400160_INSPECTIONS_20171231

NUH I H UAHULINA
Department of Environmental Qual

IN-S�PECTIONS
INSPECTIONS
0
INSPECTIONS

w
Division of Water Resources
"Facility Number ®- © O Division of Soil and Water Conservation iN 5, f;
O Other Agency l
I'ype of Visit: ® Compliance Inspection 0 Operation Review Q Structure Evaluation O Technical Assistance
Reason for Visit: ® Routine O Complaint O Follow-up O Referral O Emergency O Other O Denied Access
Date of Visit: Arrival Time: ,' Departure Time: County: K.Ld1GJ Region: [J
Farm Name: ,�(jj�.� Owner Email:
Owner Name: Phone:
Mailing Address: 91p fJ ;V)ae� _A W�l
Physical Address:
Facility Contact: 26(&2 Title:
Onsite Representative:
Certified Operator:
Back-up Operator:
Location of Farm:
Swine
Wean to Finish
Wean to Feeder
Feeder to Finish
Farrow to Wean
Farrow to Feeder
Farrow to Finish
Other
Other
Latitude:
Phone: K/ / )
Integrator:
Certification Number:
Certification Number:
Design Current Design Current
Capacity Pop. Wet Poultry Capacity Pop.
I EI Layer
Non -La er
Ury roultry
Layers
Non -Layers
Pullets
Turkeys
Turkey Poults
Other
Design Current
Discharees and Stream Impacts
1. Is any discharge observed from any part of the operation?
Discharge originated at: ❑ Structure ❑ Application Field ❑ Other:
a. Was the conveyance man-made?
Longitude:
Design Current
Cattle Capacity Pop.
Dairy Cow
Dairy Calf
Dairy Heifer
Dry Cow
Non -Dairy
Beef Stocker
Beef Feeder
Beef Brood Cow
❑ Yes �No ❑ NA ❑ NE
[] Yes ❑ No ❑ NA ❑ NE
b. Did the discharge reach waters of the State? (If yes, notify DWR) ❑ 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 DWR) ❑ Yes ❑ No ❑ NA ❑ NE
2. Is there evidence of a past discharge from any part of the operation? ❑ Yes � o ❑ NA ❑ NE
3. Were there any observable adverse impacts or potential adverse impacts to the waters ❑ Yes VNo 0 NA ❑ NE
of the State other than from a discharge?
Page I of 3 21412015 Continued

Facility Number: - Date of Inspection: — Q
Waste Collection & Treatment 100,
4. Is storage capacity (structural plus storm storage plus heavy rainfall) less than adequate? ❑ Yes No ❑ NA ❑ NE
a. If yes, is waste level into the structural freeboard? ❑ Yes ❑ No ❑ NA ❑ NE
Structure 1 Structure 2 Structure 3 Structure 4 Structure 5 Structure 6
Identifier:
Spillway?:
Designed Freeboard (in):
Observed Freeboard (in): Z 3
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 which are not properly addressed and/or managed through a
waste management or closure plan?
❑ Yes
IdNo
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Yes
ZNo
❑ NA
❑ NE
If any of questions 4-6 were answered yes, and the situation poses an immediate public health or environmenta threat, notify DWR
7. Do any of the structures need maintenance or improvement? ❑Yes ❑ 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 W(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?
No
11. Is there evidence of incorrect land application? If yes, check the appropriate box below. ❑ Yes V
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Excessive Ponding ❑ Hydraulic Overload ❑ Frozen Ground
❑ Heavy Metals (Cu, Zn, etc.)
[] PAN ❑ PAN > 10% or 10 tbs. ❑ 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): C 2,3i/T 6�a%ram-
13. Soil Type(s):
14. Do the receiving crops differ from those designated in the CAWMP?
❑ Yes RfNo
❑ NA
❑ NE
15. Does the receiving crop and/or land application site need improvement?
❑ Yes [�o
❑ NA
❑ NE
16. Did the facility fail to secure and/or operate per the irrigation design or wettable ❑ Yes Vo
❑ NA
❑ NE
acres determination?
17. Does the facility lack adequate acreage for land application?
18. Is there a lack of properly operating waste application equipment?
Required Records & Documents
19. Did the facility fail to have the Certificate of Coverage & Permit readily available?
20. Does the facility fail to have all components of the CAWMP readily available? If yes, check
the appropriate box.
❑WUP ❑Checklists ❑Design ❑ Maps ❑ Lease Agreements
❑ Yes VNo.
�o
❑ Yes
❑ Yes dNo
❑ Yes ®No
❑ Other:
21. Does record keeping need improvement? If yes, check the appropriate box below. ❑ Yes No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Waste Application ❑ Weekly Freeboard ❑ Waste Analysis ❑ Soil Analysis ❑ Waste Transfers ❑ Weather Code
❑ Rainfall ❑ Stocking ❑ Crop Yield ❑ 120 Minute Inspections ❑ Monthly and 1" Rainfall Inspections ❑ Sludge Survey
22. Did the facility fail to install and maintain a rain gauge? ❑ Yes dl,� o ❑ NA ❑ NE
23. If selected, did the facility fail to install and maintain rainbreakers on irrigation equipment? ❑Yes o ❑ NA ❑ NE
Page 2 of 3 21412015 Continued
❑ NA ❑ NE
❑NA ❑NE
❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ NA ❑ NE

