400068_INSPECTIONS_20171231

NUH f H UARULINA
Department of Environmental Qual

IV
M Division of Water Resources
❑ Division of Soil and Water Conservation
❑ Other Agency
Facility Number: 400068 Facility Status: Active Permit: AWS400068 ❑ Denied Access
Inppection Type: Compliance Inspection Inactive Or Closed Date:
Reason for Visit: Routine County: Greene Region: Washington
Date of Visit: 08/07/2017 1 Entry Time: 08:30 am Exit Time: 9:15 am Incident #
Farm Name:
Sandhill Sow Farm
Owner:
Franklin P Harris
Mailing Address:
3269 Hwy 91 N
Physical Address:
2100 Warrentown Rd
Facillty Status:
❑
Location of Farm:
On North side of SR 1149.
Owner Email: [e-mail]
Phone: [phone]
Snow Hill NC 28580
Snow Hill NC 28580
Compliant Not Compliant Integrator: Murphy -Brown LLC
Question Areas:
Dischrge & Stream impacts
Records and Documents
Latitude: 35' 26' 12"
Waste Col, Stor, & Treat
Other Issues
Longitude: 77° 44' 53"
0 Waste Application
Certified Operator: Franklin P Harris Operator Certification Number: 16622
Secondary OIC(s):
On -Site Representative(s): Name Title Phone
24 hour contact name Pat Harris Phone
On -site representative Pat Harris Phone
Primary Inspector: Marlene Salyer Phone:
Inspector Signature: Dale:
Secondary Inspector(s):
Inspection Summary:
Waste analysis: soil tested: 2015
5-12-17 = 1.26
1-26-17 = 1.08
8-4-16 = .46
IRR records are complete & balanced until July & waiting on analysis to balance July pumping - PAN is available.
Reviewed: sludge survey 2016 T=44'11tz=46"; calibration 2017; rainfalltfreeboard; stocking
page: 1

15
Permit: AWS400068 Owner - Facility : Franklin P Hams Facility Number: 400068
Inspection Date: 08/07/17 Inpsection Type: Compliance Inspection Reason for Visit: Routine
Regulated Operations Design Capacity Current promotions
Swine
Swine - Farrow to Wean 2,169 2,160
Total Design Capacity: 2,169
Total SSLW: 939,177
Waste Structures
Disignated Observed
Type Identifier Closed Data Start Date Freeboard Freeboard
Lagoon 1 PH 10/27/93 20,40 39.00
page: 2

MW
Permit: AWS400068 Owner - Facility : Franklin P Harris Facility Number: 400068
Inspection Date: 08/07/17 Inppection Type: Compliance Inspection Reason for Visit: Routine
Discharges & Stream Impacts
Yes
No Na Ne
1. Is any discharge observed from any part of the operation?
❑
0 El
r]
Discharge originated at:
Structure
❑
Application Field
[]
Other
❑
a. Was conveyance man-made?
❑
0 ❑
❑
b. Did discharge reach Waters of the State? (if yes, notify DWQ)
❑
■ ❑
❑
c. What is the estimated volume that reached waters of the State (gallons)?
d. Does discharge bypass the waste management system? (if yes, notify DWQ)
❑
0 ❑
❑
2. Is there evidence of a past discharge from any part of the operation?
❑
0 ❑
❑
3. Were there any observable adverse impacts or potential adverse impacts to Waters of the
❑
0 ❑
❑
State other than from a discharge?
Waste Collection, Storage & Treatment
Yes
No Na Ne
4. Is storage capacity less than adequate?
❑
M ❑
❑
If yes, is waste level into structural freeboard?
❑
5. Are there any immediate threats to the integrity of any of the structures observed (Le./ large
❑
0 ❑
❑
trees, severe erosion, seepage, etc.)?
6. Are there structures on -site that are not properly addressed and/or managed through a
❑
M ❑
❑
waste management or closure plan?
7. Do any of the structures need maintenance or improvement?
❑
M ❑
❑
8. Do any of the structures lack adequate markers as required by the permit? (Not applicable
0011
❑
to roofed pits, dry stacks and/or wet stacks)
9. Does any part of the waste management system other than the waste structures require
❑
0 ❑
❑
maintenance or improvement?
Waste Application
Yes No Na No
10. Are there any required buffers, setbacks, or compliance alternatives that need
❑ 0 ❑ ❑
maintenance or improvement?
11. Is there evidence of incorrect application?
❑ 0 ❑ ❑
If yes, check the appropriate box below.
Excessive Ponding?
❑
Hydraulic Overload?
❑
Frozen Ground?
❑
Heavy metals (Cu, Zn, etc)?
❑
PAN?
❑
Is PAN > 10%/10 lbs.?
❑
Total Phosphorus?
❑
Failure to incorporate manure/sludge into bare soil?
❑
Outside of acceptable crop window?
❑
Evidence of wind drift?
❑
Application outside of application area?
❑
page: 3

Permit: AWS400068 Owner - Facility : Franklin P Harris Facility Number:
400068
Inspection Date: 08/07/17 Inppection Type: Compliance Inspection Reason for Visit:
Routine
Waste Application
Yes
No Na Ne
Crop Type 1
Coastal Bermuda Grass
( Pasture)
Crop Type 2
Crop Type 3
Crop Type 4
Crop Type 5
Crop Type 6
Soil Type 1
Soil Type 2
Soil Type 3
Soil Type 4
Soil Type 5
Soil Type 6
14. Do the receiving crops differ from those designated in the Certified Animal Waste
❑
N ❑
❑
Management Plan(CAWMP)?
15. Does the receiving crop and/or land application site need improvement?
[]
0 ❑
❑
16. Did the facility fail to secure and/or operate per the irrigation design or wettable acre
❑
0 ❑
❑
determination?
17. Does the facility lack adequate acreage for land application?
❑
0 ❑
❑
18. Is there a lack of properly operating waste application equipment?
❑ .
0 ❑
❑
Records and Documents
Yes
No Na No
19. Did the facility fail to have Certificate of Coverage and Permit readily available?
❑
0 ❑
❑
20. Does the facility fail to have all components of the CAWMP readily available?
❑
0 ❑
❑
If yes, check the appropriate box below.
WU P?
❑
Checklists?
❑
Design?
❑
Maps?
❑
Lease Agreements?
❑
Other?
❑
If Other, please specify
21. Does record keeping need improvement?
❑
E ❑
❑
If yes, check the appropriate box below.
Waste Application?
❑
Weekly Freeboard?
❑
Waste Analysis?
❑
Soil analysis?
❑
Waste Transfers?
❑
Weather code?
❑
Rainfall?
❑
Stocking?
❑
page: 4

Permit: AWS400068 Owner - Facility : Franklin P Harris Facility Number: 400068
Inspection Date: 08/07/17 Inpsection Type: Compliance Inspection Reason for Visit: Routine
Records and Documents
Yes
No Na Ne
Crop yields?
❑
120 Minute inspections?
❑
Monthly and 1" Rainfall Inspections
❑
Sludge Survey
❑
22, Did the facility fail to install and maintain a rain gauge?
❑
0 ❑
❑
23. If selected, did the facility fail to install and maintain a rainbreaker on irrigation equipment
❑
M ❑
❑
(NPDES only)?
24. Did the facility fail to calibrate waste application equipment as required by the permit?
❑
0 ❑
❑
25, Is the facility out of compliance with permit conditions related to sludge? If yes, check the
❑
0 ❑
❑
appropriate box(es) below:
Failure to complete annual sludge survey
❑
Failure to develop a POA for sludge levels
❑
Non -compliant sludge levels in any lagoon
❑
List structure(s) and date of first survey indicating non-compliance:
26. Did the facility fail to provide documentation of an actively certified operator in charge?
❑
0 ❑
❑
27. Did the facility fail to secure a phosphorous loss assessment (PLAT) certification?
D
0 ❑
❑
Other Issues
Yes
No Na Ne
28, Did the facility fail to properly dispose of dead animals within 24 hours and/or document
❑
0 ❑
❑
and report mortality rates that exceed normal rates?
29. At the time of the inspection did the facility pose an odor or air quality concern?_ If yes,
❑
E ❑
❑
contact a regional Air Quality representative immediately.
30. Did the facility fail to notify regional DWQ of emergency situations as required by Permit?
❑
❑
❑
(i.e., discharge, freeboard problems, over -application)
31. Do subsurface tile drains exist at the facility?
❑
0 ❑
❑
If yes, check the appropriate box below.
Application Field
❑
Lagoon I Storage Pond
❑
Other
❑
If Other, please specify
32. Were any additional problems noted which cause non-compliance of the Permit or
❑
■ ❑
❑
CAWMP?
33. Did the Reviewer/inspector fall to discuss review/inspection with on -site representative?
❑
❑
❑
34. Does the facility require a follow-up visit by same agency?
❑
0 ❑
❑
page: 5

P
Division of Water Resources
❑ Division of Soil and Water Conservation
❑ Other Agency
Facility Number: 400068 Facility Status: Active
Permit: AWS400068
[] Denied Access
Inpsection Type: Compliance Inspection
Inactive Or Closed Date:
Reason for Visit: Routine County:
Greene Region:
Washington
Date of Visit: 08/16/2016 Entry Time: 08:20 am Exit Time: 8:55
am Incident #
Farm Name: Sandhiil Sow Farm
Owner Email:
[e-mail]
Owner: Franklin P Harris
Phone:
252-714-5335
Mailing Address: 3269 Hwy 91 N
Snow Hill NC 28580
Physical Address: 2100 Warrentown Rd
Snow Hill NC 28580
Facility Status: Compliant ❑ Not Compliant Integrator:
Murphy -Brown LLC
Location of Farm: Latitude:
35' 26' 12" Longitude.
77' 44' 53"
On North side of SR 1149.
Question Areas:
Dischrge & Stream Impacts Waste Col, Stor, & Treat
Waste Application
Records and Documents Other Issues
Certified Operator: Franklin P Harris
Operator Certification Number:
16622
Secondary OIC(s):
On -Site Representative(s): Name Title Phone
24 hour contact name Pal Harris
Phone:
On -site representative Pat Harris
Phone
Primary Inspector: Marlene Salyer
Phone:
Inspector Signature:
Date:
Secondary Inspector(s):
Inspection Summary:
waste analysis: soil tested: 2015
8A-16 = .46
6-10-16 = 1.33
2-16-15 = 1.07
11-24-15 = .79
7-17-15 = .96
IRR records are complete & balanced out.
Reviewed: sludge survey- T=44" & LTZ=46'; rainfalllfreeboard; stocking; calibration
frbrd range: 1872-28-16 to 3778-7-16
page: 1

i
Permit: AWS400068 Owner - Facility : Franklin P Harris Facility Number: 400068
Inspection Date: 08/16/16 Inpsection Type: Compliance Inspection Reason for Visit: Routine
Regulated Operations
Design Capacity Current promotions
Swine
Swine - Farrow to Wean 2,169 2,134
Total Design Capacity: 2,169
Total SSLW: 939,177
Waste Structures Observed
Disignated
Type Identifier Closed Date Start Date Freeboard Freeboard
Lagoon 1 PH 10/27/93 20.40 35.00
page: 2

I
0 Permit: AWS400068 Owner - Facility : Franklin P Harris Facility Number: 400068
Inspection Date: 08/16/16 Inppection Type: Compliance Inspection Reason for Visit: Routine
Discharges & Stream Impacts
Yes No Na N
1. Is any discharge observed from any part of the operation?
❑
M ❑
❑
Discharge originated at:
Structure
❑
Application Field
❑
Other
❑
a. Was conveyance man-made?
❑
0 ❑
❑
b. Did discharge reach Waters of the State? (if yes, notify DWQ)
❑
■ ❑
❑
c. What is the estimated volume that reached waters of the State (gallons)?
d. Does discharge bypass the waste management system? (if yes, notify DWQ)
❑
M ❑
❑
2. Is there evidence of a past discharge from any part of the operation?
❑
0 ❑
❑
3. Were there any observable adverse impacts or potential adverse impacts to Waters of the
❑
M ❑
❑
State other than from a discharge?
Waste Collection Storage & Treatment
Yes
No Na Ne
4. is storage capacity less than adequate?
❑
M ❑
❑
If yes, is waste level into structural freeboard?
❑
5. Are there any immediate threats to the integrity of any of the structures observed (I.ed large
❑
M ❑
❑
trees, severe erosion, seepage, etc.)?
6. Are there structures on -site that are not property addressed and/or managed through a
❑
■ ❑
❑
waste management or closure plan?
7. Do any of the structures need maintenance or improvement?
❑
0 ❑
❑
8. Do any of the structures lack adequate markers as required by the permit? (Not applicable
❑
0 ❑
❑
to roofed pits, dry stacks and/or wet stacks)
9. Does any part of the waste management system other than the waste structures require
❑
❑
❑
maintenance or improvement?
Waste Application
Yes No Na Ne
10. Are there any required buffers, setbacks, or compliance alternatives that need
❑ 0 ❑ ❑
maintenance or improvement?
11. Is there evidence of incorrect application?
❑ 0 ❑ ❑
If yes, check the appropriate box below.
Excessive Ponding?
❑
Hydraulic Overload?
❑
Frozen Ground?
❑
Heavy metals (Cu, Zn, etc)?
❑
PAN?
❑
Is PAN > 10%/10 tbs.?
❑
Total Phosphorus?
❑
Failure to incorporate manure/sludge into bare soil?
❑
Outside of acceptable crop window?
❑
Evidence of wind drift?
❑
Application outside of application area?
❑
page: 3

. Permit: AWS400068 Owner - Facility : Franklin P Harris Facility Number:
Inspection Date: 08/16/16 Inpsection Type: Compliance Inspection Reason for Visit:
400068
Routine
Waste Application
Yes
No Na Ne
Crop Type 1
Coastal Bermuda
Grass
(Pasture)
Crop Type 2
Small Grain Overseed
Crop Type 3
Crop Type 4
Crop Type 5
Crop Type 6
Soil Type 1
Soil Type 2
Soil Type 3
Soil Type 4
Soil Type 5
Soil Type 6
14. Do the receiving crops differ from those designated in the Certified Animal Waste
❑
0 ❑
❑
Management Plan(CAWMP)?
15. Does the receiving crop and/or land application site need improvement?
❑
0 ❑
❑
16. Did the facility fail to secure and/or operate per the irrigation design or wettable acre
❑
❑
❑
determination?
17. Does the facility lack adequate acreage for land application?
❑
❑
❑
18. Is there a lack of properly operating waste application equipment?
❑
❑
❑
Records and Documents
Yes
No Na Ne
19. Did the facility fail to have Certificate of Coverage and Permit readily available?
❑
0 ❑
❑
20. Does the facility fail to have all components of the CAWMP readily available?
❑
❑
❑
If yes, check the appropriate box below.
WUP?
❑
Checklists?
❑
Design?
❑
Maps?
❑
Lease Agreements?
❑
Other?
❑
If Other, please specify
21. Does record keeping need improvement?
❑
0 ❑
❑
If yes, check the appropriate box below.
Waste Application?
❑
Weekly Freeboard?
❑
Waste Analysis?
❑
Soil analysis?
❑
Waste Transfers?
❑
Weather code?
❑
Rainfall?
❑
Stocking?
❑
page:
4

a
Permit: AWS400068 Owner - Facility : Franklin P Harris Facility Number: 400068
Inspection Date: 08/16/16 Inpsection Type: Compliance Inspection Reason for Visit: Routine
Records and Documents
Yes
No Na Ne
Crop yields?
❑
120 Minute inspections?
❑
Monthly and 1" Rainfall Inspections
❑
Sludge Survey
❑
22. Did the facility fail to install and maintain a rain gauge?
❑
0 ❑
❑
23. If selected, did the facility fail to install and maintain a rainbreaker on irrigation equipment
❑
❑
❑
(NPDES only)?
24. Did the facility fail to calibrate waste application equipment as required by the permit?
❑0
❑
❑
25. Is the facility out of compliance with permit conditions related to sludge? If yes, check the
❑
E ❑
❑
appropriate box(es) below:
Failure to complete annual sludge survey
❑
Failure to develop a POA for sludge levels
❑
Non -compliant sludge levels in any lagoon
❑
List structure(s) and date of first survey indicating non-compliance:
26. Did the facility fail to provide documentation of an actively certified operator in charge?
❑
❑
0
27. Did the facility fail to secure a phosphorous loss assessment (PLAT) certification?
❑
E ❑
❑
Other Issues
Yes
No Na No
28. Did the facility fail to properly dispose of dead animals within 24 hours and/or document
❑
❑
❑
and report mortality rates that exceed normal rates?
29. At the time of the inspection did the facility pose an odor or air quality concern? If yes,
❑
E ❑
❑
contact a regional Air Quality representative immediately.
30. Did the facility fail to notify regional DWQ of emergency situations as required by Permit?
❑
E ❑
❑
(i.e., discharge, freeboard problems, over -application)
31. Do subsurface tile drains exist at the facility?
❑
0 ❑
❑
If yes, check the appropriate box below.
Application Field
El
Lagoon / Storage Pond
❑
Other
❑
If Other, please specify
32. Were any additional problems noted which cause non-compliance of the Permit or
❑
E ❑
❑
CAWMP?
33. Did the Reviewer/Inspector fail to discuss reviewfnspection with on -site representative?
❑
0 ❑
❑
34. Does the facility require a follow-up visit by same agency?
❑
0 ❑
❑
page: 5

t
M Division of Water Resources
❑ Division of Soil and Water Conservation
❑ Other Agency
Facility Number: 400068 Facility Status: Active Permit: AWS400066
Inpsection Type: Compliance Inspection Inactive Or Closed Date:
Reason for Visit: Routine County: Greene Region:
Date of Visit: 08/05/2015 Entry Time: 08:00 am Exit Time: 8:40 am Incident #
Farm Name: Sandhill Sow Farm Owner Email:
Owner: Franklin P Harris Phone:
Mailing Address: 3269 Hwy 91 N Snow Hill NC 28580
❑ Denied Access
Washington
[e-mail]
252-714-5335
Physical Address: - 2100 Warrentown Rd Snow Hill NC 28580
Facility Status: Compliant ❑ Not Compliant Integrator. Murphy -Brown LLC
Location of Farm: Latitude: 35' 26' 12" Longitude: 77° 44' 53"
On North side of SR 1149,
Question Areas:
Dischrge & Stream Impacts
Records and Documents
Waste Col, Stor, & Treat Waste Application
Other issues
Certified Operator: Franklin P Harris Operator Certification Number: 16622
Secondary OIC(s):
On -Site Representative(s): Name Title Phone
24 hour contact name Pat Hams Phone
On -site representative Pat Harris Phone:
Primary Inspector:
Inspector Signature:
Secondary Inspector(s):
Marlene Salyer
Inspection Summary:
Waste Analysis: soil tested: 2014
7-17-15 = .96
4-22-15 = 1.10
1-20-15 = .90
7-17-14 = .87
IRR records are complete & balanced out.
Reviewed: New COC; rainfalllfreeboard; calibration; sludge survey due 2015.
Phone:
Date:
page: 1

Permit: AWS400068 Owner - Facility : Franklin P Harris Facility Number: 400068
Inspection Cate: 08/05/15 Inpsection Type: Compliance Inspection Reason for Visit: Routine
Regulated Operations Design Capacity Current promotions
Swine
Swine - Farrow to Wean 2,169 2,115
Total Design Capacity: 2,169
Total SSLW: 939,177
Waste Structures
Disignated Observed
Type Identifier Closed Date Start Date Freeboard Freeboard
Lagoon 1 PH 10/27/93 20.40 38.00
page: 2

Permit: - AWS400068 Owner - Facility : Franklin P Harris Facility Number: 400068
Inspection Date: 08/05/15 Inpsection Type: Compliance Inspection Reason for Visit: Routine
Discharges & Stream Imnacts
Yes
No Na No
1. Is any discharge observed from any part of the operation?
❑
M ❑
❑
Discharge originated at:
Structure
❑
Application Field
❑
Other
❑
a. Was conveyance man-made?
❑
M ❑
[]
b. Did discharge reach Waters of the State? (if yes, notify DWQ)
❑
❑
❑
C. What is the estimated volume that reached waters of the State (gallons)?
d. Does discharge bypass the waste management system? (if yes, notify DWQ)
❑
M ❑
❑
2. Is there evidence of a past discharge from any part of the operation?
❑
M ❑
❑
3. Were there any observable adverse impacts or potential adverse impacts to Waters of the
❑
❑
❑
State other than from a discharge?
Waste Collection, Storage & Treatment
Yg$
No Na Ne
4. Is storage capacity less than adequate?
❑
0 ❑
❑
If yes, is waste level into structural freeboard?
❑
5. Are there any immediate threats to the integrity of any of the structures observed (Le./ large
❑
M ❑
❑
trees, severe erosion, seepage, etc.)?
6. Are there structures on -site that are not properly addressed and/or managed through a
❑
0 ❑
❑
waste management or closure plan?
7. Do any of the structures need maintenance or improvement?
❑
00
❑
B. Do any of the structures lack adequate markers as required by the permit? (Not applicable
❑
0 ❑
❑
to roofed pits, dry stacks and/or wet stacks)
9. Does any part of the waste management system other than the waste structures require
❑
❑
❑
maintenance or improvement?
Waste Application
Yes No Na No
10. Are there any required buffers, setbacks, or compliance alternatives that need
❑ ❑ ❑
maintenance or improvement?
11. Is there evidence of incorrect application?
❑ M ❑ ❑
If yes, check the appropriate box below.
Excessive Ponding?
❑
Hydraulic Overload?
❑
Frozen Ground?
❑
Heavy metals (Cu, Zn, etc)?
❑
PAN?
❑
Is PAN > 10%/10 lbs.?
❑
Total Phosphorus?
❑
Failure to incorporate manure/sludge into bare soil?
❑
Outside of acceptable crop window?
❑
Evidence of wind drift?
❑
Application outside of application area?
❑
page: 3

Permit: AWS400068 Owner - Facility : Franklin P Harris Facility Number: 400068
Inspection Date: 08/05/15 Inppection Type: Compliance Inspection Reason for Visit: Routine
Waste Application Yes No Na Ne
Crop Type 1 Coastal Bermuda Grass
(Pasture)
Crop Type 2 Small Grain Overseed
Crop Type 3
Crop Type 4
Crop Type 5
Crop Type 6
Soil Type 1
Soil Type 2
Soil Type 3
Soil Type 4
Soil Type 5
Soil Type 6
14. Do the receiving crops differ from those designated in the Certified Animal Waste
❑
0 ❑
❑
Managemerit Plan(CAWMP)?
15, Does the receiving crop and/or land application site need improvement?
❑
0 ❑
❑
16. Did the facility fail to secure and/or operate per the irrigation design or wettable acre
❑
❑
❑
determination?
17, Does the facility lack adequate acreage for land application?
❑
M ❑
❑
18. Is there a lack of properly operating waste application equipment?
❑
0 ❑
❑
Records and Documents
Yes No Na Ne
19. Did the facility fail to have Certificate of Coverage and Permit readily available?
❑ 0 ❑ ❑
20. Does the facility fail to have all components of the CAWMP readily available?
❑ ❑ ❑
If yes, check the appropriate box below.
WUP?
❑
Checklists?
❑
Design?
❑
Maps?
❑
Lease Agreements?
❑
Other?
If Other, please specify
21. Does record keeping need improvement?
❑ m ❑ ❑
If yes, check the appropriate box below.
Waste Application?
❑
Weekly Freeboard?
❑
Waste Analysis?
❑
Soil analysis?
❑
Waste Transfers?
❑
Weather code?
❑
Rainfall?
❑
Stocking?
❑
page: 4

I
Permit: AWS400068 Owner - Facility : Franklin P Harris Facility Number: 400068
Inspection Date: 08/05/15 Inpsection Type: Compliance Inspection Reason for Visit: Routine
Records and Documents
Yes
No No No
Crop yields?
❑
120 Minute inspections?
❑
Monthly and 1" Rainfall Inspections
❑
Sludge Survey
❑
22. Did the facility fail to install and maintain a rain gauge?
❑
E ❑
❑
23, If selected, did the facility fail to install and maintain a rainbreaker on irrigation equipment
❑
0 ❑
❑
(NPDES only)?
24. Did the facility fail to calibrate waste application equipment as required by the permit?
❑
❑
❑
25. Is the facility out of compliance with permit conditions related to sludge? If yes, check the
❑
N ❑
❑
appropriate box(es) below:
Failure to complete annual sludge survey
❑
Failure to develop a POA for sludge levels
❑
Non -compliant sludge levels in any lagoon
❑
List structure(s) and date of first survey indicating non-compliance:
26, Did the facility fail to provide documentation of an actively certified operator in charge?
❑
■ ❑
❑
27. Did the facility fail to secure a phosphorous loss assessment (PLAT) certification?
❑
0 ❑
❑
Other Issues
Yes No No No
28. Did the facility fail to properly dispose of dead animals within 24 hours and/or document
❑
❑
❑
and report mortality rates that exceed normal rates?
29. At the time of the inspection did the facility pose an odor or air quality concern? If yes,
❑
0 ❑
❑
contact a regional Air Quality representative immediately.
30. Did the facility fail to notify regional DWQ of emergency situations as required by Permit?
❑
❑
❑
(i.e., discharge, freeboard problems, over -application)
31. Do subsurface the drains exist at the facility?
❑
N ❑
❑
If yes, check the appropriate box below.
Application Field ❑
Lagoon / Storage Pond ❑
Other ❑
If Other, please specify
32. Were any additional problems noted which cause non-compliance of the Permit or ❑ N ❑ ❑
CAWMP?
33. Did the Reviewer/Inspector fail to discuss reviewCmspection with on -site representative? ❑ ■ ❑ ❑
34. Does the facility require a follow-up visit by same agency? ❑ 0 ❑ ❑
page: 5

r
0 Division of Water Resources
El Division of Soil and Water Conservation
❑ Other Agency
Facility Number:
400068 Facility Status:
Active Permit: AWS400068
❑ Denied Access
Inpsection Type:
Compliance inspection
Inactive Or Closed Date:
Reason for Visit:
Routine
County: Greene Region:
Washington
Date of Visit:
08/25/2014 Entry Time: 10:00 am
Exit Time: 10:30 am Incident #
Farm Name:
Sandhill Sow Farm
Owner Email:
[e-mail]
Owner:
Franklin P Harris
Phone:
252-714-5335
Mailing Address:
3269 Hwy 91 N
Snow Hill NC 28580
Physical Address:
2100 Warrentown Rd
Snow Hill NC 28580
Facility Status:
Compliant ❑ Not Compliant
Integrator: Murphy -Brown LLC
Location of Farm:
Latitude: 35" 26' 12" Longitude:
77" 44' 53"
On North side of SR 1149.
Question Areas:
Dischrge S Stream Impacts
Records and Documents
Waste Col, Stor, & Treat Waste Application
Other Issues
Certified Operator: Operator Certification Number:
Secondary OIC(s):
On -Site Representative(s): Name Title Phone
24 hour contact name Pat Harris Phone:
On -site representative Pat Hams Phone
Primary Inspector: Marlene Salyer Phone:
Inspector Signature: Date:
Secondary Inspector(s):
Inspection Summary:
Soil tested 2013
Waste Analysis:
7-14-14= .87
3-4-14= 1.05
9-4-13= .58
IRR records are complete and balanced out.
Reviewed rainfall, freeboard and stocking.
MovAng hay today.
SS dated 812014
page: 1

r
Permit: AWS400068 Owner - Facility : Franklin P Harris Facility Number: 400068
Inspection Date: 08/25/14 Inpsection Type: Compliance Inspection Reason for Visit: Routine
Regulated Operations Design Capacity Current promotions
Swine
Swine - Farrow to Wean 2,122
Total Design Capacity:
Total SSLW:
Waste Structures
Disignated Observed
Type Identifier Closed Date Start Date Freeboard Freeboard
Lagoon 1 PH 10/27/93 20.40
page: 2

r
Permit: AWS400068 Owner - Facility : Franklin P Harris Facility Number: 400068
Inspection Date: 08/25/14 Inpsection Type: Compliance Inspection Reason for Visit: Routine
Discharges $ Stream Impacts
Yes No Na No
1. Is any discharge observed from any part of the operation?
❑
■ ❑
❑
Discharge originated at:
Structure
❑
Application Field
❑
Other
❑
a. Was conveyance man-made?
❑
❑
❑
b. Did discharge reach Waters of the State? (if yes, notify DWQ)
❑
❑
❑
c. What is the estimated volume that reached waters of the State (gallons)?
d. Does discharge bypass the waste management system? (if yes, notify DWQ)
❑M
❑
❑
2. Is there evidence of a past discharge from any part of the operation?
❑
M ❑
❑
3. Were there any observable adverse impacts or potential adverse impacts to Waters of the
❑
M ❑
❑
State other than from a discharge?
Waste Collection Storage & Treatment
Yes
No Na Ne
4. Is storage capacity less than adequate?
❑
0 ❑
❑
If yes, is waste level into structural freeboard?
❑
5. Are there any immediate threats to the integrity of any of the structures observed (Le.l large
❑
0 ❑
❑
trees, severe erosion, seepage, etc.)?
6. Are there structures on -site that are not properly addressed and/or managed through a
❑
0 ❑
❑
waste management or closure plan?
7. Do any of the structures need maintenance or improvement?
❑
0 ❑
❑
8. Do any of the structures lack adequate markers as required by the permit? (Not applicable
❑
0 ❑
❑
to roofed pits, dry stacks and/or wet stacks)
9. Does any part of the waste management system other than the waste structures require
❑
0 ❑
❑
maintenance or improvement?
Waste Application
Yes No Na No
10. Are there any required buffers, setbacks, or compliance alternatives that need
❑ M ❑ ❑
maintenance or improvement?
11. Is there evidence of incorrect application?
❑ ■ ❑ ❑ ,
If yes, check the appropriate box below.
Excessive Ponding?
❑
Hydraulic Overload?
❑
Frozen Ground?
❑
Heavy metals (Cu, Zn, etc)?
❑
PAN?
❑
Is PAN > 10%110 lbs.?
❑
Total Phosphorus?
❑
Failure to incorporate manurelsludge into bare soil?
❑
Outside of acceptable crop window?
❑
Evidence of wind drift?
❑
Application outside of application area?
❑
page: 3

