;rr /'' f r 1 {i' ° 1 'il ,yll -'r h tY
~g(1� , ag'K' .'r ", aU? �� _yLr 1 1 I , •;
' c r1` >\ rr,i, r.. y.t x:• •'t�� ,!ii' x1,� 1y1 �+ �. I 1�,'4J, tvyrYEl'{1�,�J4���{! i `:••r� •
�'.} �a.,L ,, v.� * •.' I s v i \ + l'Nr , r '` -i 4 r •
w rM1t �{ F 1 rr �I ; I , { r��i}�►� . ,r } _ �� (
it
t 11 1A
,�! f l •i!' ih /'r.o 1 r+ 1.-' 1 �1 +, �t t. l Ir 11� s. : '.HRY�r
\,7Jr,rf Ai '�'If't ,•� la I,J � , V \ ,•��.cc+�+��r n' t f I i � t w ,r .y �, � �
� J ; 1! r . t t r'.• � r \ •d, r ' f '1 1 f �"'w �r °t f !s \t I+ ti t.
,f' i ,t\, , 'f •r '�r! r. r 11 �r }r�;. tih ,,4 'hS tl �� , 11 s.
r, ',1r� 'L /'" i ',` 11,ti , ,1♦ ��` I v -•�4, '.'"t���+�1,F '� l �' ! h a y rd' r),,:
�rte/ -, \' -;1 �•, �• ,I (r�Lr_ .f'~t 1 -r1 el� Y i ' .r t �: �
j�• 4tir.,_ .r t r, � J �.r ,_,. _ ti ri .. ,'}�,1, j �,t\! 1J r t r .. �r.l-:;.
•� t t � - „S 3. tr r, ` J' i t, r } �� a-..� r - , 4' � r -
�r 1 f _ � 1 r '1 ' t v kl 7 7' �. 1 !� ` iP•.' v-,*i
�?;��� l�' t • �} , C ' iY 17 f ° rl .r ] � 1 i r r t l ' b ' t
{•
rn � i ]y tti,rr �,� % _ 5 � .ti r5.r i�.,.' ' ..r; w ' tfr 4 r �r CS/ r, r � rr - •I � a � I,
1 j
it \.a rr{11�! �..• ,{•si �J iF r r v ,rt �r I,,r r/T r�� �-�. �l' � Ir, ` N,I IL! 14 l {l: 1j,�'.
.r. ,• � � 1 t t.S14 sr' r S { � \ �r t �r
,.. .ti,-...; �• .a ,.,'r}; it fl l , t .'{?. x:. .•g � � rr' ��. ,c'1S�' ' t r , r' I` ,1':-r...
t1 s r� •' ,rf % : {t D �r,7 }t I r Frrr t s r 1' -;t!) 1 ,
! ' 1 r. , lA( ' 1' :(�', i1� + ...,r t ' , }' y.5� �1 r r i •{� � ��:.}�)S - f r '. ' tj s , 1 r •r�r
f
tti`�:r�l! .1� ,,r: � ':��:' �4` 1f'- 1, 1 y r.r I! �1- •`'lrktr k "'.: rr. '� °'r �:°1� �:-; r, +,,� tt ��', � r ,' .;1: i': •.' r ' � �? . r r:• vet
, t v � � _ ,,. l ri IJf- r i , I,a,, •� rlw.�`} tilt 't' .! r'G t i
,' f't•-+'�;! � r i \` � � �r t � r V t 1 � �l't v.f1 A,. 41 wl-) y �, I' 1 5'i it
e1 fl ` }rw{�rlrr ��'t J r rti�a�t,tyS�til��y lr r'� 7�• �;
• y.P..- S ;)fir`.' � _' i • ,4, �� � royr: t r ! t �.. r i ' tt � ''a. 1 { - t
:. t 11 r �i• �i w - ttr x S {. , r S ,
L r I .• � \��y:.��,t`�fd�������r' rr.} y_.' r i r 1, r, r'}. prf,�`t �'t �.
t lln a ,rl.
r•' f}-,lA\,< r�• �r� r) It •'� } �t r.-t,,\ ,i ,7 1 r t �, ! 1;•
_ `� r �„ ti' i ®,tr ,r ti • �+ I, `,�' ' 1, t `` rt .. It _ 1 'y4, r 1
Y 3r. i," \f w•{ ;,� �a S ! , r l ' 4,r.- tl ti ; ti 'fft r• e� tl;ft
A
! `�'°� tiZ., r - �• i .. y \
...�,�� ' +a• r ! Ii t: , .4
_ i`� . '. I�..'r�rr i 1r ''rte 4 1��\' ' 4 , Vit` '7 `�t���4�r��+ ��t•• • ..1:`1;F.
rr 41. r i
1 •,.}::' '.II lit i,• J•� i� !i' ' �. :r' + '-i• '; �, i'v�1, qC•. ', c;,;.'�ff,r!-+•%1rJx•�w Fy+ t�i':�,' r�
�.-rr � •a 1 -l�r- r �.. rr .��s � •'S�"� � I,' �Ji a�a.x :f C: t.q. �ilI``II '`SSL !."'