Facility Number: - Date of Inspection: -
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 ETYes [] No ❑ NA ❑ 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 ❑ WE
27. Did the facility fail to secure a phosphorus loss assessments (PLAT) certification? ❑ Yes Z No ❑ NA ❑ NE
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 El"No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes 2(No ❑ NA ❑ NE
32. Were any additional problems noted which cause non-compliance of the permit or CAWMP? 0 Yes
33. Did the Reviewer/Inspector fail to discuss review/inspection with an on -site representative? ❑ Yes
34. Does the facility require a follow-up visit by the same agenc)? ❑ Yes
o ❑ NA ❑ NE
o ❑ NA ❑ NE
No ❑ NA ❑ NE
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).
FT,a�
+iC•� •�-Q�f!p
Ad
Ael
Reviewer/Inspector Name:
Reviewer/Inspector Signature:
Page 3 of 3
Date: 1!Z
O=

0 Division of Water Resources
Division of Soil and Water Conservation
❑ Other Agency
Facility Number: 400160 Facility Status: Active Permit: AWS400160 ❑ Denied Access
Inpsection Type: Compliance Inspection
Reason for visit:
Routine
Date of Visit:
09/1712014 Entry Time: 12:00 pm
Farm Name:
Rick Harper Farm
Owner:
Richard S Harper
Mailing Address:
960 Newell Rd
Inactive Or Closed Date:
County: Greene Region: Washington
Exit Time: 12:30 pm Incident #
Owner Email:
Phone: [phone]
Snow Hill NC 28580
Physical Address: 960 Newell Rd Snow Hill NC 28580
Facility Status: Compliant ❑ Not Compliant Integrator: Murphy -Brown LLC
Location of Farm: Latitude: 35' 29' 03"
From Snow Hill, take 256 N approx. 2 miles. Turn left on SR 1328. Farm is on left about 112 mile down.
Longitude: 77' 39' 30"
Question Areas:
Dischrge & Stream impacts Waste Col, Stor, & Treat Waste Application
Records and Documents Other Issues
Certified Operator: Richard S Harper Operator Certification Number: 16529
Secondary OIC(s):
On -Site Representative(s): Name Title Phone
24 hour contact name Rick Harper Phone:
Primary Inspector: Marlene Salyer Phone:
Inspector Signature: Date:
Secondary Inspector(s):
Inspection Summary:
Soil tested:912013
Waste analysis:
7-24-14= 1.12
IRR records are complete and balanced out on corn and SB
Irrigation events on wheat in fall/winter did not have a current waste analysis. Please watch carefully and take a waste sample to
cover all irrigation events.
Reviewed rainfall, freeboard, stocking, wheat yields
Lagoon looks good.
page: 1

Permit: AWS400160
Inspection Date: 09/17/14
Regulated Operations
Owner - Facility : Richard S Harper Facility Number: 400160
Inpsection Type: Compliance Inspection Reason for Visit: Routine
Design Capacity
Current promotions
Swine
Swine - Feeder to Finish 1,965
Total Design Capacity:
Total SSLW:
Waste Structures
Disignated Observed
Type Identifier Closed Date Start Date Freeboard Freeboard
Lagoon 1 03/14/94 20.40
page: 2