Permit: AWS400068 Owner - Facility : Franklin P Harris Facility Number:
400068
Inspection Date: 08/25/14 Inppection Type: Compliance Inspection Reason for Visit:
Routine
Waste Application
Yes No Na No
Crop Type 1
Crop Type 2
Crop Type 3
Crop Type 4
Crop Type 5
Crop Type 6
Soil Type 1
Soil Type 2
Soil Type 3
Soil Type 4
Soil Type 5
Soil Type 6
14. Do the receiving crops differ from those designated in the Certified Animal Waste
❑
0 ❑
❑
Management Plan(CAWMP)?
15. Does the receiving crop and/or land application site need improvement?
❑
0 ❑
❑
16. Did the facility fail to secure and/or operate per the irrigation design or wettable acre
❑
N ❑
❑
determination?
17. Does the facility lack adequate acreage for land application?
❑
0 ❑
❑
18. Is there a lack of properly operating waste application equipment?
❑
E ❑
❑
Records and Documents
Yes No Na Ne
19. Did the facility fail to have Certificate of Coverage and Permit readily available?
❑ E ❑ ❑
20. Does the facility fail to have all components of the CAWMP readily available?
❑ 0 ❑ ❑
If yes, check the appropriate box below.
WUP?
❑
Checklists?
❑
Design?
❑
Maps?
❑
Lease Agreements?
❑
Other?
❑
If Other, please specify
21. Does record keeping need improvement?
❑ 0 ❑ ❑
If yes, check the appropriate box below.
Waste Application?
❑
Weekly Freeboard?
❑
Waste Analysis?
❑
Sail analysis?
❑
Waste Transfers?
❑
Weather code?
❑
Rainfall?
❑
Stocking?
❑
page: 4

11
Permit: AWS400068 Owner - Facility : Franklin P Harris Facility Number: 400068
Inspection Date: 08/25/14 Inssection Type: Compliance Inspection Reason for Visit: Routine
Records and Documents
Yes
No Na No
Crop yields?
❑
120 Minute inspections?
❑
Monthly and 1" Rainfall Inspections
❑
Sludge Survey
❑
22. Did the facility fail to install and maintain a rain gauge?
❑
E ❑
❑
23. 1f selected, did the facility fail to install and maintain a rainbreaker on irrigation equipment
❑
E ❑
❑
(NPDES only)?
24. Did the facility fail to calibrate waste application equipment as required by the permit?
❑
0 ❑
❑
25. Is the facility out of compliance with permit conditions related to sludge? If yes, check the
❑
0 ❑
❑
appropriate box(es) below:
Failure to complete annual sludge survey
❑
Failure to develop a POA for sludge levels
❑
Non -compliant sludge levels in any lagoon
❑
List structure(s) and date of first survey indicating non-compliance:
26. Did the facility fail to provide documentation of an actively certified operator in charge?
❑
❑
❑
27. Did the facility fail to secure a phosphorous loss assessment (PLAT) certification?
❑
0 ❑
❑
Other Issues
Yes No No No
28. Did the facility fail to properly dispose of dead animals within 24 hours and/or document
❑
❑
❑
and report mortality rates that exceed normal rates?
29. At the time of the inspection did the facility pose an odor or air quality concern? If yes,
❑
■ ❑
❑
contact a regional Air Quality representative immediately.
30. Did the facility fail to notify regional DWQ of emergency situations as required by Permit?
❑
0 ❑
❑
(i.e., discharge, freeboard problems, over -application)
31. Do subsurface tile drains exist at the facility?
❑
0 ❑
❑
If yes, check the appropriate box below.
Application Field
❑
Lagoon / Storage Pond
❑
Other
❑
If Other, please specify
32. Were any additional problems noted which cause non-compliance of the Permit or
❑
E ❑
❑
CAWMP?
33. Did the Reviewer/Inspector fail to discuss review/inspection with on -site representative?
❑
E ❑
❑
34. Does the facility require a follow-up visit by same agency?
❑
E ❑
❑
page: 5

�9
Division of Water Quality
❑ Division of Soil and Water Conservation
❑ Other Agency
Facility Number: 400068 Facility Status: Active Permit: AWS400068 ❑ Denied Access
Inspection Type: Compliance inspection Inactive or Closed Date:
Reason for Visit: Routine County: Greene Region: Washington _ ..
Date of Visit: 08119/2013 Entry Time: 08.45 AM Exit Time: 10:00 AM Incident #:
Farm Name: Sandhill Sow Fann Owner Email:
Owner: Franklin Pat Harris Phone: [phone]
Mailing Address: 3269 Hwy 91 N Snow Hill NC 28580
Physical Address: 2100 Warrentown Rd Snow Hill NC 28580
Facility Status: 0 Compliant ❑ Not Compliant Integrator: Murlhy-Brown LLC
Location of Farm: Latitude: 35*26'12" Longitude: 77°44'53"
On North side of SR 1149
Question Areas:
Dischrge & Stream Impacts Waste Col, Stor, & Treat
Waste Application
Records and Documents Other issues
Certified Operator: Franklin P Harris
Operator Certification Number: 16622
Secondary OIC(s):
On -Site Representative(s): Name
Title Phone
24 hour contact name Pat Harris
Phone:
On -site representative Pat Harris
Phone:
Primary Inspector: Marlene Salyer
Phone:
Inspector Signature:
Date:
Secondary Inspector(s):
inspection Summary:
Waste analysis: soil tested: 2012
7-9-13 =.90
4-29-13 = .83
12-17-12 = .78
7-17-12 = .36
IRR records are complete & balanced out. Rainfall, freeboard, & stocking are recorded. SS due in 2013.
Looks Great!
Page: 1

Permit: AWS400068 Owner - Facility: Franklin Pat Harris Facility Number: 400068
Inspection Date: OB11912013 Inspection Type: Compliance Inspection Reason for Visit: Routine
Regulated Operations Design Capacity Current Population
Swine
Q Swine - Farrow to Wean 21169 2,100
Total Design Capacity: 2,169
Total SSLW: 939,177
Waste Structures
Designed Observed
Type Identifier Closed Date Start Date Freeboard Freeboard
7,g,,n 7 1 PH 10/27/93 20.40 39.00
Page: 2

Permit: AWS400068 Owner - Facility: Franklin Pat Harris Facility Number: 400068
Inspection Date: 0811912013 Inspection Type: Compliance Inspection Reason for Visit: Routine
Discharges & Stream Impacts Yes No NA NE
1. Is any discharge observed from any part of the operation? ❑ ■ ❑ ❑
Discharge originated at:
Structure ❑
Application Field ❑
Other ❑
a. Was conveyance man-made? ❑ ■ ❑ ❑
b. Did discharge reach Waters of the State? (if yes, notify DWQ) ❑ ■ ❑ ❑
c. What is the estimated volume that reached waters of the State (gallons)?
d. Does discharge bypass the waste management system? (if yes, notify DWQ) ❑ ■ ❑ ❑
2. Is there evidence of a past discharge from any part of the operation? ❑ ■ ❑ ❑
3. Were there any observable adverse impacts or potential adverse impacts to Waters of the State other than ❑ ■ ❑ ❑
from a discharge?
Waste Collection, Storage & Treatment Yes No NA NE
4. Is storage capacity less than adequate? Duo ❑
If yes, is waste level into structural freeboard? ❑
5. Are there any immediate threats to the integrity of any of the structures observed (Le./ large trees, severe ❑ ■ ❑ ❑
erosion, seepage, etc.)?
6. Are there structures on -site that are not properly addressed and/or managed through a waste management ❑ ■ ❑ ❑
or closure plan?
7. Do any of the structures need maintenance or improvement? ❑ ■ ❑ ❑
8. Do any of the structures lack adequate markers as required by the permit? (Not applicable to roofed pits,
❑ ■
❑
❑
dry stacks and/or wet stacks)
9. Does any part of the waste management system other than the waste structures require maintenance or
❑ ■
❑
❑
improvement?
Waste Application
Yes No
NA
NE
10. Are there any required buffers, setbacks, or compliance alternatives that need maintenance or
❑ ■
❑
❑
improvement?
11. Is there evidence of incorrect application?
❑ ■
❑
❑
If yes, check the appropriate box below.
Excessive Ponding?
❑
Hydraulic Overload?
❑
Frozen Ground?
❑
Heavy metals (Cu, Zn, etc)?
❑
Page: 3

Permit: AWS400068 Owner • Facility: Franklin Pat Harris
Facility Number: 400068
Inspection Date: 08/1912013 Inspection Type: Compliance Inspection
Reason for Visit: Routine
Waste Application
Yes No NA NE
PAN?
❑
Is PAN > 10%110 lbs.?
❑
Total Phosphorus?
❑
Failure to incorporate manure/sludge into bare soil?
❑
Outside of acceptable crop window?
❑
Evidence of wind drift?
❑
Application outside of application area?
❑
Crop Type 1
Coastal Bermuda Grass
(Pasture)
Crop Type 2
Small Grain Overseed
Crop Type 3
Crop Type 4
Crop Type 5
Crop Type 6
Soil Type 1
Soil Type 2
Soil Type 3
Soil Type 4
Soil Type 5
Soil Type 6
14. Do the receiving crops differ from those designated in the Certified Animal Waste Management
❑
■ Q ❑
Plan(CAWMP)?
15. Does the receiving crop and/or land application site need improvement?
ONO
❑
16. Did the facility fail to secure and/or operate per the irrigation design or wettable acre determination?
❑
E
❑ ❑
17. Does the facility lack adequate acreage for land application?
❑
■
❑ ❑
18. Is there a lack of properly operating waste application equipment?
❑
■
❑ ❑
Records and Documents
Yes
No
NA NE
19. Did the facility fail to have Certificate of Coverage and Permit readily available?
000
❑
20. Does the facility fail to have all components of the CAWMP readily available?
❑
■
❑ ❑
If yes, check the appropriate box below.
WUP?
❑
Page: 4

Permit: AWS400068 Owner • Facility: Franklin Pat Hams Facility Number : 400068
Inspection Date: 08/19/2013 Inspection Type: Compliance Inspection Reason for Visit: Routine
Records and Documents Yes No
NA NE
Checklists?
❑
Design?
❑
Maps?
❑
Lease Agreements?
❑
Other?
❑
If Other, please specify
21. Does record keeping need improvement?
❑ ■
❑ ❑
If yes, check the appropriate box below.
Waste Application?
❑
Weekly Freeboard?
❑
Waste Analysis?
❑
Soil analysis?
❑
Waste Transfers?
❑
Weather code?
❑
Rainfall?
❑
Stocking?
❑
Crop yields?
❑
120 Minute inspections?
❑
Monthly and 1" Rainfall Inspections
❑
Sludge Survey
❑
22. Did the facility fail to install and maintain a rain gauge?
❑ ■
❑ ❑
23. if selected, did the facility fail to install and maintain a rainbreaker on irrigation equipment (NPDES only)?
❑ WOO
24. Did the facility fail to calibrate waste application equipment as required by the permit?
❑ ■
❑ ❑
25. Is the facility out of compliance with permit conditions related to sludge? If yes, check the appropriate
❑ ■
❑ ❑
box(es) below:
Failure to complete annual sludge survey
❑
Failure to develop a POA for sludge levels
❑
Non -compliant sludge levels in any lagoon
❑
List structure(s) and date of first survey indicating non-compliance:
26. Did the facility fail to provide documentation of an actively certified operator in charge?
❑ ■
❑ ❑
Page: 5

Permit: AWS400068 Owner - Facility: Franklin Pat Harris Facility Number : 400068
Inspection Date. 06/19/2013 Inspection Type: Compliance Inspection Reason for Visit: Routine
Records and Documents Yes No NA NE
27. Did the facility fail to secure a phosphorous loss assessment (PLAT) certification? ❑ ■ Cl ❑
Other Issues Yes No NA NE
28. Did the facility fail to properly dispose of dead animals within 24 hours and/or document and report 11000
mortality rates that exceed normal rates?
29. At the time of the inspection did the facility pose an odor or air quality concern? If yes, contact a regional ❑ ■ ❑ ❑
Air Quality representative immediately.
30. Did the facility fail to notify regional DWQ of emergency situations as required by Permit? (i.e., discharge, ❑ ■ ❑ ❑
freeboard problems, over -application)
31. Do subsurface tile drains exist at the facility? ❑ ■ ❑ ❑
If yes, check the appropriate box below.
Application Field
Lagoon / Storage Pond
Other
If Other, please specify
32. Were any additional problems noted which cause non-compliance of the Permit or CAWMP?
33. Did the Reviewerllnspector fail to discuss review/inspection with on -site representative?
34. Does the facility require a follow-up visit by same agency?
is
Page: 6

0 Division of Water Quality
❑ Division of Soil and Water Conservation
❑ Other Agency
Facility Number: 400068 Facility Status: Active Permit: AWS400068 ❑ Denied Access
Inspection Type: CComoliance Insoection Inactive or Closed Date:
Reason for Visit: Routine County: Greene Region: Washington_
Date of Visit: 49/25L2012 Entry Time: 10:00 AM Exit Time: 10:55 AM
Farm Name: Sandhill Sow Farm
Owner: Franklin Pat Harris
Incident #:
Owner Email:
Mailing Address: 3269 HM 91 N SngA tjill tIC 28580
Phone: [phone]
Physical Address: 2100 Warrentown Rd Snow Hill NC 28580
Facility Status: N Compliant ❑ Not Compliant Integrator: Murphy -Brown LLC
Location of Farm- Latitude: 35*26'12" Longitude. 77°44'53"
On North side of SR 1149.
Question Areas:
Dischrge & Stream Impacts Waste Col, Stor, & Treat Waste Application
Records and Documents Other Issues
Certified Operator: Franklin P Harris Operator Certification Number: 16622
Secondary OIC(s):
On -Site Representative(s): Name Title Phone
24 hour contact name Pat Harris Phone:
On -site representative Pat Harris Phone:
Primary Inspector: Marlene Salyer Phone:
Inspector Signature: Date:
Secondary Inspector(s):
Inspection Summary:
Waste analysis: Soil tested: 20111 lime applied 812011
7-12-12 = .36
12-12-11 = .60
IRR records are complete & balanced out. Rainfall, freeboard, & stocking records are complete.
SS done in 2012 & Calib. in 2012
LOOKS GOOD!
Page: 1

Permit: AWS400068 Owner - Facility: Franklin Pat hams
Inspection Date: 09/25/2012 Inspection Type: Compliance Inspection
Facility Number. 400068
Reason for Visit: Routine
Regulated Operations Design Capacity Current Population
Swine
Q Swine - Farrow to Wean 2,169 20,445
Total Design Capacity: 2,169
Total SSLW: 939,177
Waste Structures
Designed Observed
Type Identifier Closed Date Start Date Freeboard Freeboard
lagoon 1 PH 10/27/93 20,40 30.00
Page: 2

Permit: AWS400068 Owner - Facility: Franklin Pat Hams Facility Number: 400068
Inspection pate: 09/25/2012 Inspection Type: Compliance Inspection Reason for Visit: Routine
Discharges & Stream Impacts Yes No NA NE
1. Is any discharge observed from any part of the operation? ❑ ■ ❑ ❑
Discharge originated at:
Structure ❑
Application Field ❑
Other ❑
a. Was conveyance man-made? ❑ ■ Q ❑
b. Did discharge reach Waters of the State? (if yes, notify DWQ)
❑ ■ ❑
❑
c. What is the estimated volume that reached waters of the State (gallons)?
d_ Does discharge bypass the waste management system? (if yes, notify DWQ)
❑ ■
❑
❑
2. Is there evidence of a past discharge from any part of the operation?
❑ ■
❑
0
3. Were there any observable adverse impacts or potential adverse impacts to Waters of the State other than
❑ ■
❑
❑
from a discharge?
Waste Collection, Storage & Treatment Yes No
NA
NE
4. is storage capacity less than adequate?
❑ ■
❑
❑
If yes, is waste level into structural freeboard?
❑
5. Are there any immediate threats to the integrity of any of the structures observed (Le./ large trees, severe
U ■
U
U
erosion, seepage, etc.)?
6. Are there structures on -site that are not properly addressed and/or managed through a waste management
00130
or closure plan?
7. Do any of the structures need maintenance or improvement?
❑ ■
❑
❑
8. Do any of the structures lack adequate markers as required by the permit? (Not applicable to roofed pits,
❑ ■
❑
❑
dry stacks and/or wet stacks)
9. Does any part of the waste management system other than the waste structures require maintenance or
❑ ■
❑
❑
improvement?
Waste Application Yes No
NA
NE
10, Are there any required buffers, setbacks, or compliance alternatives that need maintenance or
❑ ■
❑
❑
improvement?
11. Is there evidence of incorrect application?
❑ ■
❑
❑
If yes, check the appropriate box below.
Excessive Ponding?
❑
Hydraulic Overload?
❑
Frozen Ground?
❑
Heavy metals (Cu, Zn, etc)?
❑
Page: 3

Permit: AWS400068 Owner - Facility: Franklin Pat Harris
Inspection Date: 09/25/2012 Inspection Type: Compliance Inspection
Facility Number: 400068
Reason for Visit: Routine
Waste Application
Yes No
NA NE
PAN?
❑
Is PAN > 10%/10 lbs.?
Total Phosphorus?
❑
Failure to incorporate manure/sludge into bare soil?
❑
Outside of acceptable crop window?
❑
Evidence of wind drift?
❑
Application outside of application area?
❑
Crop Type 1
Coastal
Bermuda Grass
(Pasture)
Crop Type 2
Small Grain Overseed
Crop Type 3
Crop Type 4
Crop Type 5
Crop Type 6
Soil Type 1
Soil Type 2
Soil Type 3
Soil Type 4
Soil Type 5
Soil Type 6
14. Do the receiving crops differ from those designated in the Certified Animal Waste Management
❑ ■
❑ ❑
Plan(CAWMP)?
15. Does the receiving crop and/or land application site need improvement?
❑ ■
❑ ❑
16. Did the facility fail to secure and/or operate per the irrigation design or wettable acre determination? ❑ ■
❑ ❑
17. Does the facility lack adequate acreage for land application?
❑ ■
❑ ❑
18. Is there a lack of properly operating waste application equipment?
❑ ■
❑ ❑
Records and Documents
Yes No
NA NE
19. Did the facility fail to have Certificate of Coverage and Permit readily available?
❑ ■
❑ ❑
20. Does the facility fail to have all components of the CAWMP readily available?
❑ ■
❑ ❑
If yes, check the appropriate box below.
WUP?
❑
Page: 4

Permit: AWS400068 Owner • Facility: Franklin Pat Harris
Inspection Date: 09/2512012 Inspection Type: Compliance Inspection
Facility Number. 400068
Reason for Visit: Routine
Records and Documents Yes No NA NE
Checklists?
❑
Design?
❑
Maps?
❑
Lease Agreements?
❑
Other?
❑
If Other, please specify
21. Does record keeping need improvement?
❑
■ ❑ ❑
If yes, check the appropriate box below.
Waste Application?
❑
Weekly Freeboard?
❑
Waste Analysis?
❑
Soil analysis?
❑
Waste Transfers?
❑
Weather code?
❑
Rainfall?
❑
Stocking?
❑
Crop yields?
❑
120 Minute inspections?
❑
Monthly and 1" Rainfall Inspections
❑
Sludge Survey
❑
22. Did the facility fail to install and maintain a rain gauge?
❑
■ ❑ ❑
23. If selected, did the facility fail to install and maintain a rainbreaker on irrigation equipment (NPDES only)?
❑
■ ❑ ❑
24. Did the facility fail to calibrate waste application equipment as required by the permit?
❑
■ ❑ ❑
25. Is the facility out of compliance with permit conditions related to sludge? If yes, check the appropriate
❑
■ ❑ ❑
box(es) below:
Failure to complete annual sludge survey
❑
Failure to develop a POA for sludge levels
❑
Non -compliant sludge levels in any lagoon
❑
List structure(s) and date of first survey indicating non-compliance:
26. Did the facility fail to provide documentation of an actively certified operator in charge?
❑
■ ❑ ❑
Page: 5

Permit: AWS400068 Owner - Facility: Franklin Pat Hams
Inspection Date: 09/2512012 Inspection Type: Compliance Inspection
Records and Documents
27. Did the facility fail to secure a phosphorous loss assessment (PLAT) certification?
Facility Number: 400068
Reason for Visit: Routine
Yes No NA NE
❑ ■ ❑ ❑
Yes No NA NE
28. Did the facility fail to properly dispose of dead animals within 24 hours and/or document and report ❑ ■ ❑ ❑
mortality rates that exceed normal rates?
29, At the time of the inspection did the facility pose an odor or air quality concern? If yes, contact a regional ❑ ■ ❑ ❑
Air Quality representative immediately.
30, Did the facility fail to notify regional DWO of emergency situations as required by Permit? (i.e., discharge, ❑ ■ ❑ ❑
freeboard problems, over -application)
31. Do subsurface tile drains exist at the facility? ❑ ■ ❑ ❑
If yes, check the appropriate box below.
Application Meld ❑
Lagoon / Storage Pond ❑
Other ❑
If Other, please specify
32. Were any additional problems noted which cause non-compliance of the Permit or CAWMP?
33. Did the Reviewer/Inspector fail to discuss review/inspection with on -site representative?
34. Does the facility require a follow-up visit by same agency?
Page: 6

Facility Number ®-
V Division of Water Quality
0 Division of Soil and Water Conservation
0 Other Agency
Type of Visit: 0 Compliance Inspection 0 Operation Review 0 Structure Evaluation 0 Technical Assistance
Reason for Visit: 0 Routine 4& Complaint 0 Follow-up 0 Referral 0 Emergency 0 Other 0 Denied Access
Date of Visit: �, Arrival Time: Departure Time: County:
Farm Name_ �� j� � � t, ) Owner Email:
Owner Name:
Mailing Address:
Physical Address:
Facility Contact:
Onsite Representative:
Certified Operator:
Back-up Operator:
Location of Farm:
Design Current
Swine Capacity Pop.
Wean to Finish
Wean to Feeder
Feeder to Finish
Farrow to Wean
Farrow to Feeder
Farrow to Finish
Other
Other
Phone:
Title:
Latitude:
Phone:
Integrator:
Certification Number:
Certification Number:
Design Current
Wet Poultry Capacity Pop.
Layer
Non -La er
Design Current
Non-L
Pullets
Other
Poults
Longitude:
Region:
Design Current
Cattle Capacity Pop.
Dairy Cow
Dairy Calf
Dairy Heifer
Dry Cow
Non -Dairy
Beef Stocker
Beef Feeder
Beef Brood Cow
Discharges and Stream Impacts
1. Is any discharge observed from any part of the operation?
[]Yes
No
❑ NA
❑ NE
Discharge originated at: ❑ Structure ❑ Application Field ❑ Other:
a. Was the conveyance man-made?
❑ Yes
❑ No
❑ NA
❑ NE
b. Did the discharge reach waters of the State? (If yes, notify DWQ)
❑ Yes
❑ No
❑ NA
[] NE
c. What is the estimated volume that reached waters of the State (gallons)?
d. Does the discharge bypass the waste management system? (If yes, notify DWQ)
❑ Yes
❑ o
❑ NA
❑ NE
2. Is there evidence of a past discharge from any part of the operation?
❑ Yes
No
❑ NA
❑ NE
3. Were there any observable adverse impacts or potential adverse impacts to the waters
❑ Yes
FdN o
❑ NA
❑ NE
of the State other than from a discharge?
Page I of 3 21412011 Continued