{� F {.i�f '•r+� r�''\Gi.;���. .c -:-�J •: r'•<.+' -t. -r `i_ 6r �•:'•u .lr s�''1%1r •A°• 4'"��... 1�4a%\.'.i, vi
r �� rt°.'�-'i[: ,' - t 1 fl •. l �/ . f t i '<y f 'lii!` 1' 'i"' J It ;r1 ��
tryr r•,.'• . ptY.•-'�'i`w` i, �. I f i�, ••• f ++ 7' ,r' `L�"'i��
.7 � :Y '�::;.-�-".� -\ \ t - w; ,r l� t A •'i,'•'.�� 'r 1. �,�, ,�^.' is'''•'li
r:rr:r �-4. L;�i ;t' � �•rt� 1 •'�n.''+. ` �r�. '.1 -ii'.•;.�;'1.f''';�;-J,'.,� t5�,,'•�•':!_:%�/it,
VIZ
717
� ,all 4•i ��� _ h .. .r L-' �"" '•,!" � ,( .� - •;r° r,t �� �tS : tfy;'"' Y( .l' � ,0 ii �tr•""''
4�>>il,<` ��► 19 �� 'r ,�.}:t-' '' ILA,• �� �.�`.�" } � \ `s-" \1���,.fl� �� s�i>"� �f - J ��" }F°'N j�'
�)r,• r .� OJN �', Y - r; P r\'k1�' t•!y 1� ,{�� - ' , lrr 2 +'�. 3!,
�� t5 �1 ;}�•�� r�.•w F' '��}'1 ` � �_,t•�.i J ','ti'\�;.t����id��_,::+�.l lsr�ti,' ,.'%1[!•
�;;r:i t'' '•_i r � ��L; 1:.;�0 /� r :I �% • rt" ` �;r ��r ��, t' + � � r +•� '.l t � '.y 1 a."�a.,�•,t}tir L, .,.a�� j ,�.
',�ir 1`.• t r Y ` / _ ...- rr -04� , ^t�Qr ❑ : .. ,- prar °) •: i'' :
�J! ' _ �1tt. •�r � � ��/ � ,i r it • 1 t'r ? � r fra .. r.f...:,.^•,,' r 4,', � t
iIt'y('t. Lri �,i•Y!!'� t'-i i7,`"{w )11i�{. ,�
5,•!� ,�':awf' J� i ,r _ t
! ��� � ��-tit��`• 1 YJ'�� ,~C���- hr���V l�'''rIy'.,n �At ,�' ,�'(r' t r f�4�'�•r'iM•'� may' �y ,tiT�1f1���11'r � v � °� 5' 1 •'
,r - - ( �, tiCar� • ,�• .�ahC�.~ F] r Pqr!�
�'., ,' c St, ��:`` ` �_ '� -e � J, �e 'a� ti yti°�y • yJ� J , ���' �y;.�;-�1� -;iiil r -•,tri `�Ir��°`�� iw� a �I
r a _� 1 .11': ri ''tip \',: )" J•j -.1 i]! •yF,iv`/ : v iV r•'� i�l�r ••'� ti �f
JJlf-
lp.-I - •. r ''9 / ti:'� 1, �.., x. r fy f`'_ '��.M1• \ �..arf 1 iE .{S• {;p. � :.-
35
1 •:. - ••�' r, `,�.i S.1 t ,., tyr s. ^n \ 1� M, �'q7 i tV r
Q, �

MERRIT( +tune

State of North Carolina
Department of Environment,
Health and Natural Resources
Division of Water Quality
James B. Hunt, Jr., Governor
Wayne McDevitt, Secretary
A. Preston Howard, Jr., P.E., Director
D. Bruce Evans
DM Farms Sec 1 Site 4.