'!
'acid Number: -I I Date of Inspection: - —
.41
Waste Collection & Treatment
4. Is storage capacity (structural plus storm storage plus heavy rainfall) less than adequate? ❑ Yes E�No ❑ NA ❑ NE
a. If yes, is waste level into the structural freeboard? ❑ Yes [] No ❑ NA ❑ NE
Structure 1 Structure 2 Structure 3 Structure 4 Structure 5 Structure 6
Identifier:
Spillway?:
Designed Freeboard (in):
Observed Freeboard (in): 93
5. Are there any immediate threats to the integrity of any of the structures observed? ❑ Yes No ❑ NA ❑ NE
(i.e., large trees, severe erosion, seepage, etc.)
6. Are there structures on -site which are not properly addressed and/or managed through a [:]Yes [fNo ❑ NA ❑ NE
waste management or closure plan?
If any of questions 4-6 were answered yes, and the situation poses an immediate public health or environnieupri threat, notify DWQ
7. Do any of the structures need maintenance or improvement? ❑ Yes o ❑ NA ❑ NE
8. Do any of the structures lack adequate markers as required by the permit? ❑ Yes rNo ❑ NA ❑ NE
(not applicable to roofed pits, dry stacks, and/or wet stacks)
9. Does any part of the waste management system other than the waste structures require ❑ Yes No ❑ NA ❑ NE
maintenance or improvement?
Waste Application
10. Are there any required buffers, setbacks, or compliance alternatives that need ❑ Yes No ❑ NA ❑ NE
maintenance or improvement?
11. Is there evidence of incorrect land application? If yes, check the appropriate box below. ❑ Yes 2No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Excessive Ponding ❑ Hydraulic Overload ❑ Frozen Ground ❑ Heavy Metals (Cu, Zn, etc.)
❑ PAN ❑ PAN > 10% or 10 lbs. ❑ Total Phosphorus ❑ Failure to Incorporate Manure/Sludge into Bare Soil
❑ Outside of Acceptable Crop Window ❑ Evidence of Wind Drift ❑ Application Outside of Approved Area
12. Crop Type(s): Z
13. Soil Type(s):
14. Do the receiving crops differ from those designated in the CAWMP?
❑ Yes
Q o
[3 NA
[3 NE
15. Does the receiving crop and/or land application site need improvement?
❑ Yes
❑ NA
❑ NE
16. Did the facility fail to secure and/or operate per the irrigation design or wettable
El Yes
rNo
❑ NA
❑ NE
acres determination?
17. Does the facility lack adequate acreage for land application?
❑ Yes
E�' o
❑ NA
❑ NE
18. Is there a lack of properly operating waste application equipment?
❑ Yes
, No
❑ NA
❑ NE
Required Records & Documents
19. Did the facility fail to have the Certificate of Coverage & Permit readily available?
❑ Yes
Q6o
❑ NA
❑ NE
20. Does the facility fail to have all components of the CAWMP readily available? If yes, check
❑ Yes
E(N o
❑ NA
❑ NE
the appropriate box.
❑ WUP ❑Checklists ❑ Design ❑ Maps ❑ Lease Agreements
❑Other:
21. Does record keeping need improvement? If yes, check the appropriate box below.
❑ Yes
❑ No
❑ NA ffNE
❑ Waste Application ❑ Weekly Freeboard ❑ Waste Analysis ❑ Soil Analysis
❑ Waste Transfers
[] Weather Code
❑ Rainfall ❑ Stocking ❑ Crop Yield ❑ 120 Minute Inspections ❑ Monthly and 1" RainfalI Inspections
aNNo
❑ Sludge Survey
22. Did the facility fail to install and maintain a rain gauge?
[—]Yes
❑ NA
23. If selected, did the facility fail to install and maintain rainbreakers on irrigation equipment?
❑ Yes
❑ No
❑ NA rNE
Page 2 of 3 21412011 Continued

'acili Number: - Date of Ins ection:
24. Did the facility fail to calibrate waste application equipment as required by the permit? ❑ Yes [:]No ❑ NA NE
25. Is the facility out of compliance with permit conditions related to sludge? If yes, check ❑ Yes [:]No ❑ NA [j (NE
the appropriate box(es) below.
❑ Failure to complete annual sludge survey ❑ Failure to develop a POA for sludge levels
❑ Non -compliant sludge levels in any lagoon
List structure(s) and date of first survey indicating non-compliance:
26. Did the facility fail provide documentation of an actively certified operator in charge? [:]Yes [:]No ❑ NA E
27. Did the facility fail to secure a phosphorus loss assessments (PLAT) certification? [:]Yes [:]No ❑ NA YNE
Other Issues
28. Did the facility fail to properly dispose of dead animals with 24 hours and/or document
and report mortality rates that were higher than normal?
29. At the time of the inspection did the facility pose an odor or air quality concern?
If yes, contact a regional Air Quality representative immediately.
30. Did the facility fail to notify the Regional Office of emergency situations as required by the
permit? (i.e., discharge, freeboard problems, over -application)
31. Do subsurface tile drains exist at the facility? If yes, check the appropriate box below.
❑ Application Field ❑ Lagoon/Storage Pond ❑ Other:
[:]Yes ✓dNo ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes VNo ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes [eNo ❑ NA ❑ NE
[—]Yes dNo ❑ NA ❑ NE
32. Were any additional problems noted which cause non-compliance of the permit or CAWMP? ❑ Yes ❑ ❑ NA
33. Did the Reviewer/Inspector fail to discuss review/inspection with an on -site representative? ❑ Yes ❑ NA
34. Does the facility require a follow-up visit by the same agency? ❑ Yes No ❑ NA
Comments (refer to question ft Explain any YES answers and/or any additional recommendations or any other comments.
Use drawings of facility to better explain situations (use additional pages as necessary). p,
1�0 p�d✓� ��� �/�pd
ve"'Isnect " ame:
Reviewer/lnspector Signature: v
�e3of3
V
❑ NE
❑ NE
J a` a.
Phone: Qom! Q
Date:
4e,ob er// 6A4reX

u
d
}I
I
�1
�I
_
t
I�
4�
f{r
f

Division of Water Quality
Division of Soil and Water Conservation
❑ Other Agency
Facility Number: 400068 Facility Status: Active Permit: AW5400068 ❑ Denied Access
Inspection Type: Compliance Inspection Inactive or Closed Date:
Reason for Visit: Rgutine County: Greene Region: Washington
Date of Visit: 08/12/2011 Entry Time: 08:00 AM Exit Time: 08735 AM Incident #:
Farm Name: Sandhill Sow Farm Owner Email:
Owner: Franklin Pat Harris Phone: [phone]
Mailing Address: 3269 Hwy 91 N Snow Hill NC 28580
Physical Address: 2100 Warrentown Rd Snow Hill NC 28580
Facility Status: E Compliant ❑ Not Compliant Integrator: Murphy -Brown LLC
Location of Farm: Latitude: 35°26'12" Longitude: 77°44'53"
On North side of SR 1149.
Question Areas:
Dischrge & Stream Impacts Waste Col, Stor, & Treat Waste Application
Records and Documents Other Issues
Certified Operator: Franklin P Harris Operator Certification Number: 16622
Secondary OIC(s):
On -Site Representative(s): Name Title Phone
Primary Inspector: Marlene Salyer Phone:
Inspector Signature: Date:
Secondary Inspector(s):
Inspection Summary:
waste analysis:
7-1-11 = .87 soil tested 1112010 - lime applied in 812011
12-30-10 = .64
8-13-10 = .62
IRR records are complete & balanced out. Freeboard & rainfall records are complete.
Looks Good!
Page: 1

Permit: AWS400068 Owner - Facility: Franklin Pat Harris Facility Number: 400068
Inspection Date: 0811212011 Inspection Type: Compliance Inspection Reason for Visit: Routine
Waste Structures
Designed Observed
Type Identifier Closed Date Start Date Freeboard Freeboard
�agoon 1 PH 10/27/93 20.40 30.50
Page: 2

Permit: AW5400068 Owner -Facility: Franklin Pat Harris Facility Number: 400068
Inspection Date: 08/12/2011 Inspection Type: Compliance Inspection Reason for Visit: Routine
Discharges & Stream Impacts Yes No NA NE
1. Is any discharge observed from any part of the operation? ❑ ■ ❑ ❑
Discharge originated at:
Structure ❑
Application Field ❑
Other ❑
a. Was conveyance man-made? ❑ m ❑ ❑
b. Did discharge reach Waters of the State? (if yes, notify DWQ) ❑ ■ ❑ ❑
c. What is the estimated volume that reached waters of the State (gallons)?
d. Does discharge bypass the waste management system? (if yes, notify DWQ)
❑ ■
❑
❑
2. Is there evidence of a past discharge from any part of the operation?
❑ ■
❑
❑
3. Were there any observable adverse impacts or potential adverse impacts to Waters of the State other than
Q ■
❑
❑
from a discharge?
Waste Collection, Storage & Treatment Yes No
NA
NE
4. Is storage capacity less than adequate?
❑ ■
❑
❑
If yes, is waste level into structural freeboard?
5. Are there any immediate threats to the integrity of any of the structures observed (i.e./ large trees, severe ❑ ■ ❑ ❑
erosion, seepage, etc.)?
6. Are there structures on -site that are not properly addressed and/or managed through a waste management ❑ ■ ❑ ❑
or closure plan?
7. Do any of the structures need maintenance or improvement? ❑ ■ ❑ ❑
8. Do any of the structures lack adequate markers as required by the permit? (Not applicable to roofed pits, ❑ ■ ❑ ❑
dry stacks and/or wet slacks)
9. Does any part of the waste management system other than the waste structures require maintenance or ❑ ■ ❑ ❑
improvement?
Waste Application Yes No NA NE
10. Are there any required buffers, setbacks, or compliance alternatives that need maintenance or ❑ ■ ❑ ❑
improvement?
11. Is there evidence of incorrect application? ❑ ■ ❑ Cl
If yes, check the appropriate box below.
Excessive Ponding?
❑
Hydraulic Overload?
❑
Frozen Ground?
❑
Heavy metals (Cu, Zn, etc)7
❑
Page: 3

Permit: AWS400068 Owner - Facility: Franklin Pat Harris
Facility Number; 400068
Inspection Date: 08/12=11 Inspection Type: Compliance Inspection
Reason for Visit: Routine
Waste Application
Yes No NA NE
PAN?
❑
Is PAN > 10%110 lbs.?
❑
Total Phosphorus?
❑
Failure to incorporate manurelsludge into bare soil?
❑
Outside of acceptable crop window?
❑
Evidence of wind drift?
❑
Application outside of application area?
❑
Crop Type 1 Coastal Bermuda Grass
(Hay, Pasture)
Crop Type 2 Small Grain Overseed
Crop Type 3
Crop Type 4
Crop Type 5
Crop Type 6
Soil Type 1
Soil Type 2
Soil Type 3
Soil Type 4
Soil Type 5
Soil Type 6
14. Do the receiving crops differ from those designated in the Certified Animal Waste Management ❑ ■ ❑ ❑
Plan(CAWMP)?
15. Does the receiving crop and/or land application site need improvement? ❑ ■ ❑ ❑
16. Did the facility fail to secure and/or operate per the irrigation design or wettable acre determination? ❑ ■ ❑ ❑
17. Does the facility lack adequate acreage for land application? ❑ ■ ❑ ❑
18. Is there a lack of properly operating waste application equipment? ❑ ■ Q ❑
Records and Documents Yes No NA NE
19. Did the facility fail to have Certificate of Coverage and Permit readily available? ❑ ■ ❑ ❑
20. Does the facility fail to have all components of the CAWMP readily available? ❑ ■ ❑ ❑
If yes, check the appropriate box below.
WUP? ❑
Page: 4

Permit. AWS400068 Owner - Facility: Franklin Pat Harris Facility Number: 400068
Inspection Date: 08/12/2011 Inspection Type: Compliance Inspection Reason for Visit: Routine
Records and Documents Yes No NA NE
Checklists? ❑
Design? ❑
Maps? ❑
Lease Agreements? ❑
Other? ❑
If Other, please specify
21. Does record keeping need improvement?
If yes, check the appropriate box below.
Waste Application?
❑
Weekly Freeboard?
❑
Waste Analysis?
❑
Soil analysis?
❑
Waste Transfers?
❑
Weather code?
❑
Rainfall?
❑
Stocking?
❑
Crop yields?
❑
120 Minute inspections?
❑
Monthly and 1" Rainfall Inspections
❑
Sludge Survey
❑
22. Did the facility fail to install and maintain a rain gauge?
❑
■ ❑ ❑
23_ It selected, did the facility fail to install and maintain a rainbreaker on irrigation equipment (NPDES only)?
❑
■ ❑ ❑
24. Did the facility fail to calibrate waste application equipment as required by the permit?
❑
■ ❑ ❑
25. Is the facility out of compliance with permit conditions related to sludge? If yes, check the appropriate
❑
■ ❑ ❑
box(es) below:
Failure to complete annual sludge survey ❑
Failure to develop a POA for sludge levels ❑
Non -compliant sludge levels in any lagoon ❑
List structures) and date of first survey indicating non-compliance:
26. Did the facility fail to provide documentation of an actively certified operator in charge? ❑ ■ ❑ ❑
Page: 5

Permit: AWS400068 Owner - Facility: Franklin Pat Harris Facility Number: 400068
Inspection Date: 08/12I2011 Inspection Type: Compliance Inspection Reason for Visit: Routine
Records and Documents Yes No NA NE
27. Did the facility fail to secure a phosphorous loss assessment (PLAT) certification? ❑ ■ ❑ ❑
28. Did the facility fail to properly dispose of dead animals within 24 hours and/or document and report ❑ ■ ❑ ❑
mortality rates that exceed normal rates?
29_ At the time of the inspection did the facility pose an odor or air quality concern? If yes, contact a regional ❑ ■ ❑ ❑
Air Ouality representative immediately.
30_ Did the facility fail to notify regional DWQ of emergency situations as required by Permit? (i.e., discharge, ❑ ■ ❑ ❑
freeboard problems, over -application)
31. Do subsurface tile drains exist at the facility? ❑ ■ ❑ ❑
If yes, check the appropriate box below.
Application Field
Lagoon / Storage Pond
Other
If Other, please specify
32. Were any additional problems noted which cause non-compliance of the Permit or CAWMP?
33. Did the Reviewer/Inspector fail to discuss review/inspection with on -site representative?
34. Does the facility require a follow-up visit by same agency?
10
Page: 6

0 Division of Water Quality
❑ Division of Soil and Water Conservation
❑ Other Agency
Facility Number: 4 Facility Status: Active Permit: AW 4 0 ❑ Denied Access
Inspection Type: Compliance Inspection Inactive or Closed Date:
Reason for Visit: Routine County: Greene Region: Washington
Date of Visit: 10/111201Q Entry Time:D9:00 AM Exit Time: Incident #:
Farm Name: Sandhill Sow Fans Owner Email:
Owner: Franklin Pat Harris Phone: [phone]
Mailing Address: 3269 Hwy 91 N Snow Hill NC 28580
Physical Address: 2100 Warrentown Rd Snow Hill NC 28580
Facility Status: E Compliant ❑ Not Compliant Integrator: Murphy -Brawn LLC
Location of Faun: Latitude: 35*26'12" Longitude: 77°44'53"
On North side of SR 1149
Question Areas:
Discharges & Stream Impacts Waste Collection & Treatment
Waste Application
Records and Documents Other Issues
Certified Operator: Franklin P Harris
Operator Certification Number: 16622
Secondary OIC(s):
On -Site Representative{s): Name
Title Phone
24 hour contact name Pat Harris
Phone:
On -site representative Pat Harris
Phone:
Primary Inspector: Marlene Salyer
Phone:
Inspector Signature:
Date:
Secondary Inspector{s):
Inspection Summary:
waste analysis:
8-13-10 = .62
3-30-10 = .65
12-14-10 = .64
soil tested 2009 SS 2009/due 2010 Calib. 2009/due 2011
IRR records are complete and balanced out.
Freeboard range: 2/8/10 = 18" — 9-27-10 = 48"
Page: 1

Permit: AWS400068 Owner - Facility: Franklin Pat Harris
Inspection Date: 10li 1l2010 Inspection Type: Compliance Inspection
Facility Number. 400068
Reason for Visit: Routine
Regulated Operations Design Capacity Current Population
Swine
O Swine - Farrow to Wean 2,169 2,150
Total Design Capacity: 2,169
Total SSLW: 939,177
Waste Structures
Type IdentiFler Closed Date Start Date Designed Freeboard Observed Freeboard
lagoon 1PH 10/27/93 20,40 37 00
Page: 2

Permit: AWS400068 Owner - Facility: Franklin Pat Harris Facility Number: 400068
Inspection Date: 10/1112010 Inspection Type: Compliance inspection Reason for Visit: Routine
Discharges & Stream Impacts Yes No NA NE
1. is any discharge observed from any part of the operation? ❑ ■ ❑ ❑
Discharge originated at:
Structure ❑
Application Field ❑
Other ❑
a. Was conveyance man-made? ❑ 0 ❑ ❑
b. Did discharge reach Waters of the Stale? (if yes, notify DWQ) ❑ ■ ❑ ❑
c. Estimated volume reaching surface waters?
d. Does discharge bypass the waste management system? (if yes, notify DWQ)
❑ ■
❑
❑
2. Is there evidence of a past discharge from any part of the operation?
❑ ■
❑
❑
3. Were there any adverse impacts or potential adverse impacts to Waters of the State other than from a
❑ ■
❑
❑
discharge?
Waste Collection, Storage & Treatment
Yes No
NA
NE
a. Is storage capacity less than adequate?
❑ ■
❑
❑
If yes, is waste level into structural freeboard?
❑
5. Are there any immediate threats to the integrity of any of the structures observed (I.e./ large trees, severe ❑ ■ ❑ ❑
erosion, seepage, etc.)?
6. Are there structures on -site that are not properly addressed and/or managed through a waste management ❑ ■ ❑ ❑
or closure plan?
7. Do any of the structures need maintenance or improvement? 0000
8. Do any of the structures lack adequate markers as required by the permit? (Not applicable to roofed pits,
❑ ■
❑ ❑
dry stacks and/or wet stacks)
9. Does any part of the waste management system other than the waste structures require maintenance or
❑ ■
❑
❑
improvement?
Waste Application
Yes No
NA
NE
10. Are there any required buffers, setbacks, or compliance alternatives that need maintenance or
❑ ■
❑
❑
improvement?
11. Is there evidence of incorrect application?
❑ ■
❑
❑
If yes, check the appropriate box below.
Excessive Ponding? ❑
Hydraulic Overload? ❑
Frozen Ground? ❑
Heavy metals (Cu, Zn, etc)? ❑
Page: 3

Permit: AWS400068 Owner - Facility: Franklin Pat Hams Facility Number: 400068
Inspection Date: 10111/2010 Inspection Type: Compliance Inspection Reason for VisIt: Routine
Waste Application Yes No NA NE
PAN? ❑
Is PAN > 10%/10 lbs.? ❑
Total P205? ❑
Failure to incorporate manure/sludge into bare soil? ❑
Outside of acceptable crop window? ❑
Evidence of wind drift? ❑
Application outside of application area? ❑
Crop Type 1 Coastal Bermuda Grass
(Hay, Pasture)
Crop Type 2 Small Grain Overseed
Crop Type 3
Crop Type 4
Crop Type 5
Crop Type 6
Soil Type 1
Soil Type 2
Soil Type 3
Soil Type 4
Soil'Type 5
Soil Type 6
14. Do the receiving crops differ from those designated in the Certified Animal Waste Management
❑
■
❑ ❑
Plan(CAWMP)?
15. Does the receiving crop and/or land application site need improvement?
❑
■
❑ ❑
16. Did the facility fail to secure and/or operate per the'irrigation design or wettable acre determination?
❑
■
❑ ❑
17. Does the facility lack adequate acreage for land application?
❑
■
❑ ❑
18. is there a lack of properly operating waste application equipment?
❑
■
❑ ❑
Records and Documents
Yes
No
NA NE
19. Did the facility fail to have Certificate of Coverage and Permit readily available?
❑
■
❑ ❑
20. Does the facility fail to have all components of the CAWMP readily available?
❑
■
❑ ❑
if yes, check the appropriate box below.
WUP? ❑
Page: 4

Permit: AWS400068 Owner - Facility: Franklin Pat Harris
Facility Number: 400068
Inspection Date: 10111/2010 Inspection Type: Compliance Inspection
Reason for Visit: Routine
Records and Documents
Yes No
NA NE
Checklists?
❑
Design?
❑
Maps?
❑
Other?
❑
21. Does record keeping need improvement?
❑ ■
❑ ❑
If yes, check the appropriate box below.
Waste Application?
❑
120 Minute inspections?
❑
Weather code?
❑
Weekly Freeboard?
❑
Transfers?
❑
Rainfall?
❑
Inspections after> 1 inch rainfall & monthly?
❑
Waste Analysis?
❑
Annual soli analysis?
❑
Crop yields?
❑
Stocking?
❑ '
Annual Certification Form (NPDES only)?
❑
22. Did the facility fail to install and maintain a rain gauge?
❑ ■
❑ ❑
23. If selected, did the facility fail to install and maintain a rainbreaker on irrigation equipment (NPDES
only)? ❑ ■
❑ ❑
24. Did the facility fail to calibrate waste application equipment as required by the permit?
❑ ■
❑ ❑
25. Did the facility fail to conduct a sludge survey as required by the permit?
❑ ■
❑ ❑
26. Did the facility fail to have an actively certified operator in charge?
❑ ■
❑ ❑
27. Did the facility fail to secure a phosphorous loss assessment (PLAT) certification?
❑ ■
❑ ❑
Other Issues
Yes No
NA NE
28. Were any additional problems noted which cause non-compliance of the Permit or CAWMP?
❑ ■
❑ ❑
29. Did the facility fail to properly dispose of dead animals within 24 hours and/or document and report those ❑ ■ ❑ Cl
mortality rates that exceed normal rates?
30. At the time of the inspection did the facility pose an air quality concern? If yes, contact a regional Air ❑ ■ ❑ ❑
Quality representative immediately.
Page: 5

i
Permit: AWS400068 Owner - Facility: Franklin Pat Harris
Inspection Data: 10/11/2010 Inspection Type: Compliance Inspection
Otherlssues
31. Did the facility fail to notify regional DWQ of emergency situations as required by Permit?
32. Did Reviewer/inspector fail to discuss review/inspection with on -site representative?
33. Does facility require a follow-up visit by same agency?
Facility Number: 400068
Reason for Visit: Routine
Yes No NA NE
❑ ■ ❑ ❑
❑ ■ ❑ ❑
❑ ■ ❑ ❑
Page: 6

Division of Water Quality
❑ Division of Soil and Water Conservation
❑ Other Agency I --I
Facility Number: 400068 „ Facility Status: ive Permit: S4 ❑ Denied Access
Inspection Type: Comolliance Inspection Inactive or Closed Date:
Reason for Visit: Routine County. Greene Region: Washington
Date of Visit: 09108120OR _ Entry Time:08:30 AM _ Exit Time:
Farm Name: Sandhill Sow Farm
Owner: Franklin Pat Harris
Incident #:
Owner Email:
Mailing Address: 3269 Hwy 91 N Snow Hill NC 28580
Phone: [phone]
Physical Address: 2100 Warrentown Rd _ T Snow Hill NC 28580
Facility Status: 0 Compliant ❑ Not Compliant Integrator: Murphy -Brown. LLC
Location of Farm:
On North side of SR 1149.
Latitude:35°26'12" Longitude:77'A4�53"_
Question Areas:
Discharges & Stream Impacts Waste Collection & Treatment Waste Application
Records and Documents Other Issues
Certified Operator: Franklin P Harris Operator Certification Number: 16622
Secondary OIC(s):
On -Site Representative(s): Name Title Phone
24 hour contact name Pat Harris Phone:
On -site representative Pat Harris Phone:
Primary Inspector: Marlene Salyer Phone:
Inspector Signature: Date:
Secondary Inspector(s):
Inspection Summary:
Waste analysis:
8-26-09 .71
5-21-09 .90
1-9-09 .65
soil tested 12-08 & lime applied Don't forget the sludge survey
Looks Good!!
Page: 1

Permit: AWS400068 Owner- Facility: Franklin Pat Harris
Facility Number: 400068
Inspection Date: 09/08/2009 Inspection Type: Compliance Inspection Reason for Visit: Routine
Regulated Operations Design Capacity Current Population
Swine
Q Swine - Farrow to Wean 2,169 2,160
Total Design Capacity: 2,169
Total SSLW: 939,177
Waste Structures
Type Identifier Closed Date Start Date Designed Freeboard Observed Freeboard
�ag oon 1 PH 10/27/93 20.40 43. 00
Page: 2

Permit: AWS400068 Owner - Facility: Franklin Pat Harris Facility Number: 400068
Inspection Date: 09/08/2009 Inspection Type: Compliance Inspection Reason for Visit: Routine
Discharges & Stream Impacts Yes No NA NE
1. Is any discharge observed from any part of the operation? ❑ ■ ❑ ❑
Discharge originated at
Structure ❑
Application Field ❑
Other ❑
a. Was conveyance man-made? ❑ ■ ❑ ❑
b. Did discharge reach Waters of the State? (if yes, notify DWQ) ❑ ■ ❑ ❑
c. Estimated volume reaching surface waters?
d. Does discharge bypass the waste management system? (if yes, notify DWQ) ❑ ■ ❑ ❑
2. Is there evidence of a past discharge from any part of the operation? ❑ ■ ❑ ❑
3. Were there any adverse impacts or potential adverse impacts to Waters of the State other than from a ❑ ■ ❑ ❑
discharge?
Waste Collection, Storage. & Treatment Yes No NA NE
4. Is storage capacity less than adequate? ❑ ■ ❑ ❑
If yes, is waste level into structural freeboard? ❑
5. Are there any immediate threats to the integrity of any of the structures observed (Le] large trees, severe
❑ ■
❑ ❑
` erosion, seepage, etc.)?
6. Are there structures on -site that are not properly addressed and/or managed through a waste management
❑ ■
❑
❑
or closure plan?
7. Do any of the structures need maintenance or improvement?
❑ ■
❑
❑
8. Do any of the structures lack adequate markers as required by the permit? (Not applicable to roofed pits,
❑ ■
❑
❑
dry stacks and/or wet stacks)
9. Does any part of the waste management system other than the waste structures require maintenance or
❑ ■
❑
❑
improvement?
Waste Application Yes No
NA
NE
10. Are there any required buffers, setbacks, or compliance alternatives that need maintenance or
❑ ■
❑
❑
improvement?
11. Is there evidence of incorrect application? ❑ ■ ❑ ❑
If yes, check the appropriate box below.
Excessive Ponding? ❑
Hydraulic Overload? ❑
Frozen Ground? ❑
Heavy metals (Cu, Zn, etc)? ❑
Page: 3

Permit: AWS400068 Owner- Facility: Franklin Pat Hams Facility Number: 400068
Inspection Date: 09/08/2009 Inspection Type: Compliance Inspection Reason for Visit: Routine
Waste Application Yes No NA NE
PAN? Q
Is PAN > 100/a/10 lbs.? ❑
Total P205? ❑
Failure to incorporate manure/sludge into bare soil? Q
Outside of acceptable crop window? ❑
Evidence of wind drift?
Application outside of application area? ❑
Crop Type 1
Crop Type 2
Crop Type 3
Crop Type 4
Crop Type 5
Crop Type 6
Soil Type 1
Soil Type 2
Soil Type 3
Soil Type 4
Soil Type 5
Soil Type 6
14. Do the receiving crops differ from those designated in the Certified Animal Waste Management
Plan(CAWMP)?
15. Does the receiving crop and/or land application site need improvement?
16. Did the facility fail to secure and/or operate per the irrigation design or wettable acre determination?
17. Does the facility lack adequate acreage for land application?
18. Is there a lack of properly operating waste application equipment?
Records and Documents
19. Did the facility fail to have Certificate of Coverage and Permit readily available?
20. Does the facility fail to have all components of the CAWMP readily available?
If yes, check the appropriate box below.
WUP?
Coastal Bermuda Grass
(Pasture)
[ME—ZEjE]
❑■❑❑
❑ ■ ❑ Q
❑ ■ ❑ ❑
001111
Yes No NA NE
❑ ■ ❑ 0
❑ ■ ❑ ❑
X
Page: 4

Permit: AVV3400068 Owner - Facility: Franklin Pat Hams
Facility Number: 400068
Inspection Date: 09/08/2009 Inspection Type: Compliance Inspection
Reason for Visit: Routine
Records and Documents
Yes
No NA NE
Checklists?
❑
Design?
❑
Maps?
❑
Other?
❑
21. Does record keeping need improvement?
❑
■ ❑ ❑
If yes, check the appropriate box below.
Waste Application?
❑
120 Minute inspections?
❑
Weather code?
❑
Weekly Freeboard?
❑
Transfers?
❑
Rainfall?
❑
Inspections after > 1 inch rainfall & monthly?
❑
Waste Analysis?
❑
Annual soil analysis?
❑
Crop yields?
❑
Stocking?
❑
Annual Certification Form (NPDES only)?
❑
22. Did the facility fail to install and maintain a rain gauge?
❑
■ ❑ ❑
23. If selected, did the facility fail to install and maintain a rainbreaker on irrigation equipment (NPDES
only)? ❑
■ ❑ ❑
24. Did the facility fail to calibrate waste application equipment as required by the permit?
❑
■ ❑ ❑
25. Did the facility fail to conduct a sludge survey as required by the permit?
Cl
■ ❑ ❑
26. Did the facility fail to have an actively certified operator in charge?
❑
■ ❑ ❑
27. Did the facility fail to secure a phosphorous loss assessment (PLAT) certification?
❑
■ ❑ ❑
Other Issues
Yes
No NA NE
28. Were any additional problems noted which cause non-compliance of the Permit or CAWMP?
❑
■ ❑ ❑
29. Did the facility fail to property dispose of dead animals within 24 hours and/or document and report those ❑ ■ ❑ ❑
mortality rates that exceed normal rates?
30. At the time of the inspection did the facility pose an air quality concern? If yes, contact a regional Air ❑ ■ ❑ ❑
Quality representative immediately.
Page: 5

Permit: AWS400068 Owner - Facility: Franklin Pat Harris Facility Number: 400068
Inspection Date: 0910812009 Inspection Type: Compliance inspection Reason for Visit: Routine
Other Issues Yes No NA NE
31. Did the facility fail to notify regional DWQ of emergency situations as required by Permit? Q ■ Q Q
32. Did Reviewer/Inspector fail to discuss review/inspection with on -site representative? 0 ■ ❑ ❑
33. Does facility require a follow-up visit by same agency?
0000
Page: 6

Division of Water Quality
❑ Division of Soil and Water Conservation
❑ Other Agency
Facility Number: 400068 Facility Status: Active Permit: AWS400068 ❑ Denied Access
Inspection Type: Qompliagg Inspection Inactive or Closed Date:
Reason for Visit: Routine County: Greene Region: Washington
Date of Visit: 10/02/2008 Entry Time:0&00 AM Exit Time:
Incident #:
Farm Name: Sandhill Sow Farm Owner Email:
Owner: Franklin Pat Harris Phone: [phone]
Mailing Address: 3269 Hwy 91 N _ Snow Hill NC 28580
Physical Address: 2100 Warrentown Rd Snow Hill NC 28580
Facility Status: ❑Compliant ❑Not Compliant Integrator: Prgmium Standard Farms OF North Carolina Inc _
Location of Farm:
On North side of SR 1149.
Latitude, 35"26'12" Longitude: 77°44'53"
Question Areas:
Discharges & Stream impacts Waste Collection & Treatment Waste Application
Records and Documents Other Issues
Certified Operator: Franklin P Harris
Secondary OIC(s):
Operator Certification Number: 16622
On -Site Representative(s): Name Title Phone
On -site representative Pat Harris Phone:
Primary Inspector: Marlene Salyer Phone:
Inspector Signature: Date:
Secondary Inspector(s):
Inspection Summary:
waste analysis:
7-10-08 = .92
1-7-08 = 383
soil test 7-19-07
Looks good!
Page: 1

Permit: AWS400068 Owner- Facility: Franklin Pat Harris Facility Number: 400068
Inspection Date: 10/02/2008 Inspection Type: Compliance Inspection Reason for Visit: Routine
Regulated Operations Design Capacity Current Population
Swine
Q Swine - Farrow to Wean 2,169 2,169
Total Design Capacity: 2,169
Total SSLW: 939,177
Waste Structures
Type Identifier Closed Date Start Date Designed Freeboard Observed Freeboard
Lagoon 1 PH 10/27/93 20,40 36.00
Page: 2

Permit: AWS400068 Owner - Facility: Franklin Pat Harris Facility Number: 400068
Inspection Date: 10/0212008 inspection Type: Compliance Inspection Reason for V'uit: Routine
Discharges & Stream Impacts
Yes
No NA N£
1. Is any discharge observed from any part of the operation?
❑
■ ❑ ❑
Discharge originated at:
Structure
❑
Application Field
❑
Other
❑
a. Was conveyance man-made?
❑
■ ❑ ❑
b. Did discharge reach Waters of the State? (if yes, notify DWQ)
❑
■ ❑ ❑
c. Estimated volume reaching surface waters?
d. Does discharge bypass the waste management system? (if yes, notify DWQ)
❑
0110
2. Is there evidence of a past discharge from any part of the operation?
❑
■ ❑ ❑
3. Were there any adverse impacts or potential adverse impacts to Waters of the State other than from a
❑
■ ❑ ❑
discharge?
Waste Collection, Storage & Treatment
Yes
No NA NE
4. Is storage capacity less than adequate?
❑
■ ❑ ❑
If yes, is waste level into structural freeboard?
❑
5. Are there any immediate threats to the integrity of any of the structures observed (I.e./ large trees, severe
❑
■ ❑ ❑
erosion, seepage, etc.)?
6. Are there structures on -site that are not properly addressed and/or managed through a waste management ❑
■ ❑ ❑
or closure plan?
7. Do any of the structures need maintenance or improvement?
❑
■ ❑ ❑
8. Do any of the structures lack adequate markers as required by the permit? (Not applicable to roofed pits,
❑
■ ❑ ❑
dry stacks and/or wet stacks)
9. Does any part of the waste management system other than the waste structures require maintenance or
❑
■ ❑ ❑
improvement?
Waste Application
Yes
No NA NE
10. Are there any required buffers, setbacks, or compliance alternatives that need maintenance or
❑
■ ❑ ❑
improvement?
11. Is there evidence of incorrect application?
❑
■ ❑ ❑
If yes, check the appropriate box below.
Excessive Ponding? ❑
Hydraulic Overload? ❑
Frozen Ground? ❑
Heavy metals (Cu, Zn, etc)? ❑
Page: 3

Permit: AWS400068 Owner - Facility: Franklin Pat Harris
Inspection Date: 1010212008 Inspection Type: Compliance Inspection
Facility Number: 400068
Reason for Visit: Routine
Waste Application
Yes No NA NE
PAN?
❑
Is PAN > 10%110 lbs.?
❑
Total P205?
❑
Failure to incorporate manurelsludge into bare soil?
❑
Outside of acceptable crop window?
❑
Evidence of wind drift?
❑
Application outside of application area?
❑
Crop Type 1
Coastal Bermuda Grass
(Pasture)
Crop Type 2
Small Grain Overseed
Crop Type 3
Crop Type 4
Crop Type 5
Crop Type 6
Soil Type 1
Soil Type 2
Soil Type 3
Soil Type 4
Soil Type 5
Soil Type 6
14. Do the receiving crops differ from those designated in the Certified Animal Waste Management
110110
Plan(CAWMP)?
15. Does the receiving crop and/or land application site need improvement?
❑ ■ ❑ ❑
16. Did the facility fail to secure and/or operate per the irrigation design or wettable acre determination? ❑ ■ ❑ ❑
17. Does the facility lack adequate acreage for land application?
❑ ■ Cl ❑
18. Is there a lack of properly operating waste application equipment?
❑ m ❑ ❑
Records and Documents
Yes No NA NE
19. Did the facility fail to have Certificate of Coverage and Pen -nit readily available?
❑ ■ ❑ ❑
20. Does the facility fail to have all components of the CAWMP readily available?
❑ ■ ❑ ❑
If yes, check the appropriate box below.
WUP?
❑
Page: 4

Permit: AWS400068 Owner - Facility: Franklin Pat Hams Facility Number., 400068
Inspection Date: 10/02/2008 Inspection Type: Compliance Inspection Reason for Visit: Routine
Records and Documents
Checklists?
Design?
Maps?
Other?
21. Does record keeping need improvement?
If yes, check the appropriate box below.
Yes No NA NE
❑■❑❑
Waste Application?
❑
120 Minute inspections?
❑
Weather code?
❑
Weekly Freeboard?
❑
Transfers?
❑
Rainfall?
❑
Inspections after > 1 inch rainfall & monthly?
❑
Waste Analysis?
❑
Annual soil analysis?
❑
Crop yields?
❑
Stocking?
❑
Annual Certification Form (NPDES only)?
❑
22. Did the facility fail to install and maintain a rain gauge?
❑ ■ ❑
❑
23. If selected, did the facility fail to install and maintain a rainbreaker on irrigation equipment (NPDES only)?
❑ ■ ❑
❑
24. Did the facility fail to calibrate waste application equipment as required by the permit?
❑ ■ ❑
❑
25. Did the facility fail to conduct a sludge survey as required by the permit?
❑ ■ ❑
❑
26. Did the facility fail to have an actively certified operator in charge?
❑ ■ ❑
❑
27. Did the facility fail to secure a phosphorous loss assessment (PLAT) certification?
❑ ■ ❑
❑
Yns Nn NA
NF
28. Were any additional problems noted which cause non-compliance of the Permit or CAWMP? ❑ ■ ❑ ❑
29. Did the facility fail to properly dispose of dead animals within 24 hours and/or document and report those ❑ ■ ❑ ❑
mortality rates that exceed normal rates?
30. At the time of the inspection did the facility pose an air quality concern? If yes, contact a regional Air ❑ ■ ❑ ❑
Quality representative immediately.
Page: 5

Permit: AWS400068 Owner - Facility: Franklin Pat Harris
Facility Number: 400068
Inspection Date: 10/02/2008 Inspection Type: Compliance Inspection Reason for Visit: Routine
r%th- r— — Yes No NA NE
31. Did the facility fail to notify regional DWQ of emergency situations as required by Permit? ❑ ■ ❑ ❑
32. Did Reviewer/Inspector fail to discuss review/inspection with on -site representative? ❑ M ❑ ❑
33. Does facility require a follow-up visit by same agency? ❑ ■ ❑ ❑
Page: 6

E Division of Water Quality
Q Division of Soil and Water Conservation
❑ Other Agency
Facility Number: 400068 Facility Status: Active Permit: AWS400068 ❑ Denied Access
Inspection Type: Compliances5pection __ _ Inactive or Closed Date:
Reason for Visit: Rgutine County: Greene Region: Washington
Date of Visit: 03/02/2007 _ _ Entry Time:10:30 AM Exit Time:
Incident #:
Farm Name: Sandhill Sow Farm Owner Email:
Owner: Franklin Pat Harris
Phone: [phone]
Mailing Address: 3269 Hwy -1 N � _ Snow Hill NC 2080
Physical Address: 2100 VarrentownSnow Hill NC 2§580
Facility Status: ❑ Compliant ❑ Not Compliant
Location of Farm:
On North side of SR 1149.
Question Areas:
Discharges & Stream impacts
Records and Documents
Certified Operator: Franklin P Harris
Secondary OIC(s):
Integrator:
Latitude:35"26'12" _ Longitude:77°44'53"
Waste Collection & Treatment Waste Application
Otherlssues
Operator Certification Number: 16622
On -Site Representative(s): Name Title Phone
On -site representative Pat Harris Phone:
24 hour contact name Pat Harris Phone:
Primary Inspector: Marlene Salyer Phone:
Inspector Signature:
Secondary Inspector(s):
Inspection Summary:
Waste analysis" Soil test pulled on July 1, 2007
6-4-07 = 1.2
1-17-07 = .90
Date:
The freeboard is recorded weekly and 7-23-07 was 45inches. the last rainfall was 1.3inches and the lagoon was checked afterward.
The irrigation records are complet and balanced out with the last irrigation on CB on July 26, 2007, which I observed while in the area.
#1) a flush line pipe that was underground for at least 3 feet developed a 10-12 inch slit and caused a discharge during the night
hours of July 28, 2007. This drained into the Reedy Branch which runs to Tyson Marsh. Mr. harris called this incident into the WaRO
office at 6:55 am July 30, 2007.
See incident #200702418
Page: 1
Ll�

Permit: AWS400068 Owner - Facility: Franklin Pat Harris Facility Number: 400068
Inspection Date: 03/02/2007 Inspection Type: Compliance Inspection Reason for Visit: Routine
Regulated Operations Design Capacity Current Population
Swine
Swine - Farrow to Wean 2,169 2,039
Total Design Capacity: 2,169
Total SSLW: 939,177
Waste Structures
Type Identifier Closed Date Start Date Designed Freeboard Observed Freeboard
kgoon 1 PH 10/27/93 20.40 45.00
Page: 2
Lx

I
Permit: AWS400068 Owner - Facility: Franklin Pat Hams Facility Number. 400068
Inspection Date: 03/02/2007 Inspection Type: Compliance Inspection Reason for Visit: Routine
Discharges & Stream Impacts
Yes
No
NA NE
1. Is any discharge observed from any part of the operation?
■
❑
❑ ❑
Discharge originated at:
Structure
❑
Application Field
❑
Other
■
a. Was conveyance man-made?
❑
■
❑ ❑
b. Did discharge reach Waters of the State? (if yes, notify DWQ)
■
❑
❑ ❑
c. Estimated volume reaching surface waters?
2000
d. Does discharge bypass the waste management system? (if yes, notify DWQ)
■
❑
❑ ❑
2. Is there evidence of a past discharge from any part of the operation?
❑
■
❑ ❑
3. Were there any adverse impacts or potential adverse impacts to Waters of the State other than from a
❑
■
❑ ❑
discharge?
Waste Collection, Storage & Treatment
Yes
No
NA NE
4. Is storage capacity less than adequate?
❑
■
❑ ❑
If yes, is waste level into structural freeboard?
❑
5. Are there any immediate threats to the integrity of any of the structures observed (I.eJ large trees, severe
❑
■
❑ ❑
erosion, seepage, etc.)?
6. Are there structures on -site that are not properly addressed and/or managed through a waste management ❑
■
❑ ❑
or closure plan?
7. Do any of the structures need maintenance or improvement?
❑
■
❑ ❑
8. Do any of the structures lack adequate markers as required by the permit? (Not applicable to roofed pits,
❑
■
❑ ❑
dry stacks and/or wet stacks)
9. Does any part of the waste management system other than the waste structures require maintenance or
❑
■
❑ ❑
improvement?
Waste Application
Yes
No
NA NE
10. Are there any required buffers, setbacks, or compliance alternatives that need maintenance or
❑
■
❑ ❑
improvement?
11. Is there evidence of incorrect application?
❑
■
❑ ❑
If yes, check the appropriate box below
Excessive Ponding?
❑
Hydraulic Overload?
❑
Frozen Ground?
❑
Heavy metals (Cu, Zn, etc)?
❑
Page: 3

Permit: AWS400068 Owner - Facility: Franklin Pat Hams Facility Number: 400068
Inspection Date: 03/02/2007 Inspection Type: Compliance Inspection Reason for Visit: Routine
Waste Application Yes No NA NE
PAN? ❑
Is PAN > 10%/10 lbs.? ❑
Total P205? ❑
Failure to incorporate manurelsludge into bare soil? ❑
Outside of acceptable crop window? ❑
Evidence of wind drift? ❑
Application outside of application area? ❑
Crop Type 1 Coastal Bermuda Grass
(Pasture)
Crop Type 2 Small Grain Overseed
Crop Type 3
Crop Type 4
Crop Type 5
Crop Type 6
Soil Type 1
Soil Type 2
Soil Type 3
Soil Type 4
Soil Type 5
Soil Type 6
14. Do the receiving crops differ from those designated in the Certified Animal Waste Management
11000
Plan(CAWMP)?
15. Does the receiving crop and/or land application site need improvement?
❑
■
❑ ❑
16. Did the facility fail to secure and/or operate per the irrigation design or wettable acre determination?
Cl
■
❑ ❑
17. Does the facility lack adequate acreage for land application?
❑
■
❑ ❑
18. is there a lack of properly operating waste application equipment?
❑
■
❑ ❑
Records and Documents
Yes
No
NA NE
19. Did the facility fail to have Certificate of Coverage and Permit readily available?
❑
■
❑ ❑
20. Does the facility fail to have all components of the CAWMP readily available?
❑
■
❑ ❑
If yes, check the appropriate box below.
WUP?
❑
Page: 4
V

Permit: AWS400068 Owner - Facility: Franklin Pat Hams Facility Number: 400068
Inspection Date: 03/02/2007 Inspection Type: Compliance Inspection Reason for Visit: Routine
Records and Documents Yes No NA NE
Checklists? ❑
Design?
Maps?
Other?
21. Does record keeping need improvement?
If yes, check the appropriate box below.
Waste Application?
❑
120 Minute inspections?
❑
Weather code?
❑
Weekly Freeboard?
❑
Transfers?
❑
Rainfall?
❑
Inspections after > 1 inch rainfall & monthly?
Cl
Waste Analysis?
❑
Annual soil analysis?
❑
Crop yields?
❑
Stocking?
❑
Annual Certification Form (NPDES only)?
❑
22. Did the facility fail to install and maintain a rain gauge?
❑
■
❑ ❑
23. If selected, did the facility fail to install and maintain a rainbreaker on irrigation equipment (NPDES only)?
❑
■
❑ ❑
24. Did the facility fail to calibrate waste application equipment as required by the permit?
❑
■
❑ ❑
25. Did the facility fail to conduct a sludge survey as required by the permit?
❑
■
❑ ❑
26. Did the facility fail to have an actively certified operator in charge?
❑
■
❑ ❑
27. Did the facility fail to secure a phosphorous loss assessment (PLAT) certification?
Cl
■
❑ ❑
Other Issues
Yes
No
NA NE
28. Were any additional problems noted which cause non-compliance of the Permit or CAWMP?
❑
■
❑ ❑
29. Did the facility fail to properly dispose of dead animals within 24 hours and/or document and report those ❑ ■ ❑ ❑
mortality rates that exceed normal rates?
30. At the time of the inspection did the facility pose an air quality concern? If yes, contact a regional Air ❑ IN ❑ ❑
Quality representative immediately.
Page: 5
L

Permit: AWS400068 Owner - Facility: Franklin Pat Harris Facility Number. 400068
Inspection Date: 03/02/2007 Inspection Type: Compliance Inspection Reason for Visit: Routine
Other Issues Yes No NA NE
31. Did the facility fail to notify regional DWQ of emergency situations as required by Permit? ❑ ■ ❑ 0
32. Did Reviewer/inspector fail to discuss review/inspection with on -site representative? Q ■ ❑ 0
33. Does facility require a follow-up visit by same agency?
11 ■ Q
Page: 6
1�

Division of Water Quality
❑ Division of Soil and Water Conservation
❑ Other Agency
Facility Number: 400068 Facility Status: Active Permit: AWS400068 ❑ Denied Access
Inspection Type: Compliance Insgection _ inactive or Closed Date:
Reason for Visit: Routine - County: GreeneRegion: Washington _
Date of Visit: 071ZQJ2007 _ Entry Time:10:30 AM _ Exit Time: Incident #:
Farm Name: Sandhill Sow Farm Owner Email: .
Owner: Franklin Pat Hams Phone: [phone]
Mailing Address: 3269 Hwy 91 N Snow Hill NC 28580
Physical Address: 2100 Warrentpwn Rd Snow Hill NC 28580
Facility Status: ❑ Compliant ❑ Not Compliant Integrator:
Location of Farm:
On North side of SR 1149.
Question Areas:
Discharges & Stream Impacts
Records and Documents
Latitude: 35°2612" Longitude: 7 °
Waste Collection & Treatment Waste Application
Otherlssues
Certified Operator: Franklin P Harris Operator Certification Number: 16622
Secondary OIC(s):
On -Site Representative(s): Name Title Phone
On -site representative Pat Harris Phone:
24 hour contact name Pat Harris Phone:
Primary Inspector: Marlene Salyer Phone:
Inspector Signature:
Secondary Inspector(s):
Inspection Summary:
Waste analysis" Soil test pulled on July 1, 2007
6-4-07 = 1.2
1-W-07 = .90
Date:
The freeboard is recorded weekly and 7-23-07 was 45inches. the last rainfall was 1.3inchas and the lagoon was checked afterward.
The irrigation records are complete and balanced out with the last irrigation on CB on July 26, 2007, which I observed while in the area.
#1) a flush line pipe that was underground for at least 3 feet developed a 10-12 inch slit and caused a discharge during the night
hours of July 28, 2007. This drained into the Reedy Branch which runs to Tyson Marsh. Mr. harris called this incident into the WaRO
office at 6:55 am July 30, 2007.
See incident #200702418
Page: 1

Permit: AWS400068 owner - Facility: Franklin Pat Hams Facility Number : 400068
Inspection Date: 07/30/2007 Inspection Type: Compliance Inspection Reason for Visit: Routine
Regulated Operations Design Capacity Current Population
Swine
swine - Farrow to Wean 2,169 2,039
Total Design Capacity: 2,169
Total SSLW: 939,177
Waste Structures
Type Identifier Closed Date Start Date Designed Freeboard Observed Freeboard
3goon 1 PH 10/27/93 20,40 45.01
Page: 2

Permit: AWS400068 Owner - Facility: Franklin Pat Harris Facility Number: 400068
Inspection Date: 07/30/2007 Inspection Type: Compliance Inspection Reason for Visit: Routine
Discharges & Stream Impacts
Yes
No NA
NE
1. Is any discharge observed from any part of the operation?
■
❑ ❑
❑
Discharge originated at:
Structure
❑
Application Field
❑
Other
■
a. Was conveyance man-made?
❑
■ ❑
❑
b. Did discharge reach Waters of the State? (if yes, notify DWQ)
■
❑ ❑
❑
c. Estimated volume reaching surface waters?
2000
d. Does discharge bypass the waste management system? (if yes, notify DWQ)
■
❑ ❑
❑
2. Is there evidence of a past discharge from any part of the operation?
❑
■ ❑
❑
3. Were there any adverse impacts or potential adverse impacts to Waters of the State other than from a
❑
■ ❑
❑
discharge?
Waste Collection, Storage & Treatment
Yes
No NA
NE
4. Is storage capacity less than adequate?
❑
■ ❑
❑
If yes, is waste level into structural freeboard?
❑
5. Are there any immediate threats to the integrity of any of the structures observed (Le./ large trees, severe
❑
■ ❑
❑
erosion, seepage, etc:)?
6. Are there structures on -site that are not properly addressed and/or managed through a waste management ❑
■ ❑
❑
or closure plan?
7. Do any of the structures need maintenance or improvement?
❑
■ ❑
❑
8. Do any of the structures lack adequate markers as required by the permit? (Not applicable to roofed pits,
❑
■ ❑
❑
dry stacks and/or wet stacks)
9. Does any part of the waste management system other than the waste structures require maintenance or
❑
■ ❑
❑
improvement?
Waste Application
Yes
No NA
NE
10. Are there any required buffers, setbacks, or compliance alternatives that need maintenance or
❑
■ 110
improvement?
11. Is there evidence of incorrect application?
❑
■ ❑
❑
If yes, check the appropriate box below.
Excessive Ponding?
❑
Hydraulic Overload?
❑
Frozen Ground?
❑
Heavy metals (Cu, Zn, etc)?
❑
Page: 3

Permit: AWS400068 Owner - Facility: Franklin Pat Harris
Inspection Date: 07/30/2007 Inspection Type: Compliance inspection
Facility Number : 400068
Reason for Visit: Routine
Waste Application
Yes
No NA NE
PAN?
❑
Is PAN > 10%/10 lbs.?
❑
Total P2O5?
❑
Failure to incorporate manure/sludge into bare soil?
❑
Outside of acceptable crop window?
❑
Evidence of wind drift?
❑
Application outside of application area?
❑
Crop Type 1
Coastal Bermuda Grass
(Pasture)
Crop Type 2
Small Grain Overseed
Crop Type 3
Crop Type 4
Crop Type 5
Crop Type 6
Soil Type 1
Soil Type 2
Soil Type 3
Soil Type 4
Soil Type 5
Soil Type 6
14. Do the receiving crops differ from those designated in the Certified Animal Waste Management
❑
■ Q ❑
Plan(CAWMP)?
15. Does the receiving crop and/or land application site need improvement?
❑
■ ❑ ❑
16. Did the facility fail to secure and/or operate per the irrigation design or wettable acre determination? ❑
■ Q ❑
17. Does the facility lack adequate acreage for land application?
❑
■ ❑ ❑
18. Is there a lack of properly operating waste application equipment?
❑
■ ❑
Records and Documents
Yes
No NA NE
19. Did the facility fail to have Certificate of Coverage and Permit readily available?
❑
■ ❑ ❑
20. Does the facility fail to have all components of the CAWMP readily available?
❑
Is Q ❑
If yes, check the appropriate box below.
WUP?
❑
Page: 4

Permit: AWS400068 Owner - Facility: Franklin Pat Harris
Facility Number: 400068
Inspection Date: 07/30/2007 Inspection Type: Compliance Inspection
Reason for Visit: Routine
Records and Documents
Yes
No
NA NE
Checklists?
❑
Design?
❑
Maps?
❑
Other?
❑
21. Does record keeping need improvement?
❑
■
Cl ❑
If yes, check the appropriate box below.
Waste Application?
❑
120 Minute inspections?
❑
Weather code?
❑
Weekly Freeboard?
❑
Transfers?
❑
Rainfall?
❑
Inspections after> 1 inch rainfall & monthly?
❑
Waste Analysis?
❑
Annual soil analysis?
❑
Crop yields?
❑
Stocking?
❑
Annual Certification Form (NPDES only)?
❑
22. Did the facility fail to install and maintain a rain gauge?
❑
■
❑ ❑
23. If selected, did the facility fail to install and maintain a rainbreaker on irrigation equipment (NPDES
only)? ❑
■
Cl ❑
24. Did the facility fail to calibrate waste application equipment as required by the pen -nit?
❑
■
❑ ❑
25. Did the facility fail to conduct a sludge survey as required by the permit?
❑
■
❑ ❑
26. Did the facility fail to have an actively certified operator in charge?
❑
■
❑ ❑
27. Did the facility fail to secure a phosphorous loss assessment (PLAT) certification?
❑
■
❑ ❑
V..
1Jn
IJA MP
28. Were any additional problems noted which cause non-compliance of the Permit or CAWMP? ❑ ■ ❑ ❑
29. Did the facility fail to properly dispose of dead animals within 24 hours and/or document and report those ❑ ■ ❑ ❑
mortality rates that exceed normal rates?
30. At the time of the inspection did the facility pose an air quality concern? If yes, contact a regional Air ❑ ■ ❑ ❑
Quality representative immediately.
Page: 5