PO Box 309
Magnolia NC 28453
Dear D. Bruce Evans:
"IV
ROOM
C)EHNR
September 4, 1997 RECER' D
1991
FAYETTEVILLE
REG. OFFICE
Subject: Certificate of Coverage No. AWS8207I7
DM Farms Sec 1 Site 4
Swine Waste Collection, Treatment, Storage
and Application System
Sampson County
In accordance with your application received on June 13, 1997, we are forwarding this Certificate
of Coverage (COC) to Farm No. 82-717, authorizing the operation of an animal waste collection,
treatment, storage and land application system in accordance with the State's General Permit. This
approval shall consist of the operation of this system including, but not limited to, the management of
animal waste from the DM Farms Sec 1 Site 4 Farm, located in Sampson County, with an animal capacity
of no greater than 7920 Feeder to Finish and the application to a minimum of 67.5 acres of land as
specified in the Certified Animal Waste Management Plan (CAWMP).
The COC shall be effective from the date of issuance until December 31, 2001, and shall hereby
void Certificate of Coverage No. AWS310755 dated July 16, 1997. The purpose of this COC, is to
correct the listing for the facility's county. Pursuant to this COC, you are authorized and required to
operate the system in conformity with the conditions and limitations as specified in the General Permit, the
facility's CAWMP, and this COC, with no discharge of wastes to surface waters. An adequate system for
collecting and maintaining the required monitoring data and operational information must be established for
this farm. Any increase in waste production greater than the certified design capacity or increase in
number of stocked animals above the number authorized by this COC will require a modification to the
CAWMP and this COC and shall be completed prior to actual increase in either wastewater flow or number
of animals.
In accordance with General Statue 143-215.10C, Animal Waste Management Plans shall include
the following components:
- A checklist of odor sources and best management practices to minimize these sources.
- A checklist of insect sources and best management practices to minimize these sources.
- Provisions set forth for acceptable methods of disposing of mortalities.
- Provisions regarding emergency action plans.
Your existing Certified Animal Waste Management Plan must include the above elements, by
December 31, 1998. Documentation of the certification must be available to inspectors onsite. Submittal
of the amended certification statement shall be required upon renewal of your permit coverage in 2001.
P.O. Box 29535, Raleigh, North Carolina 27626-0535 Telephone [phone] FAX [phone]
An Equal Opportunity Affirmative Action Employer. 50%,recycled/,10% post -consumer paper

Please be advised that any violation of the terms and conditions specified in this COC, the General
Permit or the CAWMP may result in the revocation of this COC.
Upon notification by the Division of this COC's expiration, you shall apply for its renewal. This
request shall be made within 30 days of notification by the Division.
This COC is not automatically transferable. A name/ownership change application must be
submitted to the DWQ prior to a name change or change in ownership.
If any parts, requirements, or limitations contained in this COC are unacceptable, you have the
right to apply for an individual non -discharge permit by contacting the engineer listed below for
information on this process.. Unless such a request is made within 30 days, this COC shall be final and
binding.
The subject farm is located in the Fayetteville Regional Office. The Regional Office Water Quality
Staff may be reached at [phone]. If you need additional information concerning this COC or the
General Permit, please contact Mike Lewandowski at [phone] ext. 362.
Sincerely,
A. Preston Howard, Jr., P.E.
cc: (Certificate of Coverage only for all cc's)
Sampson County Health Department
Fayetteville Regional Office, Water Quality Section
Sampson County Soil and Water Conservation District
Permit File

State of North Carolina
Department of Environment,
Health and Natural Resources
Fayetteville Regional Office
James B. Hunt, Jr., Governor
Jonathan B. Howes, Secretary
e��
DEHNR
DIVISION OF WATER QUALITY
July 21, 1997
CERTIFIED MAIL
RETURN RECEIPT REQUESTED
Mr. James Sauls
DM Farms Mag4 Sow Farm
P.O. Box 1076
Rose Hill, NC 28458
Subject: Notice of Recommendation for Enforcement
Mag4 Sow Farm
Facility No. 82-77
Samspon County
Dear Mr. Sauls,
This letter is to notify you that the Fayetteville 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 the
violation by the Mag4 Sow Farm on July 10, 1997 of your 2H .0217
non -discharge permit, pusuant 15A NCAC 2H .0217.
If you have an explanation for this violation that you wish to
present, please respond to this office on or before August 5, 1997.
Your explanation will be reviewed and if an enforcement action is
still deemed appropriate, your explanation will be forwarded to the
Director with the enforcement package for his consideration.
If you have any questions concerning this matter, please
contact me at [phone].
Sincerely,
Kerr T. Stevens
Regional Supervisor
cc: Sue Homewood - Compliance Group
Central Files
Wachovia Building, Suite 714, Fayetteville 0 FAX [phone]
North Carolina 28301-5043 Nl%f C An Equal Opportunity AfFlrmative Action Employer
Voice 910-486-1541 50% recycled/ 10% post -consumer paper