Permit: AW5400068 Owner - Facility: Franklin Pat Harris
Inspection Date: 07/30/2007 Inspection Type: Compliance Inspection
Otherlssues
31. Did the facility fail to notify regional DWQ of emergency situations as required by Permit?
32. Did Reviewer/inspector fail to discuss review/inspection with on -site representative?
33_ Does facility require a follow-up visit by same agency?
Facility Number : 400068
Reason for Visit: Routine
Yes No NA NE
❑ ■ ❑ ❑
❑ ■ ❑ ❑
❑ ■ ❑ ❑
Page: 6

Division of Water Quality
❑ Division of Soil and Water Conservation
❑ Other Agency
Facility Number: 400068 _ Facility Status: Active Permit: NCA240068 ❑ Denied Access
Inspection Type: Compliance Inspection Inactive or Closed Date:
Reason for Visit: RoWt0j)e County: §reene Region: Washington
Date of Visit: 02JO112006 Entry Time:09.00 A, MExit Time: Incident #:
Farm Name: Sandhill Sow Farm Owner Email:
Owner: Franklin Pat Harris Phone: [phone]
Mailing Address: 3269 Hwy 91 N Snow Hill NC 28580
Physical Address:
Facility Status: 0 Compliant ❑ Not Compliant Integrator:
Location of Farm: Latitude: 35°26'12" _ Longitude: 77"44'53"
On North side of SR 1149.
Question Areas:
Discharges & Stream Impacts Waste Collection & Treatment Waste Application
Records and Documents Other issues
Certified Operator: Franklin P Hams Operator Certification Number: 16622
Secondary OiC(s):
On -Site Representative(s): Name Title Phone
On -site representative Pat, Hams Phone:
Primary Inspector: Marlene Salyer Phone:
Inspector Signature: Date:
Secondary Inspector(s):
Inspection Summary:
Waste analyses:
1-10-2006 = 0.87
10-11-05 = 0.56
7-1-05= 1.3
5-26-05 -1.3
Soil test 2-05 and limed on 3-1-05
Page: 1

Permit: NCA240068 Owner - Facility: Franklin Pat Hams
Inspection Date: 02/01/2006 Inspection Type: Compliance Inspection
Facility Number: 400068
Reason for Visit: Routine
Regulated Operations Design Capacity Current Population
Swine
❑ Swine - Farrow to Feeder 1,800
W Swine - Farrow to Wean 1,989
Total Design Capacity: 1,800
Total SSL.W: 939,600
Waste Structures
Type Identifier Closed Date Start Date Designed Freeboard Observed Freeboard
agoon 1 PH 10/27/93 20.40 23.00
Page: 2

Permit: NCA24D068 Owner - Facility: Franklin Pat Harris Facility Number: 400068
Inspection Date: 02/01/2006 Inspection Type: Compliance Inspection Reason for Visit: Routine
Discharges & Stream Impacts
Yes
No NA NE
1. Is any discharge observed from any part of the operation?
❑
■ ❑ ❑
Discharge originated at:
Structure
❑
Application Field
❑
Other
0
a. Was conveyance man-made?
❑
■ ❑ ❑
b. Did discharge reach Waters of the State? (if yes, notify DWQ)
❑
■ ❑ ❑
c. Estimated volume reaching surface waters?
d. Does discharge bypass the waste management system? (if yes, notify DWQ)
❑
000
2. Is there evidence of a past discharge from any part of the operation?
❑
■ ❑ ❑
3. Were there any adverse impacts or potential adverse impacts to Waters of the State other than from a
❑
■ ❑ ❑
discharge?
Waste Collection, Storage & Treatment
Yes
No NA NE
4. Is storage capacity less than adequate?
❑
■ ❑ ❑
If yes, is waste level into structural freeboard?
❑
5. Are there any immediate threats to the integrity of any of the structures observed (Le./ large trees, severe
❑
■ ❑ ❑
erosion, seepage, etc.)?
6. Are there structures on -site that are not properly addressed and/or managed through a waste management ❑
■ ❑ ❑
or closure plan?
7. Do any of the structures need maintenance or improvement?
❑
■ 110
8. Do any of the structures lack adequate markers as required by the permit? (Not applicable to roofed pits,
❑
■ ❑ ❑
dry stacks and/or wet stacks)
9. floes any part of the waste management system other than the waste structures require maintenance or
❑
■ ❑ ❑
improvement?
Waste Application
Yes
No NA NE
10. Are there any required buffers, setbacks, or compliance alternatives that need maintenance or
❑
■ ❑ ❑
improvement?
11. Is there evidence of incorrect application?
❑
■ ❑ ❑
If yes, check the appropriate box below.
Excessive Ponding?
❑
Hydraulic Overload?
❑
Frozen Ground?
❑
Heavy metals (Cu, Zn, etc)?
❑
Page: 3

Permit: NCA240068 Owner - Facility: Franklin Pat Hams
Inspection Date: 02/012006 Inspection 'Type: Compliance Inspection
Facility Number: 400068
Reason for Visit: Routine
Waste Application
Yes No NA NE
PAN?
❑
Is PAN > 10%/10 lbs.?
❑
Total P205?
❑
Failure to incorporate manurelsludge into bare soil?
❑
Outside of acceptable crop window?
❑
Evidence of wind drift?
❑
Application outside of application area?
❑
Crop Type 1
Coastal Bermuda Grass
(Pasture)
Crop Type 2
Small Grain Overseed
Crop Type 3
Crop Type 4
Crop Type 5
Crop Type 6
Soil Type 1
Autryville
Soil Type 2
Norfolk
Soil Type 3
Soil Type 4
Soil Type 5
Soil Type 6
14. Do the receiving crops differ from those designated in the Certified Animal Waste Management
❑ ■ ❑ ❑
Plan(CAWMP)?
15. Does the receiving crop and/or land application site need improvement?
❑ ■ ❑ ❑
16. Did the facility fail to secure and/or operate per the irrigation design or wettable acre determination? ❑ ■ ❑ ❑
17. Does the facility lack adequate acreage for land application?
❑ ■ ❑ ❑
18. Is there a lack of properly operating waste application equipment?
❑ ■ ❑ ❑
Records and Documents
Yes No NA NE
19. Did the facility fail to have Certificate of Coverage and Permit readily available?
❑ ■ ❑ ❑
20. Does the facility fail to have all components of the CAWMP readily available?
❑ ■ ❑ ❑
If yes, check the appropriate box below.
WUP?
❑
Page: 4

Permit: NCA240068 Owner - Facility: Franklin Pat Hams
Facility Number: 400068
Inspection Date: 02/01/2006 Inspection Type: Compliance Inspection
Reason for Visit: Routine
Records and Documents
Yes
No
NA NE
Checklists?
❑
Design?
❑
Maps?
❑
Other?
❑
21. Does record keeping need improvement?
❑
■
❑ ❑
It yes, check the appropriate box below.
Waste Application?
❑
120 Minute inspections?
❑
Weather code?
❑
Weekly Freeboard?
❑
Transfers?
❑
Rainfall?
❑
Inspections after > 1 inch rainfall & monthly?
❑
Waste Analysis?
❑
Annual soil analysis?
❑
Crop yields?
❑
Stocking?
❑
Annual Certification Form (NPDES only)?
❑
22. Did the facility fail to install and maintain a rain gauge?
❑
0110
23. If selected, did the facility fail to install and maintain a rainbreaker on irrigation equipment (NPDES
only)? ❑
■
❑ ❑
24. Did the facility fail to calibrate waste application equipment as required by the permit?
❑
■
❑ ❑
25. Did the facility fail to conduct a sludge survey as required by the permit?
❑
0110
26. Did the facility fail to have an actively certified operator in charge?
❑
■
❑ ❑
27. Did the facility fail to secure a phosphorous loss assessment (PLAT) certification?
❑
■
❑ ❑
Other Issues
Yes
No
NA NE
28. Were any additional problems noted which cause non-compliance of the Permit or CAWMP?
❑
000
29. Did the facility fail to property dispose of dead animals within 24 hours and/or document and report those ❑ ■ ❑ ❑
mortality rates that exceed normal rates?
30. At the time of the inspection did the facility pose an air quality concern? If yes, contact a regional Air 0000
Quality representative immediately.
Page: 5

Permit: NCA240068 Owner - Facility: Franklin Pat Harris Facility Number: 400068
Inspection Date: 0=112006 inspection Type: Compliance Inspection Reason for Visit: Routine
Otherissues Yes No MA NE
31. Did the facility fail to notify regional DWQ of emergency situations as required by Permit? ❑ ■ 11 ❑
32. Did Reviewer/inspector fail to discuss reviewifnspection with on -site representative? ❑ M Cl Q
33. Does facility require a follow-up visit by same agency?
A"off■l
Page: 6
9

Division of. Water, Quality. A
Division,of Soil an&.Water-Gonseryahoa
O Other Agency
iType of Visit O Compliance Inspection O Operation Review O Lagoon Evaluation
IReasonforVisit O Routine O Complaint O Follow up O Emergency Notification O Other ❑ Denied Access
Facility Number 40 68 Date of Visit: 2-13-2004 Time: 9:00
O Not Operational O Below Threshold
® Permitted ® Certified 0 Conditionally Certified 13 Registered Date Last Operated or Above Threshold: ....... . ................
Farm Name: MrjraS.S2xWW11SQ.W................................................................................... County: CjTcrjlc..................._.-...................... W.RR ?........
Owner Name: ftj .......................................... HU.M......................................................... Phone No: 747:2.69:I,.:14.7 .2S. fiist<.........................
Mailing Address: 3Z69.H1gblWAY.91..N.Q r1Jx...............:................................................... SAQW.U111-Kc ...................................................... 28508.............
Facility Contact: .............................................................................. Title. Phone No.
Onsite Representative: FaJH............................................................................................. Integrator: P.rcu)Jiwu.SLtamdard.F, rMfi..Qfli.QrtlI..........
Certified Operator:Iftalakli,n.!............................ Hari js.............•....... ... Operator Certification Number:l,{b22..................
....................... ..........
Location of Farm:
On North side of SR 1149. •
N Swine ❑ Poultry ❑ Cattle ❑ Horse Latitude 35 • 26 12 Longitude 77 • 44 . 53 ,
Design Current
Swine Capacity Population
❑ Wean to Feeder
❑ Feeder to Finish
❑ Farrow to Wean
N Farrow to Feeder
1800
1800
❑ Farrow to Finish
❑ Gilts
❑ Boars
Design Current Design Current
Poultry Capacity Population Cattle Capacity Population
❑ Layer ❑ Dairy I I __j
❑ Non -Layer 10 Non -Dairy
❑ Other
Total Design Capacity 1,800
Total SSLW 939,600
Number of Lagoons 1
Holding F Solid Traps
Discharges & Stream Impacts
1. Is any discharge observed from any part of the operation? ❑ Yes ® No
Discharge originated at: ❑ Lagoon ❑ Spray Field ❑ Other
a. If discharge is observed, was the conveyance man-made? ❑ Yes ❑ No
b. If discharge is observed, did it reach Water of the State? (If yes, notify DWQ) ❑ Yes ❑ No
c. If discharge is observed, what is the estimated flow in gal/min?
d. Does discharge bypass a lagoon system? (If yes, notify DWQ)
2. Is_there evidence of past discharge from any part of the operation?
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes N No
3. Were there any adverse impacts or potential adverse impacts to the Waters of the State other than from a discharge? ❑ Yes N No
Waste Collection & Treatment
4. Is storage capacity (freeboard plus storm storage) less than adequate? ❑ Spillway ❑ Yes N No
Structure I Structure 2 Structure 3 Structure 4 Structure 5 Structure b
Identiiier:................................... ................................................................................................................................. —......... .... I .................. I...........
Freeboard (inches): 24
111711na r....�:»....r

l"lAIUJ
[Facility Number: 40-68 Date of Inspection 2-13-2004
t-Ur"SIAMCM
5. Are there any immediate threats to the integrity of any of the structures observed? (ie/ trees, severe erosion,
seepage, etc.)
6. Are there structures on -site which are not properly addressed and/or managed through a waste management or
closure plan?
(If any of questions 4-6 was answered yes, and the situation poses an
immediate public health or environmental threat, notify DWQ)
7. Do any of the structures need maintenance/improvement?
8. Does any part of the waste management system other than waste structures require maintenance/improvement?
9. Do any stuctures lack adequate, gauged markers with required maximum and minimum liquid level
elevation markings?
Waste Api3lication
10. Are there any buffers that need maintenance/improvement?
11. Is there evidence of over application? If yes, check the appropriate box below.
❑ Excessive Ponding ❑ PAN ❑ Hydraulic Overload ❑ Frozen Ground ❑ Copper and/or Zinc
12. Crop type Coastal Bermuda (Graze) Small Grain Overseed
❑ Yes
® No
❑ Yes
® No
❑ Yes
®No
❑ Yes
® No
❑ Yes
W No
❑ Yes
® No
❑ Yes
® No
13. Do the receiving crops differ with those designated in the Certified Animal Waste Management Plan (CAWMP)? ❑ Yes ® No
14. a) Does the facility lack adequate acreage for land application? ❑ Yes ❑ No .
b) Does the facility need a wettable acre determination? ❑ Yes ❑ No
c) This facility is pended for a wettable acre determination? ❑ Yes ❑ No
15. Does the receiving crop need improvement? ❑ Yes ® No
16. Is there a lack of adequate waste application equipment? ❑ Yes ® No
Odor Issues
17. Does the discharge pipe from the confinement building to the storage pond or lagoon fail to discharge at/or below ❑ Yes ❑ No
liquid level of lagoon or storage pond with no agitation?
18. Ai-e there any dead animals not disposed of properly within 24 hours? ❑ Yes ® No
19. Is there any evidence of wind drift during land application? (i.e. residue on neighboring vegetation, asphalt, ❑ Yes ® No
roads, building structure, and/or public property)
20. At the time of the inspection did the facility pose an odor or air quality concern? If yes, contact a regional ❑ Yes ® No
Air Quality representative immediately.
Reviewer/Inspector Name Marlene D. Salyer
Reviewer/Inspector Signature: 4,,,6e,� J Date: ;Z 7_/�

12112103 Continued
3 Facility Number: 40-68 Date of Inspection 2-13-2004
Reauired Records & Documents
21. Fail to have Certificate of Coverage & General Permit or other Permit readily available?
❑ Yes
® No
22. Does the facility fail to have all components of the Certified Animal Waste Management Plan readily available?
(ie/ WUP, checklists, design, maps, etc.)
❑ Yes
® No
23. Does record keeping need improvement? If yes, check the appropriate box below.
❑ Yes
® No
❑ Waste Application ❑ Freeboard ❑ Waste Analysis ❑ Soil Sampling
24. Is facility not in compliance with any applicable setback criteria in effect at the time of design?
❑ Yes
® No
25. Did the facility fail to have a actively certified operator in charge?
❑ Yes
® No
26. Fail to notify regional DWQ of emergency situations as required by General Permit?
(ie/ discharge, freeboard problems, over application)
❑ Yes
®No
27. Did Reviewer/Inspector fail to discuss review/inspection with on -site representative?
❑ Yes
® No
28. Does facility require a follow-up visit by same agency?
❑ Yes
❑ No
29. Were any additional problems noted which cause noncompliance of the Certified AWMP?
❑ Yes
® No
NPDES Permitted Facilities
30. Is the facility covered under a NPDES Permit? (If no, skip questions 31-35)
❑ Yes
® No
31. If selected, did the facility fail to install and maintain rainbreakers on irrigation equipment?
❑ Yes
❑ No
32. Did the facility fail to install and maintain a rain gauge?
❑ Yes
❑ No
33. Did the facility fail to conduct an annual sludge survey?
❑ Yes
❑ No
34. Did the facility fail to calibrate waste application equipment? ❑ Yes ❑ No
35. Does record keeping for NPDES required forms need improvement? If yes, check the appropriate box below. ❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ Stocking Form ❑ Crop Yield Form ❑ Rainfall ❑ Inspection After V Rain
❑ 120 Minute Inspections ❑ Annual Certification Form
0 No violations or deficiencies were noted during this visit. You will receive no further correspondence about this visit.
ddltlOnal COInineIIts'andlor Drawrngs � r ( 7' f7 ' ? y j j�d
Waste analysis: 2-9-04 = 1.2 lbs
11-13-03 = 1.0 lbs
8-8-03 = 1.3 lbs
6-9-03 = 1.3 lbs
4-7-03 = 1.7 lbs
2-8-03 = 1.3 lbs
Soil test on 10-3-03 and lime applied on 11-27-03.
The irrigation equipment was calabrited in August 2003.
The irrigation records are complete and balanced out.
The freeboard levels and rain events are recorded weekly.

r
Technical Assistance Site Visit Report
Division of Soil and Water Conservation
p Natural Resources Conservation Service
O Soil and Water Conservation District
O Other...
Facility Number 40 - 6$ Date: 115/03 Time: 1 900 1 Time On Farm: 45 WaRO
Farm Name Harris Sandhiil Sow County Greene
Phone: [phone]-H,
Mailing Address 3269 Highway 91 North _ _ Snow Hill NC 28508
Onsite
Representative Pat Harris / Michele Christensen Integrator[Premium Standard Farms
Type Of Visit Purpose Of Visit
Operation Review
Compliance Inspection (pilot only)
Technical Assistance
Confirmation for Removal
I ❑ No Animals -Date Last Operated: I
❑ Operating below threshold
® Swine ❑ Poultry ❑ Cattle ❑ Horse
e0 Routine
O Response to DWQ/DENR referral
O Response to DSWC/SWCD referral
O Response to complaint/local referral
0 Requested by producer/integrator
O Follow-up
O Emergency
O Other...
Design Current Design Current
Wean to Feeder
El Feeder to Finish
El Farrow to Wean
Farrow to Feeder 1800 Sgpp
■ Farrow to Finish
■ Gilts
Boars
Capacity Population
Layer
Non -Layer
Dairy
10 Non Dairy
Other
GENERAL QUESTIONS:
1. Is waste discharging from any part of the operation and reaching surface waters or wetlands? ❑ yes ® no
2. Is there evidence of a past waste discharge from any part of the operation that waste reached
Other
GENERAL QUESTIONS:
1. Is waste discharging from any part of the operation and reaching surface waters or wetlands? ❑ yes ® no
2. Is there evidence of a past waste discharge from any part of the operation that waste reached
❑ yes ® no
surface waters or wetlands?
3• Does any problem pose an immediate threat to the integrity of the waste structure (large trees,
❑ yes 0 no
seepage, severe erosion, etc.)?
4. is there evidence of nitrogen over application, hydraulic overloading or excessive ponding
❑ yes 0 no
requiring DWQ notification?
5- Is there evidence of improper dead animal disposal that poses a threat to the environment
❑ yes ® no
and/or public health?
fi. Is the waste level within the structural freeboard elevation range for any waste structure?
❑ yes 0 no
Structurel Structure 2 Structure 3 Structure 4 Structure 5
Identifier
Level (Inches) 32
CROP TYPES lCoastal Bermud raz II grain overseed
SPRAYFIELD
SOIL TYPES NoA AyB
7. What type of technical assistance does the onsite representative feel is needed? (list in comment section)
03/10/03

ri
Facility:Number 40 - 68 Date:
9115/03
PARAMETER
( No assistance provided/requested
❑ 8. Waste spill leaving site
TECHNICAL ASSISTANCE Needed
Provided
❑ 9. Waste spill contained on site
25. Waste Man Revision or Amendment
❑
El❑
10. Level in structural freeboard
Waste Plan
❑
❑
❑ 11. Level in storm storage
26. Conditional Amendment
27. Review or Evaluate Waste Plan wlproducer
❑
❑
❑ 12. Waste structure integrity compromised
❑ 13. Waste structure needs maintenance
28. Forms Need (list in comment section)
❑
❑
29. Missing Components (list in comments)
❑
❑
❑ 14. Over application >= 10% & 10 lbs.
❑
❑
[315. Over application < 10% or < 10 lbs.
30.2H.0200 re -certification
[116. Hydraulic overloading
31. Five S Thirty day Plans of Action (PoA)
❑
❑
32. Irrigation record keeping assistance
❑
❑
❑ 17. Deficient irrigation records
❑ 18. Latelmissing waste analysis
33.Organizelcomputerization of records
❑
❑
❑ 19. Late/missing lagoon level records
34. Sludge Evaluation
❑
❑
® 20. Latelmissing soils analysis
[121. Crop needs improvement
35. Sludge or Closure Plan
❑
❑
❑ 22. Crop inconsistent with waste plan
36. Sludge removal/closure procedures
❑
❑
37. Waste Structure Evaluation
❑
❑
❑ 23. Irrigation maintenance deficiency
[124. Deficient sprayfield conditions
38. Structure Needs Improvement
❑
❑
39.Operation & Maintenance Improvements
❑
❑
40. Marker check/calibration
❑
❑
Re-gulatory Referrals
41. Site evaluation
❑
❑
❑ Referred to DWQ Date:
42. Irrigation Calibration
❑
❑
Referred to NCDA Date;
❑ Other...
43. Irrigation system desigMnstallation
❑
❑
Date:
44.Secure Irrigation information (maps, etc.)
❑
❑
LIST IMPROVEMENTS
45.Operating improvements (pull signs, etc.)
❑
❑
MADE BY OPERATION
46. Wettable Acre Determination
❑
❑
1 • coastal bermuda fields have been conditioned
41. Evaluate WAD certification/rechecks
❑
❑
48. Crop evaluationlrecommendations
❑
❑
with DMI
2.
49. Drainage worklevaluation
❑
❑
installed rain break_ on irrigation pump
50. Land shaping, subsoiling, aeration, etc.
51. Runoff control, stormwater diversion, etc.
❑
❑
❑
❑
3.
52. Buffer improvements
❑
❑
53. Field measurements(GPS, surveying, etc.)
❑
❑
4.
54. Mortality BMPs
❑
❑
55. Waste operator education (NPDES)
❑
❑
5'
56.Operation & maintenance education
❑
❑
57. Record keeping education
❑
❑
6.
58. Cropiforage management education
❑
❑
59. Soli and/or waste sampling education
❑
❑
03/10/03

i
Facility Number 40 - ® Date: 1 9/15/03
ICOMMENTS:
'0. Missing soil test for 2002 crop year. if soil test is found, place in record book.
Waste analysis dated 818/03 nitrogen is 1.3 Ibs/1000 gallons
6/9/03 nitrogen is 1.3 Ibs/1000 gallons
4/7/03 nitrogen is 1.7 ibs11000 gallons
2/18/03 nitrogen is 1.3 Ibs/1000 gallons
8/8/02 nitrogen is 0.94 Ibs/1000 gallons
12/4/02 nitrogen is 1.1 Ibs/1000 gallons
Make records available for three years.
IRR2 records are complete and balanced with drops in lagoon consistent with irrigation events.
Lagoon level is recorded weekly.
In process of shrubing lagoon dike walls and removing trash from lagoon.
New coastal bermuda field does have weeds and dog fennels. Coastal bermuda field needs to be sprayed for weeds.
'roducer planning to install flood gates on low ends of spray fields to contain any runoff. Gates have been previously been
istalled but area washed due to heavy rainfall.
Irrigation reel has been calibrated.
TECHNICAL SPECIALIST Partin McLawhom
SIGNATURE
3 03/10/03

Facility \umber: — Date of Inspection 1 '
Odor Issues
26. Does the discharge pipe from the confinement building to the storage pond or lagoon fail to discharge at/or below ❑ Yes ❑ No
liquid level of lagoon or storage pond with no agitation?
2T Are there any dead animals not disposed of properly within 24 hours? ❑ Yes ❑ No
28. Is there any evidence of wind drift during land application? (i.e. residue on neighboring vegetation, asphalt, ElYes ❑ No
roads, building structure, and/or public property)
29. Is the land application spray system intake not located near the liquid surface of the lagoon? ❑ Yes ❑ No
30. Were any major maintenance problems with the ventilation fan(s) noted? (i.e. broken fan belts, missing or
or broken fan blade(s), inoperable shutters. etc_) ❑ Yes ❑ No
31. Do the animals feed storage bins fail to have appropriate cover? ❑ Yes ❑ No
32. Do the flush tanks lack a submerged fill pipe or a permanent/temporary cover? ❑ Yes ❑ No
Additional Comments and/or Drawings:- - - � V"_y—
rJ troy-►'�-(� �j e`�we 9-,v� S = 3v a w� �i - Gro a.,,.� . �
5 `vJ ; �d�t, L�c�
qptv� GzI LkI
�, CX 1��-�- r c.eR.:Lv 2- �-- -ice � w•— V� - �tQ4M.;
�s g
04, dCuLlo�
cak� I��r
05103101

A
'> vision oi`Vat�r
t3'::
T =:d Divbswani of Safi and Wateir Conservvateon
Q`Other Agearg ; �� `.
Type of Visit Cornpliance Inspection O Operation Review O Lagoon Evaluation t�
Reason for Visit t;�'rtoutine O Complaint O Follow up O Emergency Notification O Other ❑ Denied Access
Facility Number _ ¢p Date of Visit: - L-O Z Time: Q Z5
Q Not Operational Q Below Threshold
Permitted Certified 13 Conditionally Certified 0 Registered Date Last Operated or Above Threshold: .........................
Farm Name: trr s S: K. h:.►!. � County:..--�. ! fi..Q.�,..............................(err
Owner Name:.......am..... ...4L11Lh!�Q ......................... . Phone No:.....`�..:..Z..!7..`..2.....� xs:
..................... ...............
FacilityContact:.............................................................................. Title:................................................................. Phone No:......
Mailing Address: ....... 3 Z-�r......... '' .............. .. al ..... .Q r-4 ............... ...�L7.:...i......4A.............. K. ........... r���....
Onsite Representative:.........u.± �....................... Integrator: .... run'.........,���,........
Certified Operator:... . .... ............ ?�'Operator Certification Number:. �,H.l ,Z2- .._.....
..................................
Location off Farm:
❑ Swine ❑ Poultry ❑ Cattle ❑ Horse Latitude ' ° 66 Longitude • 4 69
Design Current Design, Current Design Cni'ieat „
Capacity Population Poultry Capacity Pop,ulation. ' Cattle CapacitY PQ -elation
` ❑ Wean to Feeder ❑ Layer ❑ Dairy
Feeder to Finish ❑ Non -Layer ❑ Non -Dairy
❑ Farrow to Wean
Marrow to Feeder JE1 Other
❑ Farrow to Finish Total Design Capacity
Gilts
❑ Boars 'Total SSLW
Subsurface Drains Present ❑ Lagoon Area ❑ Spray Field Area
Number of Lagoons E ❑ P
Holding Ponds / Solid Traps " ❑ No Liquid Waste Management System
Discharges & Stream Impacts
1. Is any discharge observed from any part of the operation?
❑ Yes o
Discharge originated at: ❑ Lagoon ❑ Spray Field ❑ Other
a. If discharge is observed, was the conveyance man-made? ❑ Yes M 1qo
b. If discharge is observed, did it reach Water of the State'? (If yes, notify DWQ) ❑ Yes E-No
c. If discharge is observed. what is the estimated flow in gallmin? MA"
d. Does discharge bypass a lagoon system? (If yes, notify DWQ) ❑ Yes ❑'No
2. Is there evidence of past discharge from any part of the operation? ❑ Yes ❑No
3. Were there any adverse impacts or potential adverse impacts to the Waters of the State other than from a discharge? ❑ Yes 8-No
Waste Collection & Treatment
4. Is storage capacity (freeboard plus storm storage) less than adequate? ❑ Spillway ❑ Yes Ef No
Structure 1 Structure 2 Structure 3- Structure 4 Structure 5 Structure 6
Identifier: ...............................
Freeboard (inches): 3 3
5100 Continued on back

S
Facility Number: 40 - (p Date of Inspection
6. Are there structures on -site which are not properly addressed and/or managed through a waste management or
closure plan?
(If any of questions 4-6 was answered yes, and the situation poses an
immediate public health or environmental threat, notify DWQ)
7. Do any of the structures need maintenance/improvement?
8. Does any part of the waste management system other than waste structures require maintenance/improvement?
9_ Do any stuctures lack adequate, gauged markers with required maximum and minimum liquid level
elevation markings?
Waste Application
10. Are there any buffers that need maintenance/improvement?
11. Is there evidence of over application? ❑ Excessive Ponding ❑ PAN
12. Crop type
rr6
-7TI-
El❑ Yes
19-No
❑ Yes
EKo
❑ Yes
[Q`No
❑ Yes
E]-No
❑ Yes
allo
❑ Yes
P-No
13. Do the receiving cropsl-(pIfflr wrth those designated in tld Certified Animal Waste Management Plan (CAWMP)?
14. a) Does the facility lack adequate acreage for land application?
b) Does the facility need a wettable acre determination?
c) This facility is pended for a wettable acre determination?
15. Does the receiving crop need improvement?
16. Is there a lack of adequate waste application equipment?
Required Records & Documents
IT Fail to have Certificate of Coverage & General Permit readily available?
I & Does the facility fail to have all components of the Certified Animal Waste Management Plan readily available?
(ie/ WUP, checklists, design, maps, etc.)
19. Does record keeping need improvement? (ie/ irri gl on, freeberard, Castealys' & soil sample ports)
20. Is facility not in compliance with any applicable setback criteria in effect at the time of design?
21. Did the facility fail to have a actively certified operator in charge?
22. Fail to notify regional DWQ of emergency situations as required by General Permit?
(ie/ discharge, freeboard problems, over application)
23. Did Reviewer/Inspector fail to discuss review/inspection with on -site representative?
24. Does facility require a follow-up visit by same agency?
25. Were any additional problems noted which cause noncompliance of the Certified AWMP?
0:'?�6.*Mh i6ris:or• di!fide idt,5 were noted• diWirig this:visit: • Y:oii :wiil•reeeive iW futther •
corresporideitce: abo' U*f this visit:::
❑ Yes &KNo
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes [�No
❑ Yes [-To
❑ Yes D-No
❑ Yes D-No
Q Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes Q No
❑ Yes [1io
[]Yes O.No
❑ Yes Q-No
❑ Yes lil�o
❑ Yes 9 No
.m
Comments -(refer to:question #): Explain any YES?answecs and/or any recommendatro[is or�afi other eo nments.
Use drawings of facility to,betterexpEain situations"(use additional pages a necessary) -
R 7
N 1 //� 4 �
�LQ� _ Ju-c-[ c 4-'
[(i �. (S.'1 S ac, , p �, of Lu .,�:•, I i to-c"LL".'
a'rvu �^-et- I t- l b- O l - (. 4-1 I.3
Reviewer/Inspector Name ".,ri-
Reviewer/Inspector Signature: Date: - O
3/23/99

Facility Number: — fa (7, Date of Inspection 1-6 -off Printed on: 7/21/2440
Odor Issues
26. Does the discharge pipe from the confinement building to the storage pond or lagoon fail to discharge attor below ❑ Yes ❑ No
liquid level of lagoon or storage pond with no agitation?
27. Are there any dead animals not disposed of properly within 24 hours? Cl Yes E3-N
28. Is there any evidence of wind drift during land application? (i.e. residue on neighboring vegetation, asphalt, ❑ Yes [ o
roads, building structure, and/or public property)
29. Is the land application spray system intake not located near the liquid surface of the lagoon? ❑ Yes S- o
30. Were any major maintenance problems with the ventilation fan(s) noted? (i.e. broken fan belts, missing or
or broken fan blade(s), inoperable shutters, etc.) ❑ Yes [TNO
31. Do the animals feed storage bins fail to have appropriate cover? ❑ Yes 0 No
32. Do the flush tanks lack a submerged fill pipe or a permanent/temporary cover? ❑ Yes ❑ No
Additional . omments an orDrawings:
AL
200,, •
�.�,�, .•w�-�cf fcllk-ate -C'-� �� i,�G`-d' j'�-�C
4-0 4
as 9 - 9 �66-- 4-kt
La�cs� •e- . a�.e_.
[� ►�-� 4' eckc'T'
5100

EType of Visit O Compliance Inspection Operation Review O Lagoon Evaluation
IReasonforVisit .O Routine O Complaint O Follow up O Emergency Notification O Other ❑ Denied Access
Facility Number 44 68 Date of Visit: t3l13/200o Time: � Printed on: 3f72001
Q Not O erational 0 Below Threshold
E2 Permitted E] Certified Q Conditionally Certified 13 Registered Date Last Operated or Above Threshold: .................
Farm Name: Harris.Sandill.Sow...................................•..............................................
OwnerName: Pat ............................................ Harrh..............................................
Facility Contact:
Title:
County: G. ne—...-•---•-----------------------•---•----... Wa.RO........
Phone No: 292-Q1:, I9.T.-A"lC�-•--•-•...................
Phone No:
Mailing Address: Rt_4_.BQs.45.0................•- .-------•-----•--........--•-.. Snuxr Ti11AC..--•-•-..............._......................._....... 2850 .............
Onsite Representative: P,at..}4arr1'la.................................................................................... Integrator: C,azQ. W&Farms...................................----......---....
Certified Operator: p ha ..a..........................HArAi ............................................... Operator Certification Number:.1
Location of Farm:
On North side of SR 1149.
T
® Swine ❑ Poultry ❑ Cattle ❑ Horse Latitude F 35 OF 26 ' 12 °• Longitude F 77 10
Desi Current.......:: - -
...... :...:::...._..... gn. .......: Design .::.Current::...... Design ....: Current....
Swine
Ca aci Po alattoa ..:Poultry....,. pacity :. Population _...:Cattle .pacrty :. ..p ..
Ca Ca Po ula n
❑ Wean to Feeder
❑ Feeder to Finish
❑ Farrow to Wean
® Farrow to Feeder
1800
1800
❑ Farrow to Finish
❑ Gilts
❑ Boars
Discharges & Stream Impacts
1. is any discharge observed from any part of the operation?
Discharge originated at: [ILagoon ❑ Spray Field [3Other
a. If discharge is observed. was the conveyance man-made?
b. If discharge is observed. did it reach Water of the State? (If yes, not&f - DWQ)
c. If discharge is observed. ,vhat is the estimated flow in gal/min?
d. Does discharge b�Tass a lagoon system? (If yes. notify DWQ)
2. Is there evidence of past discharge from any part of the operation?
3. Were there any adverse impacts or potential adverse impacts to the Waters of the State other than from a discharge?
Waste Collection & Treatment
4. Is storage capacity (freeboard plus storm storage) less than adequate? ❑ Spillway
Sh-ucture I Structure 2 Structure 3 Structure 4
Identifier: ................................... ..
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes ® No
Stnieture 5 Structure 6
Freeboard(inches)...............30................................ ...................... .... ............

5/00 Con inued on back
+" Facility Number. 40--68 Date of Inspection 8/23/2000 Printed on: 3/7/2001
5_ Are there any immediate threats to the integrity of any of the structures observed? (ie/ trees, severe erosion, [] Yes ® No
seepage, etc.)
6. Are there structures on -site which are not properly addressed and/or managed through a waste management or
closure plan? ❑ Yes N No
(If any of questions 4fi was answered yes, and the situation poses an
immediate public health or environmental threat, notify DWQ)
7. Do any of the structures need maintenance/improvement? ❑ Yes ® No
8. Does any part of the waste management system other than waste structures require maintenance/improvement? ❑ Yes N No
9. Do any stuctures lack adequate, gauged markers with required maximum and minimum liquid level
elevation markings? ❑ Yes N No
Waste Application
10. Are there any buffers that need maintenance/improvement? ❑ Yes N No
I I - Is there evidence of over application? ❑ Excessive Ponding ❑ PAN ❑ Hydraulic Overload ❑ Yes N No
12. Crop type Coastal Bermuda (Graze) Small Grain Overseed
13. Do the receiving crops differ with those designated in the Certified Animal Waste Management Plan (CAWMP)? ❑ Yes N No
14. a) Does the facility lack adequate acreage for land application?
❑ Yes
❑ No
b) Does the facility need a wettable acre determination?
❑ Yes
❑ No
c) This facility is pended for a wettable acre determination?
❑ Yes
❑ No
15. Does the receiving crop need improvement?
❑ Yes
N No
16. Is there a lack of adequate waste application equipment?
❑ Yes
® No
Required Records & Documents
17. Fail to have Certificate of Coverage & General Permit readily available?
❑ Yes
®No
18. Does the facility fail to have all components of the Certified Animal Waste Management Plan readily available?
(iel WUP, checklists, design, maps, etc.)
❑ Yes
® No
19. Does record keeping need improvement? (ie/ irrigation, freeboard, waste analysis & soil sample reports)
® Yes
❑ No
20. Is facility not in compliance with any applicable setback criteria in effect at the time of design?
❑ Yes
® No
21. Did the facility fail to have a actively certified operator in charge?
❑ Yes
N No
22. Fail to notify regional DWQ of emergency situations as required by General Permit?
(ie/ discharge, freeboard problems, over application)
❑ Yes
N No
23. Did Reviewer/lmspector fail to discuss review/inspection with on -site representative?
❑ Yes
N No
24. Does facility require a follow-up visit by same agency?
❑ Yes
® No
25. Were any additional problems noted which cause noncompliance of the Certified AWMP?
❑ Yes
® No
0 •N. violations; or;deficiencies•were:tioted:dtairiug iiis-visit:;You wdl:receive'no'further: ; -
•�corresuondenceabontthis,visit......:. . , :: ;:; :: ; ;;:-: _; ; ; ; _ :-. ;•;-
Reviewer/Inspector Name

,
Type of Visit O Compliance Inspection O Operation Review O Lagoon Evaluation
Reason for Visit © Routine O Complaint O Follow up O Emergency Notification O Other ❑ Denied Access
Facility Number 40 bg Date of Visit 1 5/12/2000 Printed an: 5/16/2000
NNot O erational 0 Below Threshold
® Permitted ® Certified E3 Conditionally Certified © Registered Date Last Operated or Above Threshold:
Farm Name: Rards.SamilhilSON............WW. County: Cyr
CCmrr.......... ................... ........ ....... FARO........
Owner Name: F.aj............................................ Hjrris...................................... -................. Phone No: 7.47.-26Qj.-T�.74.7-�42$ Off ...... ..............
FacilityContact: ..............................................................................Title:..........................................I... Phone No:
MailingAddress: t. .. 5? .4.................. ................... .... ................ .... I ........ ................ sJ[t:P.lY..1 I.Ac........__............_•. ..... Z>35Q .............
Onsite Representative: pAt 101CCiS.................. ......................................................... , .. Integrator: ;dr.!?�i1[r�.0! m�& ._... �_........�..-.•..
Certified Operator: FjmAMjm.jP........................... Harris ............................................... Operator Certification Number:1.{021....... ._..................
Location or Farm:
Cto..NQrth..5idc.Qf..SCR.1.149.............. ................................................................................................................................................ .................................. ...............
....:_
.... ..................
® Swine ❑ Poultry ❑ Cattle ❑ Norse Latitude E-357.0 26 12 u Longitude 77 *
❑ Wean to Feeder
❑ Feeder to Finish
❑ Farrow to Wean
® Farrow to Feeder
1800
1800
❑ Farrow to Finish
❑ Gilts
❑ Boars
I
rent ..
A.,
❑ Other
Y Total Design Capacity, 1,800
Total SSLW1 939,600
Subsurface Drains Present 110 Lagoon Area 10 Spray Field Area
No Liquid Waste Management System
Discharges & Stream Impacts
1. Is any discharge observed from any part of the operation? ❑ Yes ® No
Discharge originated at: ❑ Lagoon ❑ Spray Field ❑ Other
a. If discharge is observed; was the conveyance man-made? El Yes ❑ No
b. If discharge is observed. did it reach Water of the State? (If yes. notify DWQ) ❑ Yes ❑ No
c. If discharge is observed. what is the estimated flow in gal/min?
d. Does discharge -bypass a lagoon system? (If yes, notify DWQ) ❑ Yes ❑ No
2. Is there evidence of past discharge from any part of the operation? ❑ Yes ® No
3. Were there any adverse impacts or potential adverse impacts to the Waters of the State other than from a discharge? ❑ Yes ® No
Waste Collection & Treatment
4. Is storage capacity (freeboard plus storm storage) less than adequate? ❑ Spillway
Structure I Structure 2 Structure 3 Structure 4 Structure 5
❑ Yes ® No
Structure 6
Identifier: ...................................
Freeboard (inches): 26

1 "
Continued on baci4
Facility Number: 40-68 Date of Inspection 5/12/2000 Printed on: 5/1612000
5. Are there any immediate threats to the integrity of any of the structures observed? (ie/ trees, severe erosion, ❑ Yes ® No
seepage, etc.)
6. Are there structures on -site which are not properly addressed and/or managed through a waste management or
closure plan? ❑ Yes N No
(If any of questions 4-6 was answered yes, and the situation poses an
immediate public health or environmental threat, notify DWQ)
7. Do any of the structures need maintenance/improvemenV ❑ Yes N No
8. Does any part of the waste management system other than waste structures require maintenance/improvement? ❑ Yes N No
9. Do any stuctures lack adequate, gauged markers with required maximum and minimum liquid level
elevation markings? ❑ Yes N No
Waste Application
10. Are there any buffers that need maintenance/improvement? ❑ Yes N No
11. Is there evidence of over application? ❑ Excessive Ponding ❑ PAN ❑ Yes N No
12. Crop type Coastal Bermuda (Hay) Small Grain
13. Do the receiving crops differ with those designated in the Certified Animal Waste Management Plan (CAWMP)? ❑ Yes N No
14. a) Does the facility lack adequate acreage for land application? ❑ Yes ❑ No
b) Does the facility need a wettable acre determination? ❑ Yes ❑ No
c) This facility is pended for a wettable acre determination? ❑ Yes ❑ No
15. Does the receiving crop need improvement?
16_ Is there a lack of adequate waste application equipment?
Required Records & Documents -
17. Fail to have Certificate of Coverage & General Permit readily available?
18. Does the facility fail to have all components of the Certified Animal Waste Management Plan -readily available?
(ie/ WUP, checklists, design, maps, etc.)
19. Does record keeping need improvement? (ie/ irrigation, freeboard, waste analysis & soil sample reports)
20. Is facility not in compliance with any applicable setback criteria in effect at the time of design?
21. Did the facility fail to have a actively certified operator in charge?
22. Fail to notify regional DWQ of emergency situations as required by General Permit?
(ie/ discharge, freeboard problems, over application)
23. Did Reviewer/Inspector fail to discuss review/inspection with on -site representative?
24. Does facility require a follow-up visit by same agency?
25. Were any additional problems noted which cause noncompliance of the Certified AWMP?
o yiolatioris:or daeiencies•were:$oted :ditHhe thi'5 avWt:: qt1: vvilI receive no farther :
.-.-correspondence about this :visit.
analysis 10/99; waste analysis 3/17/00 - 2.5 lbs./1000 gals.
records of the CAWMP are complete including irrigation records with nitrogen balance.
❑ Yes
N No
❑ Yes
® No
❑ Yes
N No
❑ Yes
N No
❑ Yes
N No
❑ Yes
N No
❑ Yes
N N o
❑ Yes
N No
❑ Yes
N No
❑ Yes
N No
❑ Yes
® No
Reviewer/Inspector Name Di
-- . R . r . 0 0'..._._
Afro Tvndalf r=
r_.. 5 -17-nr-�'

iiAwer/Inspector Signature: Date:
Facility Number. 40--68 Date of Inspection 5522000 Printed on: 5/16/2000
Odor Issues
26: Does the discharge pipe from the confinement building to the storage pond or lagoon fail to discharge at/or below ❑ Yes ❑ No
liquid level of lagoon or storage pond with no agitation?
27. Are there any dead animals not disposed of properly within 24 hours? ❑ Yes ® No
28. Is there any evidence of wind drift during land application? (i.e. residue on neighboring vegetation, asphalt, ❑ Yes ®No
roads, building structure, and/or public property)
29. Is the land application spray system intake not located near the liquid surface of the lagoon? _ ❑ Yes ® No
30. Were any major maintenance problems with the ventilation fan(s) noted? (i.e. broken fan belts, missing or
or broken fan blade(s), inoperable shutters, etc.) _ _ _ ❑ Yes ®No
1 31. Do the animals feed storage bins fail to have appropriate cover? ❑Yes ®No
32. Do the flush tanks lack a submerged fill pipe or a permanent/temporary cover? ❑ Yes ❑ No
__ Z

i
Division of Water Quality
0 Division of Soil and Water Conservation
0 Other Agency 11
Type of Visit © Compliance Inspection O Operation Review O Lagoon Evaluation
(Reason for Visit O Routine O Complaint O Follow up O Emergency Notification O Other ❑ Denied Access
Facility Number 40 68
. Date of Visit 5112/ZOOt) Printed on: 5/16/2000
NNot O erational 0 Below Threshold
® Permitted ® Certified © Conditionally Certified [3 Registered Date Last Operated or Above Threshold: .........................
Farm Name: 7CJCIS. a�l�i�l4 RYIi..................................................................... .............. County: Guriltr ............................................... WARO........
Owner Name:i'I}t............................................ Harris ......................................................... Phone No: 7.47.-26i}1-J;L..74-77.8428.—.Q Vr..........................
Facility Contact: ..............................................................................Title Phone No
Mailing Address: tit.4.. Qs..4913......................................................................................... SJU.QW'JJilA..NC-------.---- ............................... ZB.5.0.8 .............
Onsite Representative: JP,At,Dairris...................... Integrator:C,�rQjjjUa, gjr.Ma
Certified Operator: Jf,9A113lIJR.FR.......................... dal[ar1S............................................... Operator Certification Number:1{§22..............................
Location of Farm:
..................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................... y
® Swine ❑ Poultry ❑ Cattle ❑ Horse Latitude 3S ° 26 12 Longitude 77 • 44 ° 53 «
Design Current
Swine Capacity Population
❑ Wean to Feeder
❑ Feeder to Finish
❑ Farrow to Wean
0 Farrow to Feeder
1800
1800
❑ Farrow to Finish
❑ Gilts
❑ Boars
Design Current
Poultry Capacitv Population
❑ Layer
❑ Non -Layer
❑ Other
Design Current
Cattle Capacity Population
❑ Dairy
❑ Non -Dairy
Total Design Capacity 1,800
Total SSLW 1 939,600
Number of Lagoons ❑Subsurface Drains Present J10 Lagoon Area 10Spray Field Area
Holding Ponds 1 Solid Traps ❑ No Liquid Waste Management System
Dischar¢es & Stream Impacts
1. Is any discharge observed from any part of the operation? ❑ Yes ® No
Discharge originated at: ❑ Lagoon ❑ Spray Field ❑ Other
a. If discharge is observed, was the conveyance man-made? ❑ Yes []No
b. If discharge is observed, did it reach Water of the State? (If yes, notify DWQ) ❑ Yes ❑ No
c. If discharge is observed, what is the estimated flow in gal/min?
d. Does discharge bypass a lagoon system? (If yes, notify DWQ) ❑ Yes ❑ No
2. Is there evidence of past discharge from any part of the operation? ❑ Yes ® No
3. Were there any adverse impacts or potential adverse impacts to the Waters of the State other than from a discharge? ❑ Yes ® No
Waste Collection & Treatment
4. Is storage capacity (freeboard plus storm storage) less than adequate? ❑ Spillway ❑ Yes ®No
Structure I Structure 2 Structure 3 Structure 4 Structure 5 Structure 6
Identifier: ............................................. .................
Freeboard (inches): 26

Continued on back
Facility Number: 40-68 Date of Inspection 5/12/2000 Printed on: 5/16/2000
5. Are there any immediate threats to the integrity of any of the structures observed? (ie/ trees, severe erosion, ❑ Yes ® No
seepage, etc.)
6. Are there structures on -site which are not properly addressed and/or managed through a waste management or
closure plan? ❑ Yes ® No
(If any of questions 4-6 was answered yes, and the situation poses an
immediate public health or environmental threat, notify DWQ)
7. Do any of the structures need maintenance/improvement? ❑ Yes ® No
8. Does any part of the waste management system other than waste structures require maintenance/improvement? ❑ Yes ® No
9. Do any stuctures lack adequate, gauged markers with required maximum and minimum liquid level
elevation markings? ❑ Yes ® No
Waste Application
10. Are there any buffers that need maintenancelimprovement? ❑ Yes ® No
11. Is there evidence of over application? ❑ Excessive Ponding ❑ PAN ❑ Yes ® No
12. Crop type Coastal Bermuda (Hay) Small Grain
13. Do the receiving crops differ with those designated in the Certified Animal Waste Management Plan (CAWMP)? ❑ Yes to No
14. a) Does the facility lack adequate acreage for land application? ❑ Yes ❑ No
b) Does the facility need a wettable acre determination? ❑ Yes []No
c) This facility is pended for a wettable acre determination? ❑ Yes ❑ No
15. Does the receiving crop need improvement?
16. is there a lack of adequate waste application equipment?
Required Records & Documents
17. Fail to have Certificate of Coverage & General Permit readily available?
18. Does the facility fail to have all components of the Certified Animal Waste Management Plan'readily available?
(ie/ WUP, checklists, design, maps, etc.)
O 19. Does record keeping need improvement? (ie/ irrigation, freeboard, waste analysis & soil sample reports)
20. is facility not in compliance with any applicable setback criteria in effect at the time of design?
21. Did the facility fail to have a actively certified operator in charge?
22. Fail to notify regional DWQ of emergency situations as required by General Permit?
(ie/ discharge, freeboard problems, over application)
23. Did Reviewer/Inspector fail to discuss review/inspection with on -site representative?
24. Does facility require a follow-up visit by same agency?
25. Were any additional problems noted which cause noncompliance of the Certified AWMP?
0 N6-vii6lations:or deficiencies-were'noted:during•this wigit; You:will:receive no further ' .
correspondence about this .visit.. - ..
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes ®No
❑ Yes ® No
Comments (refer to question #): Explain any YES answers and/or any recommendations or any other comments.
Use drawings of facility to better explain situations. (use additional pages as necessary):
Soil analysis 10199; waste analysis 3117/00 - 2.5 Ibs.11000 gals.
AN records of the CAMP are complete including irrigation records with nitrogen balance.
Reviewer/Inspector Name ;Daphne B. Cullom Entered by Ann
,. .. j --1 7—GXO
.� �

Reviewer/Inspector Signature: Date:
Facility Number: 40-68 Date of Inspection 5/1212000 Printed on: 5/16/2000
Odor Issues
26. Does the discharge pipe from the confinement building to the storage pond or lagoon fail to discharge at/or below ❑ Yes []No
liquid level of lagoon or storage pond with no agitation?
27. Are there any dead animals not disposed of properly within 24 hours? ❑ Yes ® No
28. Is there any evidence of wind drift during land application? (i.e. residue on neighboring vegetation, asphalt, ❑ Yes ® No
roads, building structure, and/or public property)
29. Is the land application spray system intake not located near the liquid surface of the lagoon? ❑ Yes ® No
30. Were any major maintenance problems with the ventilation fan(s) noted? (i.e. broken fan belts, missing or
or broken fan blade(s), inoperable shutters, etc.) ❑ Yes ® No
31. Do the animals feed storage bins fail to have appropriate cover? ❑ Yes ® No
32. Do the flush tanks lack a submerged fill pipe or a permanent/temporary cover? ❑ Yes ❑ No
Additional omments and/orDrawings:

Division of Soil and Water Conservation - Operation Review
[jl Division of Soil and Water Conservation - Compliance Inspection
e Division of Water Quality - Compliance inspection
D Other Agency - Operation Review
149 Routine 0 Complaint 0 Follow-up of DWQ inspection Q Follow-up of DSWC review Q Other
in r ■
Facility Number 40 68 Date of Inspection 12/14/99
Time of Inspection 9:00 AM 24 hr. (hh:mm)
® Permitted ® Certified 0 Conditionally Certified 13 Registered 113 Not O erational Date Last Operated:
Farm Name: Haxris.SU&JU.So x....
County: (. XCgjag.............................................. W-URO........
Owner Name:.81............................................ Harxis.......................................................... Phone No: 7.47-:2.fi}.)l:F ■..7.4.7.: 4 A -A ide..........................
Facility Contact:.............................................................................. Title Phone No
Mailing Address: Ei.1.,4jDQ1,.4.50............................ .. 5.U.Q 1'..i~1tU"NC........................... ............ WAS.............
Onsite Representative: FAInarris.................................................................................... Integrator: cAro i ma.Farma........................... .........................
Certified Operator: FJC,flAtljldl.,P............................ HajrjrAN ............................................... Operator Certification Number:16§22,.............................
Location of Farm:
.............................. .................. .......................................................................................................................................... -............ .................
.....................
Latitude 35 • 26 ° 12 Longitude 77 • 44 [ 53
Swine
Design Current Design Current
Capacity Population Poultry Capacity Population
❑ Layer
❑ Non -Layer
❑ Wean to Feeder
❑ Feeder to Finish
❑ Farrow to Wean
® Farrow to Feeder
1800
1760
❑ Farrow to Finish
❑ Gilts
❑ Boars
❑ Other
Design Current
Cattle Capacity Population
❑ Dairy
❑ Non -Dairy
] I __j
Total Design Capacity F1,800
Total SSLW 1 939,600
Number of Lagoons 1 ❑ Subsurface Drains Present ❑ Lagoon Area 10 Spray Field Area
Holding Ponds! Solid Traps 10 No Liquid Waste Management System
Discharges & Stream Impacts
1. Is any discharge observed from any part of the operation? ❑ Yes ® No
Discharge originated at: ❑ Lagoon ❑ Spray Field ❑ Other
a. If discharge is observed, was the conveyance man-made? ❑ Yes ❑ No
b. If discharge is observed, did it reach Water of the State? (If yes, notify DWQ) ❑ Yes ❑ No
c. If discharge is observed, what is the estimated flow in gal/min?
d. Does discharge bypass a lagoon system? (If yes, notify DWQ) ❑ Yes ❑ No
2. Is there evidence of past discharge from any part of the operation? ❑ Yes ®No
3. Were there any adverse impacts or potential adverse impacts to the Waters of the State other than from a discharge? ❑ Yes ® No
Waste Collection & Treatment
4. Is storage capacity (freeboard plus storm storage) less than adequate? ❑ Spillway ❑ Yes ® No
Structure 1 Structure 2 Structure 3 Structure 4 Structure 5 Structure 6
Identifier:
Freeboard (inches): ...............2,4 .........._......................................
................................................................................................................................................................................
5. Are there any immediate threats to the integrity of any of the structures observed? (ie/ trees, severe erosion, ❑ Yes ® No
seepage, etc.)
3/23/99 Continued on back
Printed nn 5/OMIAn

Printed on 5/9/2000
Facility Number: 40-68 1Date of Inspection 12/14/99
6. Are there structures on -site which are not properly addressed and/or managed through a waste management or
closure plan? ❑ Yes ®No
(If any of questions 4-6 was answered yes, and the situation poses an
immediate public health or environmental threat, notify DWQ)
7. Do any of the structures need maintenance/improvement? ❑ Yes ®No
8. Does any part of the waste management system other than waste structures require maintenance/improvement? ❑ Yes ® No
9. Do any stuctures lack adequate, gauged markers with required maximum and minimum liquid level .
elevation markings? ❑ Yes ® No
Waste Application
10. Are there any buffers that need maintenance/improvement? ❑ Yes ® No
11. Is there evidence of over application? ❑ Excessive Ponding ❑ PAN ❑ Yes ® No
12. Crop type Bermuda (grazed) Small Grain
13. Do the receiving crops differ with those designated in the Certified Animal Waste Management Plan (CAWMP)? ❑ Yes ® No
14. a) Does the facility lack adequate acreage for land application? ❑ Yes ❑ No
b) Does the facility need a wettable acre determination? ❑ Yes ❑ No
c) This facility is pended for a wettable acre determination? ❑ Yes ❑ No
15. Does the receiving crop need improvement?
16. Is there a lack of adequate waste application equipment?
Required Records &_Documents
17. Fail to have Certificate of Coverage & General Permit readily available?
18. Does the facility fail to have all components of the Certified Animal Waste Management Plan readily available?
(ie/ WUP, checklists, design, maps, etc.)
19. Does record keeping need improvement? (ie/ irrigation, freeboard, waste analysis & soil sample reports)
20. Is facility not in compliance with any applicable setback criteria in effect at the time of design?
21. Did the facility fail to have a actively certified operator in charge?
22. Fail to notify regional DWQ of emergency situations as required by General Permit?
(ie/ discharge, freeboard problems, over application)
23. Did Reviewer/Inspector fail to discuss reviewlinspection with on -site representative?
24. Does facility require a follow-up visit by same agency?
25. Were any additional problems noted which cause noncompliance of the Certified A WMP?
0 No•06lati6r;s:o:r d&&iencies•Were:noted:during•this visit.:Wt Will receive nb further
correspondence about this:visit.::: ::: ::: :::: :: ::: :::::::::
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes ® No
Comments (refer to question 9): Explain any YES answers and/or any recommendations or any other comments.
Use drawings of facility to better explain situations. (use additional pages as necessary):
Waste analysis 10/5199 = 0.75
Farm was flagged for wettable acres by DSWC.
Farm has drainage problem in sprayfield. This problem is being addressed with Greene NRCS. Drainage problem is a
bowl in field.
Reviewer/Inspector Name Carl Dunn Entered by Ann Tyndall
Reviewer/Inspector Signature: Date:

Division of Soil and Water Conservation - Operation Review
Division of Soil and Water Conservation - Compliance Inspection
[3 Division of Water Quality - Compliance Inspection
© Other Agency - Operation Review
Routine O Com laint O Follow-up of DW inspection O Follow-up of DSWC review 490ther
Facility Number 40 68 Date of Inspection 10-5-99
Time of Inspection 1 830 24 hr. (hh:mm)
® Permitted ® Certified 13 Conditionally Certified ©Registered 113 Not Operational Date Last Operated:
Farm Name: HarCIS.SUALlA_Saw................................................. l .................................. County: GXCRAC.............................................. ARO........
Owner Name: Pall............................................HArris......................................................... Phone No: 7.4Z-2.kf11: .� �-,14��rQ ii��..........................
Facility Contact: ..............................................................................Title ... Phone No
MailingAddress:.FUA...U.Qx.450........................................................................................ 511�1k�.T 1 ..�I....................................................... zR5.0.8 .............
Onsite Representative:........................................................................................................... integrator: CArpjjUq,.F.prjR5 ....................................................
Certified Operator:jFx-.aAl6.G][1.J!........................... U8jrjrj5 ............................................... Operator Certification Number:16Q2.............................
Location of Farm:
►:
Latitude 35 • 12 11 Longitude 77 • ®53 "
Design Current
Swine Capacity Population
❑ Wean to Feeder
❑ Feeder to Finish
❑ Farrow to Wean
® Farrow to Feeder
1800
❑ Farrow to Finish
❑ Gilts
❑ Boars
Design Current
Poultry Capacity Population
❑ Layer
❑ Non -Layer
❑ Other
Design Current
Cattle Capacity Population
❑ Dairy
❑ Non -Dairy
Total Design Capacity 1,800
--71
Total SSLW 939,600
Number of Lagoons 10 Subsurface Drains Present ❑ Lagoon Area ID Spray Field Area
Holding Ponds 1 Solid Traps JE1 No Liquid Waste Management System
Discharges & Stream Impacts
1. Is any discharge observed from any part of the operation? ❑ Yes ❑ No
Discharge originated at: ❑ Lagoon ❑ Spray Field ❑ Other
a. If discharge is observed, was the conveyance man-made? ❑ Yes ❑ No
b. If discharge is observed, did it reach Water of the State? (If yes, notify DWQ) ❑ Yes ❑ No
c. If discharge is observed, what is the estimated flow in gal/min?
d. Does discharge bypass a lagoon system? (If yes, notify DWQ) ❑ Yes ❑ No
2. Is there evidence of past discharge from any part of the operation? ❑ Yes ❑ No
3. Were there any adverse impacts or potential adverse impacts to the Waters of the State other than from a discharge? ❑ Yes ❑ No
Waste Collection & Treatment
4. Is storage capacity (freeboard plus storm storage) less than adequate? ❑ Spillway D Yes ❑ No
Structure I Structure 2 Structure 3 Structure 4 Structure 5 Structure 6
Identifier:
Freeboard (inches): ............... ZQ ...............
5. Are there any immediate threats to the integrity of any of the structures observed? (ie/ trees, severe erosion, ❑ Yes ❑ No
seepage, etc.)
3/23/99 Continued on back
Printed on 51o/7Mn

Printed on 5/9/200o
(Facility Number: 40-68 Date of Inspection 10-�99
6. Are there structures on -site which are not properly addressed and/or managed through a waste management or
closure plan? ❑ Yes ❑ No
(If any of questions 4-6 was answered yes, and the situation poses an
immediate public health or environmental threat, notify DWQ)
7.. Do any of the structures need maintenance/improvement? ❑ Yes ❑ No
8. Does any part of the waste management system other than waste structures require maintenance/improvement? ❑ Yes ❑ No
9. Do any stuctures lack adequate, gauged markers with required maximum and minimum liquid level
elevation markings? ❑ Yes ❑ No
Waste Application
10. Are there any buffers that need maintenance/improvement? ❑ Yes ❑ No
11. Is there evidence of over application? ❑ Excessive Ponding ❑ PAN ❑ Yes ❑ No
12. Crop type
13. Do the receiving crops differ with those designated in the Certified Animal Waste Management Plan (CAWMP)? ❑ Yes ❑ No
14. a) Does the facility lack adequate acreage for land application? ❑ Yes ❑ No
b) Does the facility need a wettable acre determination? ❑ Yes ❑ No
c) This facility is pended for a wettable acre determination? ❑ Yes ❑ No
15. Does the receiving crop need improvement?
16. Is there a lack of adequate waste application equipment?
Required Records & Documents
17. Fail to have Certificate of Coverage & General Permit readily available?
18. Does the facility fail to have all components of the Certified Animal Waste Management Plan readily available?
(ie/ WUP, checklists, design, maps, etc.)
19. Does record keeping need improvement? (ie/ irrigation, freeboard, waste analysis & sail sample reports)
20. Is facility not in compliance with any applicable setback criteria in effect at the time of design?
21. Did the facility fail to have a actively certified operator in charge?
22. Fail to notify regional DWQ of emergency situations as required by General Permit?
(ie/ discharge, freeboard problems, over application)
23. Did Reviewer/inspector fail to discuss review/inspection with on -site representative?
24. Does facility require a follow-up visit by same agency?
25. Were any additional problems noted which cause noncompliance of the Certified AWMP?
0' iio-yioiatioris'o•r'&&Wn' ies•were'noted'during this Visit::Wti Will:reeeive nb further :
correspondence about this.visit. . . - .
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes ❑ No
Comments (refer to question #): Explain any YES answers and/or any recommendations or any other comments.
Use drawings of facility to better explain situations. (use additional pages as necessary):
*Emergency flooding/hurricane lagoon assessment.
*Lagoon structure assessment conducted by Daphne Cartner, Div. Soil and Water.
*Lagoon level was adequate.
*Flood waters from Contentnea.
*Irrigation was operable.
*Receiving crops were adequate.
z
Reviewer/Inspector Name ;Martin McLawhorn Daphne Cartner
Reviewer/Inspector Signature: Date:

® Division of Soil and Water Conservation - Operation Review
j] Division of Soil and Water Conservation - Compliance Inspection
0 Division of Water Quality - Compliance Inspection
E3 Other Agency - Operation Review
14P Routine O Complaint Q Follow-up of DWQ inspection Q Follow-up of DSWC review Q Other 1
L - Facility Number 40 6$ Date of Inspection 3/29/99
Time of Inspection 850 24 hr. (hh:mm)
® Permitted ® Certified 13 Conditionally Certified [3 Registered JE3 Not O erational Date Last Operated:
Farm Name: Hail[xis.5amdhill.50m.......................................................................... County: Gx.ccag .............................................. WaRQ ....
Owner Name: ................................................... ............... Phone No: 7.7.r2(}1:It1,..7.9.7.-4 Al[icc..........................
Facility Contact:
Title:
Phone No:
MailingAddress: EU.4...UQX..4.43........................................................................................ JR�Iky. Ill.. ....................................................... 28.59.8 .............
Onsite Representative: flAt.Rarris.................................................................................... Integrator: lAtla4�[lt�l.Glttllas. aJGR11Aa.lF�GARS..........
Certified Operator: J:lCgj10.1i11Jt1.1P........................... Uarrjs ............................................... Operator Certification Numberj§6.22.............................
Location of Farm:
.......................................................................................................................................................................................................................................
Latitude 35 • 26F 12 u Longitude 77 • 44 i 53 u
Swine
Design Current Design Current
Capacity Population Poultry Capacity Population
❑ Layer
❑ Non -Layer
❑ Wean to Feeder
❑ Feeder to Finish
❑ Farrow to Wean
® Narrow to Feeder
1800
1765
❑ Farrow to Finish
❑ Gilts
❑ Boars
Design Current
Cattle Capacity Population
❑ Dairy
❑ Non -Dairy
❑ Other
Total Design Capacity 1,800
Total SSLW 939,600
Number of Lagoons I ❑ Subsurface Drains Present ❑ Lagoon Area 10 Spray Field Area
Holding Ponds / Solid Traps I JE1 No Liquid Waste Management System
Discharges & Stream Impacts
1. Is any discharge observed from any part of the operation? ❑ Yes ® No
Discharge originated at: ❑ Lagoon ❑ Spray Field ❑ Other
a. If discharge is observed, was the conveyance man-made? ❑ Yes ❑ No
b. If discharge is observed, did it reach Water of the State? (if yes, notify DWQ) ❑ Yes ❑ No
c. If discharge is observed, what is the estimated flow in gal/min?
d. Does discharge bypass a lagoon system? (If yes, notify DWQ) ❑ Yes ❑ No
2. Is there evidence of past discharge from any part of the operation? ❑ Yes ® No
3. Were there any adverse impacts or potential adverse impacts to the Waters of the State other than from a discharge? ❑ Yes ® No
Waste Collection & Treatment
4. Is storage capacity (freeboard plus storm storage) less than adequate? ❑ Spillway ❑ Yes ® No
Structure 1 Structure 2 Structure 3 Structure 4 Structure 5 Structure 6
Identifier:
Freeboard (inches)...............34....................
5. Are there any immediate threats to the integrity of any of the structures observed? (ie/ trees, severe erosion,
seepage, etc.)
3/23/99
❑ Yes ® No
Continued on back
Printed an 5/gnnfin

Printed on 5/9/2000
Facility Number: 40-68 1 Date of Inspection 3/29199
6. Are there structures on -site which are not properly addressed and/or managed through a waste management or
closure plan?
❑ Yes
® No
(1f any of questions 4-6 was answered yes, and the situation poses an
immediate public health or environmental threat, notify DWQ)
7. Do any of the structures need maintenance/improvement?
❑ Yes
® No
S. Does any part of the waste management system other than waste structures require maintenance/improvement?
❑ Yes
® No -
9. Do any stuctures lack adequate, gauged markers with required maximum and minimum liquid level
elevation markings?
❑ Yes
® No
Waste Application
10. Are there any buffers that need maintenance/improvement?
❑ Yes
® No
11. Is there evidence of over application? ❑ Excessive Ponding ❑ PAN
❑ Yes
®No
12. Crop type Coastal Bermuda (Graze) Small Grain Overseed
13. Do the receiving crops differ with those designated in the Certified Animal Waste Management Plan (CAWMP)?
❑ Yes
® No
14. a) Does the facility lack adequate acreage for land application?
❑ Yes
® No
b) Does the facility need a wettable acre determination?
® Yes
❑ No
c) This facility is pended for a wettable acre determination?
❑ Yes
❑ No
15. Does the receiving crop need improvement?
❑ Yes
®No
16. Is there a lack of adequate waste application equipment?
❑ Yes
® No
Re wired Records & Documents
17. Fail to have Certificate of Coverage & General Permit readily available?
❑ Yes
® No
18. Does the facility fail to have all components of the Certified Animal Waste Management Plan readily available?
(ie/ WUP, checklists, design, maps, etc.)
❑ Yes
® No
19. Does record keeping need improvement? (ie/ irrigation, freeboard, waste analysis & soil sample reports)
❑ Yes
IN No
20. Is facility not in compliance with any applicable setback criteria in effect at the time of design?
❑ Yes
® No
21. Did the facility fail to have a actively certified operator in charge?
❑ Yes
® No
22. Fail to notify regional DWQ of emergency situations as required by General Permit?
(ie/ discharge, freeboard problems, over application)
❑ Yes
®No
23. Did Reviewer/Inspector fail to discuss review/inspection with on -site representative?
❑ Yes
®No
24. Does facility require a follow-up visit by same agency?
❑ Yes
® No
25. Were any additional problems noted which cause noncompliance of the Certified AWMP?
❑ Yes
® No
❑ lrio Adlatiofis:or def Wncies •were:noted :during• this •visit:: You_ will :receive no furtheir : •
.-.-correspondence about this.visit. - ... .... ... ..... .. ... .. ...
Comments (refer to question # ): Explain any YES answers and/or any recommendations or any other comments.
Use drawings of facility to better explain situations. (use additional pages as necessary):
*Recommend signing up for Neuse Rule options by 8/1/99 with Greene Soil and Water.
*Given Mt. Reg card.
*Soil samples dated 3/11/98.
*Lagoon freeboard levels kept weekly as required..
14b. Operation flagged for a wettable acre determination based on 75% rule. Spray fields have been measured through GPS with
information forwarded to Greene Soil and Water. Once wettable acres are determined waste utilization plan needs to be amended
to match acres.
15. Working with Greene Soil and Water to possibly work out low spot in spray field by constructing grassed waterways.
Reviewer/Inspector Name ;Pat Hooper 2521946-6481 Martin McLawhorn
Reviewer/Inspector Signature: Date:

Printed on 5/9/2000
Facility Number: 40-68 1 Date of Inspection 3/29/99
Odor Issues
26. Does the discharge pipe from the confinement building to the storage pond or lagoon fail to discharge at/or below ❑ Yes ❑ No
liquid level of lagoon or storage pond with no agitation?
27. Are there any dead animals not disposed of properly within 24 hours? ❑ Yes 0 No
28. Is there any evidence of wind drift during land application? (i.e. residue on neighboring vegetation, asphalt, ❑ Yes ❑ No
roads, building structure, and/or public property)
29. Is the land application spray system intake not located near the liquid surface of the lagoon? ❑ Yes ❑ No
30. Were any major maintenance problems with the ventilation fan(s) noted? (i.e. broken fan belts, missing or
or broken fan blade(s), inoperable shutters, etc.) ❑ Yes ❑ No
31. Do the animals feed storage bins fail to have appropriate cover? ❑ Yes ❑ No
32. Do the flush tanks lack a submerged fill pipe or a permanent/temporary cover? ❑ Yes ❑ No
Additional Comments and/or Drawings:
It is OK to pump water from low spot and irrigate onto spray field as long as low spot has not received waste (will not have to recor
on IRR2).
*Waste sample dated 2/4/99 with nitrogen 1.5 Ibs/1000 gallons.
Printed on 5/9/2000

cu
............................
..........................
...................................
.....................
............................
. . . . . . . . . .
. . . . . . . . . . .
.......... ...
......................... . . . . . . . .
...........
................. ........... . . . . . . .
...............
... ...............
....... .
. . . .
pro
v
V
ci
A
00
0[
Ho
p.. .......
�kill
q�,
�3}
FAR
_
..... . ......
...... ...
. .......... .
... ......
.....
....
....
..
.........
.......
........
AF

8
0
' � Cericatoi�'�ate' ,
e DEM Reply U
Certification it
Conditional; ays F
Coy ditionaf. Mgat*'oa
R�4Wremen Higher Yie
°0 Vegetation
p Acreage
Other
p Request to be removed 0 Removal Confirmation Recieved
Comments � Basin Name: euse
Regional DWQ Staff Date Record Exported to Permits Database

Division of Soil and Water Conservation p Other Agency
p Division of Water Quality
I* rcouane p t:ompraint p rouow-up of uwtl inspection p Ponow-up of uswu review p utner 1
Facility Number
p Registered E Certified p Applied for Permit E Permitted
Farm Name: Harris SandhillSiDw..................................................
Date of Inspection
Time of Inspection ® 24 hr. (hh:mm)
in Not 0peratrona Date Last Operated:
........ County: Greene
WaRO
Owner Name: Pat.Harris ............................ Ted.Harrix ............................................... Phone No: 74.7.-26fiLH,.7.47.-8428.O.Rice.........................
Facility Contact: PaU arris........................................................Title: owner .................................................. Phone No: 919124.7.-26.Q1........................
MailingAddress: Rt.4...Box 443......................................................................................... Snow.Hill... C...................................................... 1 28508 ..............
Onsite Representative: P.at.Har:ri..........................
Integrator: Caroliva.Fairms ...........................
Certified Operator:FrartlClitx.l'............................ Harris................................................ Operator Certification Number: 1f622.............................
Location of Farm:
Latitude ©• ®& ©44 Longitude ©• ®& ©a'
esign...current _ .. esign, Uurrent Design urren
Swine Capacity Population Poultry Capacity Population Cattle Capacity Population
© Wean to Feeder
p Feeder to tnis
p Farrow to Wean
® arrow to Feeder
p Farrow to Finis
p Gilts
p Boars
Number of Lagoons / Holding Posrds TT p Subsurface Drains resen l] Lagoon Area ❑ Spray Held Area
p No Liquid Waste Management System
General
1. Are there any buffers that need maintenance/improvement? Cl Yes ® No
2. Is any discharge observed from any part of the operation? p Yes ig No
Discharge originated at: p Lagoon C7 Spray Field ❑ Other
a. If discharge is observed, was the conveyance man-made? p Yes ® No
b. If discharge is observed, did it reach Surface Water? (If yes, notify DWQ) p Yes N No
e. If discharge is observed, what is the estimated flow in gal/min?
d. Does discharge bypass a lagoon system? (If yes, notify DWQ) 0 Yes ®No
3. Is there evidence of past discharge from any part of the operation? p Yes ®No
4. Were there any adverse impacts to the waters of the State other than from a discharge? p Yes ®No
5. Does any part of the waste management system (other than lagoonstholding ponds) require p Yes H No
maintenance/improvement?
6. Is facility not in compliance with any applicable setback criteria in effect at the time of design? p Yes ®No
7. Did the facility fail to have a certified operator in responsible charge? p Yes ®No
7/25/97

Facility um ber: 40_68
8. Are there lagoons or storage ponds on site which need to be properly closed? p Yes R No
Structures (Lagoons,Holding Ponds, Flush Pits, etc.)
9. Is storage capacity (freeboard plus storm storage) less than adequate? ® Yes p No
Structure I Structure 2 Structure 3 Structure 4 Structure 5 Structure 6
Identifier:......................................................................................................
Freeboard (ft): 1.2
10. Is seepage observed from any of the structures? p Yes ® No
11. Is erosion, or any other threats to the integrity of any of the structures observed? p Yes ® No
12. Do any of the structures need maintenance/improvement? p Yes IN 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? p Yes N No
Waste Application
14. Is there physical evidence of over application? p Yes N No
(If in excess of WMP, or runoff entering waters of the State, notify DWQ)
15. Crop type CjaasLal.Rertnuda.(.graze)............ SmaU.C=iU.I]YeXseed..................................................................................................................
16. Do the receiving crops differ with those designated in the Animal Waste Management Plan (AWMP)? p Yes ® No
17.
Does the facility have a lack of adequate acreage for land application?
p Yes
N No
18.
Does the receiving crop need improvement?
p Yes
®No
19.
Is there a lack of available waste application equipment?
p Yes
®No
20.
Does facility require a follow-up visit by same agency?
p Yes
®No
21.
Did Reviewer/Inspector fail to discuss review/inspection with on -site representative?
p Yes
®No
22.
Does record keeping need improvement?
p Yes
®No
For Certified or Permitted Facilities Only
23.
Does the facility fail to have a copy of the Animal Waste Management Plan readily available?
p Yes
®No
24.
Were any additional problems noted which cause noncompliance of the Certified AWMP?
p Yes
®No
25.
Were any additional problems noted which cause noncompliance of the Permit?
® Yes
p No
a( .. o vio ions.or jrir--iencies-wer.e noted . nnng this visit. on. wi-rereive nay further . - .
�ex�e§poA�dCae¢ 3�7gR� �hiS •Yisi}: • � . • . • . • . • . � . � . � . � . . � .
:ny r"ecommendationor anyeother comments:#XrConn'meilts (refer, to question n�and/ora
r.
,replainsitutons useadd�tionaL�ages as neUsedawings piacttobettecessary): _
No subsurface drain tile on site according to Mr. Harris A
25. Need to keep weekly freeboard levels as required by General Permit
* Pulled soil samples but has not received results
* For General Permit will need to secure odor control, insect control and mortality checklists
* Conducted paper review on 12/9/97 - physical review of site conducted 12/10/97 at 8:30 a.m.
9. Freeboard level at 14 inches - need to pump in accordance with plan and as soon as weather & soil conditions permit.
* Need;to remove (and prevent) foreign materialfrom lagoon - plastics, gloves, bottles, etc.
* Spray field/pasture has "-bowled" depression area where surface water ponds; observed no outlet
7125/97 —
Reviewer/Inspector Name TPat Hooper , "- =
Reviewer/Inspector Signature: Date:

n
�4
©_
fflvisido.of 5off"d :WaterConservation.- Operation:Review
'Division ofF Soil and Water Conservation - Gvrn hence -Ins ectron
_ p p_ _
� Divisioit of Water Qpalit3r=Complia"Ce Inspection w
p "Other Agency - Operation. Review - _ . '
p Routine p cornp aft o ow -up of DWQ inspection p Follow-up of DSWC review O Other
Facility Number Date of Inspection
Time of Inspection � 24 hr. (hh:mm)
p Registered E Certified p Applied for Permit 0 Permitted In Not 15perahona Date Last Operated:
Farm Name: Harris.Sandhill.Snw................................................................................... County: Greene WaRO
Owner Name:
Facility Contact:
Harris.Sandhip.Sow.Eairnt............... Phone No: .74.7.-260JL H,.7.47-842&OiErwt.........................
Title:
Phone No:
MailingAddress: Rt.4...Ba U......................................................................................... Snow.HULNC ....................................................... 28508 ..............
Onsite Representative: PAt.Harri&................................................................................... Integrator: CnAtiAenital,.Graiim.Caraii]ua..Farms..........
Certified Operator:Fra.tlU[L-P............................ Harrise............................................... Operator Certification Number: 16622.....
Location of Farm:
Latitude ©•®° ©11 Longitude ©•
Design current esign Current, Design urren
Swine Capacity. Population Poultry Capacity Population ! Cattle Capacity Population
13 Wean to Veeder
p reeder to rinish
p Farrow to Wean
Farrow to Feeder
p Farrow to Finis
p Gilts
p Boars
p ayer
p Non -Layer
Nutnher of Lagoons %Holding"Porids p Subsurface Drains resen agoon rea p pray Field Area
13 No Liquid Waste Management System
General
1. Are there any buffers that need maintenance/improvement? p Yes ® No
2. Is any discharge observed from any part of the operation? 13 Yes ® No
Discharge originated at: p Lagoon p Spray Field p Other
a. If discharge is observed, was the conveyance man-made? p Yes p No
b. If discharge is observed, did it reach Surface Water? (If yes, notify DWQ) la Yes p No
c. If discharge is observed, what is the estimated flow in gal/min?
d. Does discharge bypass a lagoon system? (If yes, notify DWQ) I] Yes p No
3. Is there evidence of past discharge from any part of the operation? p Yes ®No
4. Were there any adverse impacts to the waters of the State other than from a discharge? p Yes ®No
5. Does any part of the waste management system (other than lagoons/holding ponds) require p Yes ® No
maintenance/improvement?
6. Is facility not in compliance with any applicable setback criteria in effect at the time of design? p Yes ®No
7. Did the facility fail to have a certified operator in responsible charge? p Yes ® No
7125197

1
aci um er: 40_68
8. Are there lagoons or storage ponds on site which need to be properly closed?
Structures (Lagoons,Holdins Ponds, Flush Pits, etc.)
9. Is storage capacity (freeboard plus storm storage) less than adequate?
Structure I Structure 2 Structure 3 Structure 4
Identifier:
Freeboard (ft): I 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?
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 State, notify DWQ)
0 Yes ® No
® Yes p No
Structure 5 Structure 6
p Yes
H No
p Yes
® No
p Yes
N No
p Yes
® No
p Yes
® No
15. Crop type ......................... Rye ..................................................................................... ...........................................................
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?
21. Did Reviewer/Inspector fail to discuss review/inspection with on -site representative?
22. Does record keeping need improvement?
For Certified or Permitted Facilities Only
23. Does the facility fail to have a copy of the Animal Waste Management Plan readily available?
24. Were any additional problems noted which cause noncompliance of the Certified AWMP?
25. Were any additional problems noted which cause noncompliance of the Permit?
R - o ar tions.or erencies-were.n:ote uringt rs visi .. no will -receive nu u er .: .
correspondoicO about Xiis.Yis� ; ...:...:.. ... . .
p Yes ® No
p Yes ®No
p Yes ®No
p Yes ®No
p Yes ®No
p Yes H No
p Yes ®No
p Yes N No
p Yes ® No
N Yes p No
[�is_
omments (refer to.question #): EYp ai any .answers and/ora©y reeommen ti_uns o"r any 'ot er, comments :.;
se:drawi cgs of facility to`better' explain situations. (use-additional=pages as a' sary) -
site inspection is a follow-uD to the 2/11/98 inspection. Please note the followine comments:.
& #25 - Inadequate freeboard. Lower level of lagoon when weather & soil conditions permit.
Waste Analysis - October 1997; Another. sample'collected 2/11/99.
Irrigation records need to be re -calculated to show nitrogen balance for receiving crop(rye) Report -balances to WaRO.
- 7/25/97 —
Reviewer/Inspector Name iDaphne B:X511oni -
t
Reviewer/Inspector Signature: Date:

d Division of Soil=and Water Conservation - Uperation Review .
p.Divisio. n of St hand Watet Conservation._ Cotnpliaince l'dspection " _ a
Division of -Water Quality --Compliance Inspection : e
p Other:Ageacy = Uperation Review e
e complaint or ollow-up of uwy inspection
I Facility Number I
p Registered E Certified p Applied for Permit E Permitted
Farm Name: Harris Sand,hillSow...........
-up of i)!!Pw%: review p utner
Date of Inspection
Time of Inspection 24 hr. (hh:mm)
p of perattona Date Last Operated:
„-,--, County: Greene WaRO
Owner Name: ................................................... Harris.Sandbill.Sow.Farm............... Phone No: .7.4:L-2601-H..747.-8..428 0fftcc.........................
Facility Contact: , aUbrms........................................................Title:.........
PhoneNo: ....................................................
Mailing Address: Rt.4...>b 443......................................................................................... Snow.HHLAC ....................................................... 28508 ..............
Onsite Representative: Kjm.Tftkmam.1airy:R.W..1!'IaAtager.................................... Integrator: Continental.Gxa.ins.Carcdina.F.ar m..........
Certified Operator:FranklinP ............................ Harris ............................................... Operator Certification Number:lfi622.............................
Location of Farm:
Latitude ©0®1 ©" Longitude ©• ®' ©"
esign- - 117d-frent Design Current luesign - . urren
'Capacity Population .Poultry Capacity .Population Cattle Capacity, Population
p Wean to Yeeder
Feeder toFEET—
13 Farrow to Wean
® Farrow to Feeder
p Farrow to Finis
Gilts
p Boars
Number of lagoons / Holding'Porn& u sur ace Drains resen Q agoon rea 13 spray ie rea
o Mquid Waste Management system
General
1. Are there any buffers that need maintenance/improvement? p Yes ®No
2. Is any discharge observed from any part of the operation? N Yes p No
Discharge originated at: p Lagoon N Spray Field p Other
a. If discharge is observed, was the conveyance man-made? p Yes ® No
b. If discharge is observed, did it reach Surface Water? (If yes, notify DWQ) p Yes g No
c. If discharge is observed, what is the estimated flow in gal/min? See notes.
d. Does discharge bypass a lagoon system? (If yes, notify DWQ) p Yes ® No
3. Is there evidence of past discharge from any part of the operation? p Yes ®No
4. Were there any adverse impacts to the waters of the State other than from a discharge? p Yes ®No
5. Does any part of the waste management system (other than lagoons/holding ponds) require [3 Yes N No
maintenance/improvement?
6. Is facility not in compliance with any applicable setback criteria in effect at the time of design? p Yes ® No
7. Did the facility fail to have a certified operator in responsible charge? p Yes ®No
7/25/97

aci iIty Number: 40_68
8. Are there lagoons or storage ponds on site which need to be properly closed?
Structures Lag_oons,Ho[ding Ponds, Flush Pits, etc.)
9. Is storage capacity (freeboard plus storm storage) less than adequate?
Structure I Structure 2 Structure 3 Structure 4
Identifier:
Freeboard (ft): l 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?
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 State, notify DWQ)
p Yes ® No
N Yes p No
Structure 5 Structure 6
15. Crop type ......................... Rye ..................................................................................... ...........................................................
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?
21. Did Reviewer/Inspector fail to discuss review/inspection with on -site representative?
22. Does record keeping need improvement?
For Certified_ or Permitted Facilities Only
23. Does the facility fail to have a copy of the Animal Waste Management Plan readily available?
24. Were any additional problems noted which cause noncompliance of the Certified AWMP?
25. Were any additional problems noted which cause noncompliance of the Permit?
q . 53w!q4tions.or crencies-were-no a .. nng is visa:. You wi .receive no u _ er . .
p Yes ® No
p Yes ® No
p Yes N No
p Yes ® No
® Yes p No
p Yes ® No
p Yes ®No
p Yes ®No
p Yes ®No
® Yes p No
p Yes ®No
p Yes p No
N Yes p No
® Yes p No
® Yes p No
�ommeuts (refer to question Ex ' lain any YES answers and/or any recoimmendatiohs arr�any other r6mtneift
Ise drawingssof facility to hetterrexplain 'Atuatioas (use:additional pages as:necessary)
ite mvesti" anon/ins . ection due to anon oils call to WaRO a p rox, 12:50 Y
g P Ym PP PM: = � A
'lease note the coinments below:
2 - Discharge observed as a•result of overapplication. Animal waste did not reach surface waters, however waste was collected
dthin a -roadside ditch, which is iributay to`7ack•'s7F6rk that flows to Tyson Marsh, tributary to Contentnea Creek in the Neuse
:fiver Basin. Estimated -at least3,000 gallons mn'tlie,roadside ditch.
9 - Inadequate freeboard (IT). Need to lower freeboard level when weather & soil conditions permit. Required to notify
Legional Office when freeboard,is.less than required structural &storm freeboard. 7/25/97
Reviewer/Inspector Name Daphne W Cu'llom ;
Reviewer/Inspector Signature: Date:
nc�a—�t -CIA

act i Number: 40_68 Date of Inspection_ $-
Additionsi'Cominents and/or Drawings::
14 - See #2 ve. f -
20 - Need to revisit facility to review CAWMP & irrigation records. - -
22 & 923 - Records not available for. review. CAWMP & General Permit not on site for review..
o :.
24 & #25 - Irrigating during a -rainfall event. Violation of CAWMP & General Permit. See #8 of required specifications in Waste
Utilization Plan.
21 ' Advised Kim Tilghman to have Mr. Harris contact me ASAP. Ms. Tilghman was made" aware of violations and ceased
irrigation events @ the farm. Facility to be revisited.
* Samples collected: fecal coliform, N & P, BOD
*Photos taken on site.
BC, 2/11/98 =
r
."� • .0 '�''ram -

}
'�• r ,� �;�w:��:�-�xd�ae`e..---n,,,,;,..u.....:�...a.,¢;: —.,.r '�-.��r -a �-��r=:.u'.4oa...� _x:M:.�-aa.-.�:`:x`:,a,cez :�..?
Y
[] riv
'ision of Soil and Water Conservation [\Other Agency
ision of Water Quality
JQMoutine O Complaint O Follow-up of DNVQ inspection O Follow-up of DSWC review O Other
Date of Inspection
Facility Number
Time of Inspection j : 00 24 hr. (hh:rmn)
© Registered UrCertified 0 Applied for Permit LTP/ermitted JE3 Not Opera Date Last Operated: ....................
Farm Name: ........A�. ...... 6..�.�............M,n.. County:..l. �R. ............................
Owner Name:..P01.1.—.A 4. ...... ��dt ...''s 10.11�!. ......... Phone No: T4 7--$ Z8
3 ......................... .........................
Facility Contact: ....Y.. .`1 LC4. ..... 5................................ Title: .....Qw ............ r............................... Phone No: .....IL .... a............
F .
Mailing Address:...4-Z4....`.�.........BnyS......4i4�........................................ ........'�ou�.'�ti s..5.`. �C- ............ a�..��.
r........................
q
Onsite Representative:{ _ }' I,. ....... .4�ia-ti.a,..�...................................................... Integrator: ..._..��. ( :J.1.A.nLa........ ..............
Certified Operator,... T!1..� +^- -4+s1� .. :..4&w 5................................. Operator Certification Number,...._...° �° ZZ......
Location of Farm:
�� ......` q.......................................................................................................................................................................-.---...................................
�.. _ ...... ....... - .
Latitude " Longitude ©• ®4 ®"
Design . ,Current r'. Designs Current Design Curr"ent y5
"Swine ' Capacity Population `" Poultry Capacity Population Cattle Ca iactty„Population
❑ Wean to Feeder <: ❑ Layer ❑ Dairy
❑Feeder to Finish ❑ Non -Layer ❑ Non-Dairy
l I
❑ P ow to Wean
f
arrow to Feeder 5 ❑ Other
El Farrow to Finish Total Des ign`Capacl<ty:> .. 8p0
❑ G is
oars p Total SSLW
Number 4of Lagoons / Holding Ponds- ❑ Subsurface Drains Present ❑ Lagoon Area JE1 Spray Field Area
— :.... .:: y� .. - • r
❑ No Liquid Waste Management Systemme,
general
1. Are there any buffers that need maintenance/improvement?
ElYes
, �_,�
61- o
2. Is any discharge observed from any part of the operation?
❑ Yes
U40
Discharge originated at: ❑ Lagoon [I Spray Field [I Other
a. If discharge is observed, was the conveyance man --made?
❑ Yes
❑ No
b. If discharge is observed, did it reach Surface Water? (If yes, notify DWQ)
❑ Yes
❑ No
c. If discharge is observed, what is the estimated flow in -aVmin?
A. Does discharge bypass a lagoon system? (If yes, notify DWQ)
❑ Yes
❑ No
3. Is there evidence of past discharge from any part of the operation?
❑ Yes
(o/
4. Were there any adverse impacts to the waters of the State other than from a discharge?
El Yes
914
5. Does any part of the waste management system (other than lagoons/holding ponds) require
❑ Yes
&K
maintenance/improvement?
b. Is facility not in compliance with any applicable setback criteria in effect at the time of design?
❑ Yes
91<6
7. Did the facility fail to have a certified operator in responsible charge?
❑ Yes
0,No
7/25/97
Continued on back

Facility Number: —
8. Are there lagoons or storage ponds on site which need to be properly closed'?
❑ Yes , o
Structures (Lagoonr-,tioiding Ponds, Flush Pits, etc.1
9. Is storage capacity (freeboard plus storm storage) less than adequate?
Structure I Structure 2 Structure 3 Structure a Structure 5
Identi fier: ........................
Freeboard0: ...........1. . i+n.L.................................... ....................... ..............................................................
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)
es ❑ No
Structure 0
13.
Do any of the structures lack adequate minimum or maximum liquid level markers?
❑ Yes
EWo
Waste Application
14.
Is there physical evidence of over application?
❑ Yes
tiYt`to
15.
(1f in excess of WMP, or runoff entering waters of the State, notify DW[Q)
Crop type .......... ................................45e-f...............4 S.� P� � �................................
16.
Do the receiving crops differ with those designated in the Animal Waste Management Plan (AWMP)?
❑ Yes
[yi o
17.
Does the facility have a lack of adequate acreage for land application?
❑ Yes
I]d No
18.
Does the receiving crop need improvement?
❑ Yes
tom`\o
19.
Is there a lack of available waste application equipment?
❑ Yes
EaNo
20.
Does facility require a follow-up visit by same agency?
❑ Yes
211No
21, Did Reviewer/Inspector fail to discuss review/inspection with on -site representative? ❑ Yes [X�Q,o
22. Does record keeping need improvement? ❑ Yes s (o
For Certified or Permitted Facilities Only
23. Does the facility fail to have a copy of the Animal Waste Management Plan readily available? ❑ Yes Q40
24. Were -any additional problems noted which cause noncompliance of the Certified AWMP? Ea,'Ke�s ❑ No
25. Were any additional problems noted which cause noncompliance of the Permit'? &K., ❑ No
No.vitilations or deiiciencie's.were noted during this.visit.- .You.will receive no further
correspondence about this .visit'..','. :.
Comments,(refer to question #) Explain any YES answers and/or ariv recommendations or any other corrrments'
Use;drawings of facility -to better'explam situations (use additional pages as necessarv) n � w
Q is to jq-7 —1.S t—� 6- a8 �a.� 1 4-I —G8 — 1.S
V W 1P `tU {� eazrtrriq.Q.�����(I � t✓� �m�
'u a- u +mac {{��
+�LO�.KeSZ .
�y rTe� � ��vuUurz s��.�..._
7/25/97
Reviewer/Inspector Name o Ex
Reviewer/inspector Signature: Date:

facility Number: iA) Date of Inspection
ddid n"oA-m--nefit's and/or Drawings:
z:Rv-wvq---'-feL6k -(zz W. V-%
j
I
7/25/97

16 Kounne 0 Lompsamt 0 ronow-up of uwv Inspecnon 0 ronow-up oI Lnw%_, review 0 utner
Facility Number
p Registered E Certified p Applied for Permit ■ Permitted
Farm Name: Harris.S.andhjl1 SDw.................
Owner Name: P.atHarris ............................ Ted.Harris.................................
Date of Inspection
Time of Inspection
24 hr. (hh:mm)
p Not 0perationa Date Last Operated:
County: Greene WaRO
Phone No:.7.4:1-26.Q1.:H,.7.47.-$428.Offu-e .........................
Facility Contact: Pat.Harris........................................................Title: owner.................................................. Phone No: 9191.7.47:2601........................
Mailing Address: Rt.4...B€L 443....................................................................•.................... Sjxo.w.Hj1L..N.0 ....................................................... 28.508 ..............
Onsite Representative: Pax.Harris................................................................................... Integrator: Carulina.Earms.....................................................
Certified Operator: FranlWaR........................... Hurii ............................................... Operator Certification Number: 1f622.............................
Location of Farm:
Latitude ©• ®' ©" Longitude ©•'_ ©"
p Layer
p Non -Layer
General
1. Are there any buffers that need maintenance/improvement? p Yes N No
2. Is any discharge observed from any part of the operation?
Discharge originated at: p Lagoon p Spray Field p Other
a. If discharge is observed, was the conveyance man-made?
b. If discharge is observed, did it reach Surface Water? (If yes, notify DWQ)
c. If discharge is observed, what is the estimated flow in gallmin?
d. Does discharge bypass a lagoon system? (If yes, notify DWQ)
3. Is there evidence of past discharge from any part of the operation?
4. Were there any adverse impacts to the waters of the State other than from a discharge?
5. Does any part of the waste management system (other than lagoons/holding ponds) require
maintenance/improvement?
6. Is facility not in compliance with any applicable setback criteria in effect at the time of design?
p Yes H No
p Yes N No
p Yes ® No -
p Yes H No
p Yes ® No
p Yes ® No
Yes ® No
p Yes 0 No
7. Did the facility fail to have a certified operator in responsible charge?
7/25/97
p Yes ® No

lFacHity Number: 40_68
S. Are there lagoons or storage ponds on site which need to be properly closed?
p Yes
® No
Structures (Lagoons,Holdina Ponds, plush Pits, etc.)
9. Is storage capacity (freeboard plus storm storage) less than adequate?
® Yes
p No
Structure 1 Structure 2 Structure 3 Structure 4 Structure 5
Structure 6
Identifier: ......................_............................................... .................................... ................................... ...................................
...................................
Freeboard (ft): 1.2
10. Is seepage observed from any of the structures?
p Yes
® No
11. Is erosion, or any other threats to the integrity of any of the structures observed?
p Yes
® No
12. Do any of the structures need maintenance/improvement?
p 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?
p Yes
®No
Waste Application
14. Is there physical evidence of over application?
p Yes
H No
(If in excess of WMP, or runoff entering waters of the State, notify DWQ)
15. Crop type .... Caastal.Rerrwda.(graze)............. mali. Cain.D.Yerseed...................................................................................
16. Do the receiving crops differ with those designated in the Animal Waste Management Plan (AWMP)?
p Yes
N No
17. Does the facility have a lack of adequate acreage for land application?
p Yes
®No
18. Does the receiving crop need improvement?
p Yes
®No
19. Is there a lack of available waste application equipment?
p Yes
®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?
p Yes
®No
22. Does record keeping need improvement?
p Yes
®No
For Certified or Permitted Facilities Only
23. Does the facility fail to have a copy of the Animal Waste Management Plan readily available?
p Yes
N No
24. Were any additional problems noted which cause noncompliance of the Certified AWMP?
p Yes
® No
25. Were any additional problems noted which cause noncompliance of the Permit?
R Yes
p No
Q . _ o'tions.orrrencics:were..n.ote....in.g s �s:. n Wi .rereive nourt r .:
: ...:..: ._....... :9erzetopAC�Wlit'Ais-vsV • :......... .
• . • . • . • .
------------
i
Reviewer/Inspector Name
Reviewer/Inspector Signature:
per
Date: a

w4 kb
State of North Carolina
Department of Environment
and Natural Resources
Division of Water Quality
Washington Regional Office
James B. Hunt, Jr., Governor
Wayne McDevitt, Secretary
A. Preston Howard, Jr., P.E., Director
December 23, 1997
Mr. Pat Harris
Harris Sandhill Sow Farm
Rt. 4, Box 443
Snow Hill, NC 28580
SUBJECT: Animal Feedlot Operation Site Inspection
Harris Sandhill Sow Farm
Facility No(s). 40-68
Greene County
Dear Mr. Harris:
On October 15, 1997, 1 conducted an animal feedlot operation site inspection at the referenced facility. Overall, the
operation was found to be in satisfactory condition. A copy of the inspection report is attached for your review.
In general, this inspection includes verifying that: (1) the farm has a Certified Animal Waste Management Plan
(CAWMP); (2) the farm is complying with requirements of the State Rules 15 NCAC 2H.0217, Senate Bill 1217, and
the Certified Animal Waste Management Plan; (3) the farm operation's waste management system is being operated
properly under the direction of a Certified Operator; (4) the required records are being kept; (5) there are no signs of
seepage, erosion, and/or runoff.
The recommendations and/or comments regarding your inspection can be found in the comment section of the attached
inspection form. It is very important as the owner and Operator in Charge that you address any noted concerns, as soon
as possible. For assistance, please contact your Technical Specialist and/or the local Soil & Water Conservation District
Office.
Thank you for your cooperation and assistance during the inspection. Should you have further questions or
comments regarding this inspection, do not hesitate to call me at [phone], ext. 321.
Sincerely,
Q�L� (3--
Daphne B. Cullom
Environmental Specialist 11
cc: Greene County SWCD Office
Mike Regans, Greene County NCCES
David Moore, Carolina Farms
WaRO .�-
943 Washington Square Mall, Washington, NC 27689 Telephone [phone] FAX [phone]
An Equal Opportunity Affirmative Action Employer

1• Koutine O t-ompiamt O ronow-up of uwV inspection O ra
Facility Number
p Registered E Certified p Applied for Permit 0 Permitted
p
O
Date of Inspection
Time of Inspection 24 hr. (hh:mm)
in Not 13p_e_ra_fi'o_n'7_j Date Last Operated:
Farm Name: Harri&SaadhillSaw.F.arm...................................................................... County: Greene WaRO
Owner Name: Pat ........................................... Harris ......................................................... Phone No: .7.47.361IL:H,.7.4,Z-SASS-O.Mite.........................
Facility Contact:
Title:
Phone No:
MailingAddress: Rt.4...Batx..a........................................................................................ Saox..HULAC ....................................................... 28508 ..............
Onsite Representative: P.ax.Ha.Kris.................................................................................... Integrator: Carnlina.Farms.....................................................
Certified Operator: F.rankftP .......................... Harris............................................... Operator Certification Number: 1ti622.............................
Location of Farm:
'V,
Latitude Longitude ©• ® ©
Swine
Capacity Population Poultry
Wean to Feeder
Feeder to Finish
Farrow to Wean
Farrow to Feeder
p Farrow to Finis
Gilts
Boars
Capacity Population Cattle Capacity Population
P13
atry
on- airy
pLayer
p Non -Layer
Other
Total Design Capacity 1,800
Total SSLW 939,6
1 Number of Lagoons 7 Holding Ponds F--^T---ISubsurface rains Present I p goon rea jj3 Spray Field Area
General
1. Are there any buffers that need maintenance/improvement? p Yes ® No
2. Is any discharge observed from any part of the operation? p Yes ® No
Discharge originated at: p Lagoon p Spray Field p Other
a. If discharge is observed, was the conveyance man-made? p Yes p No
b. If discharge is observed, did it reach Surface Water? (If yes, notify DWQ) E3 Yes p No
c. If discharge is observed, what is the estimated flow in gallmin?
d. Does discharge bypass a lagoon system? (If yes, notify DWQ) p Yes p No
3. Is there evidence of past discharge from any part of the operation? p Yes ® No
4. Were there any adverse impacts to the waters of the State other than from a discharge? p Yes ® No
5. Does any part of the waste management system (other than lagoons/holding ponds) require ❑ Yes ® No
maintenance/improvement?
6. Is facility not in compliance with any applicable setback criteria in effect at the time of design? p Yes ® No
7. Did the facility fail to have a certified operator in responsible charge? p Yes ® No
7/25/97

ace Number: 40_68
1 8. Are there lagoons or storage ponds on site which need to be properly closed? D Yes N No
i Structures (Lap_oons, Holdinjj Ponds, Flush Pits, etc.)
9. Is storage capacity (freeboard plus storm storage) less than adequate? D Yes ® No
Structure I Structure 2 Structure 3 Structure 4 Structure 5 Structure 6
Identifier: -
Freeboard (ft): 1.8 ft.
10. is seepage observed from any of the structures? D Yes N No
11. Is erosion, or any other threats to the integrity of any of the structures observed? D Yes ® No
12. Do any of the structures need maintenance/improvement? D 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? p Yes ® No
Waste Application
14. is there physical evidence of over application? p Yes N No
(If in excess of WMP, or runoff entering waters of the State, notify D-,NQ)
15. Crop type ...... CoasW1larmuda Gt:ass............................................................................................................................................................................
16. Do the receiving crops differ with those designated in the Animal Waste Management Plan (AWMP)? D Yes ® No
17. Does the facility have a lack of adequate acreage for land application? D Yes ® No
18. Does the receiving crop need improvement? D Yes ®No
19. Is there a lack of available waste application equipment? D Yes ® No
20. Does facility require a follow-up visit by same agency? p Yes ®No
21. Did Reviewer/Inspector fail to discuss review/inspection with on -site representative? D Yes ®No
22. Does record keeping need improvement? D Yes ®No
For Certified or Permitted Facilities Oniv
23. Does the facility fail to have a copy of the Animal Waste Management Plan readily available? D Yes ®No
24. Were any additional problems noted which cause noncompliance of the Certified A WMP? p Yes ®No
25. Were any additional problems noted which cause noncompliance of the Permit? p Yes ®No
Z . o-vits - ons.or erencies•wer.e.nnn nrmg this visit.,. You w>< • .receive ncr further . - -
: �e�es�io�dege�about�tti�s•Y�s�t::•.• •.•.•.•.•.•.•.•.:: • - •..•.-:- •.•...•.• . ' '...
COMM�ts (re er to question #} plarn,,any answers and/or anyz recommendations or any other, comments.
1:'Andvzis,'2/97-10/97
to better eiplainsitnatiois. (use sdrtnal pages asn
csampl4Fai11"7
od_a6t9waste management plan is complete with all components.
' plete with nitrogen balance_
`#bllawmg %tems�at�e conditions -of the Card 'A ii ' Wast6 Management Plan'•and the general pia heiifore these items
nst be implemented:
'lagoons7stflrageparids frx of-faretgriebr3s m ludut„butrio# lnriited fo tires,�oMies, plasttcp odt:cts, light bulbs, gloves,
ges or any athar soltda 7/25/97
Reviewer/Inspector Name Dsip>ibe B Cullom T'" ' F - -
Reviewer/Inspector Signatu 6: } Date: f , _ G•1 -7

Liu
111
rb
46-
I. ol
m

JLt_--14-1995 15:32 FROM DES', '-3FF QUALITY SECTION TO
WF�?O P . 02/02
Site Rewires Immediate Attention: -t v O
Facility No. - (e8
DrWSI4r7 OF ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT
ANDAAL FEEDLOT OPERATIONS SITE N'ISITATION RECORD
DATE::T 1-7 , 1.995
rune:3a
Farm Name/Own<
Mailing Address:
County:
Integrator:
On Site Representative: 1 rcc- � fin( r
Physical Addressll ocatiorz:
Phonc:
,0'4 —Phone: 7¢ 7� s 73 S ,
1/
Type of Operation: Swine ✓ _ Poultry Cattle
Design Capacity: od Number of Animals on Site.
DEM Certificatian Numben ACE _ DEM Certification Number: ACNEW
Latitude: 55 —' 2L_..-L5�" 0 Longitude: -7-)- ' -Q�- " WEievation: _Feat
Ckle Yes or No
Does the Animal Waste Lagoon is ilfficient freeboard of I Foot + 25 year 24 hour storfn event
(approximately I Foot + 7 inche or No Actual Freeboard:.___ —Ft. Inches-
2
Was any seepage observedm oon(&)? Yes o No as any erosion obs ed? Yes r No
Is adequate land available for spra Ye or No Is the cover crop adequate,: Y or No
Crop(s) being utilized: aS r9-
Does the facility meet SCS minilm= se�back criteria? 200 Feet from DwelIin w a or No
I00 Peet from Wells? +v or No
Is the animal waste 5tt;!ckpilcd within 10'0 Feet of USGS Blue Line Stream? Yes or(9
Is animal waste land applied or sort �, irrigated within 25 Feet of a USGS Map Blue Line? Yes or N)
is animal waste discharged into wat: rs ov a state by man-made ditch, flushing system, or other
similar man-made devices? Yee o If Yes, Phase Explain.
Does the facility maintain adequatc waste management records (volumes of ruanure, land applied,
spray irrigated on specific acreage wih cover crap)? Yes or No
Additional Comments: p
LiA-
�a 7
6&-� Llwa-qj
Inspector name -
cc. Facility Assessment Unit
�217ZA
Signature
Use Attachments if Needed.
TOTAL P.02

M