Permit: AWS400160 Owner - Facility : Richard 5 Harper Facility Number: 400160
Inspection Date: 09/17/14 Inspection Type: Compliance Inspection Reason for Visit: Routine
Discharges & Stream Impacts
Yes
No No Ne
1. Is any discharge observed from any part of the operation?
❑
N ❑
❑
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)
❑
M ❑
❑
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?
❑
M Cl
❑
3. Were there any observable adverse impacts or potential adverse impacts to Waters of the
❑
M ❑
❑
State other than from a discharge?
Waste Collectlon,Storage & Treatment
Yes No No 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
❑
M ❑
❑
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?
❑
❑
❑
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
❑
0 ❑
❑
maintenance or improvement?
Waste Application
Yes No No 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%/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: AWS400160 Owner - Facility : Richard S Harper Facility Number: 400160
Inspection Date: 09/17/14 Inpsection 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
❑
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
❑
N ❑
❑
determination?
17. Does the facility lack adequate acreage for land application?
❑
0 ❑
❑
18. Is there a lack of properly operating waste application equipment?
1101111
Records and Documents
Yes No Na Ne
19. Did the facility fail to have Certificate of Coverage and Permit readily available?
❑
N ❑
❑
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?
❑ ❑ ❑
If yes, check the appropriate box below.
Waste Application?
❑
Weekly Freeboard?
❑
Waste Analysis?
Soil analysis?
❑
Waste Transfers?
❑
Weather code?
❑
Rainfall?
❑
Stocking?
❑
page: 4

Permit: AWS400160 Owner - Facility : Richard S Harper Facility Number:
400160
Inspection Date: 09/17/14 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?
❑
E ❑
❑
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?
❑
01111
25. Is the facility out of compliance with permit conditions related to sludge? If yes, check the
❑
01111
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?
❑
01111
27. Did the facility fail to secure a phosphorous loss assessment (PLAT) certification?
❑
0 ❑
❑
Other Issues
Yes No Na No
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,
❑
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 tile drains exist at the facility?
❑
E ❑
❑
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 reviewfinspection with on -site representative?
❑
E ❑
❑
34. Does the facility require a follow-up visit by same agency?
❑
0 ❑
❑
page: 5

0 Division of Water Quality
❑ Division of Soil and Water Conservation
❑ Other Agency
Facility Number: 400160 Facility Status: Active Permit: AWS400160 ❑ Denied Access
Inspection Type: Compliance Inspection Inactive or Closed Date:
Reason for Visit: Routine _ _ County: Greene Region: Washington
Date of Visit: 08/20/2012 Entry Time: 12:00 PM Exit Time: 12745 PM
Farm Name: Rick Harper Farm
Owner: Richard S Hamer
Incident #:
Owner Email:
Mailing Address: 960 Newell Rd snow Hill NC 28580
Phone. 2; 2-747-$732
Physical Address: 960 Newell Rd Snow Hill NC 28580
Facility Status: E Compliant ❑ Not Compliant Integrator: Murphy -Brown LLC
Location of Farm:
Latitude:35°29'03" Longitude: 77°39'30"
From Snow Hill, take 258 N approx. 2 miles. Turn left on SR 1328. Farm is on left about 112 mile down.
Question Areas:
a Dischrge & Stream Impacts Waste Col, Stor, & Treat Waste Application
jjRecords and Documents Other Issues
Certified Operator: Richard S Harper
Secondary OIC(s):
Operator Certification Number: 16529
On -Site Representative(s): Name Title Phone
24 hour contact name Rick Harper Phone:
On -site representative Rick Harper Phone:
Primary Inspector: Marlene Salyer Phone:
Inspector Signature: Yloy__ I Date:
Secondary Inspector(s):
Inspection Summary:
Waste analysis: soil tested: 212012
9-26-11 = 1.0
7-12-12 = 1.0
IRR's on corn are complete & balanced out. Freeboard, rainfall, & crop yield are recorded.
Calibration & sludge survey due in 2012.
Looks Good!
Page: 1

Permit: AWS400160 Owner - Facility: Richard S Harper
Inspection Date. 0812012012 Inspection Type: Compliance Inspection
Facility Number: 400160
Reason for Visit: Routine
Regulated Operations Design Capacity Current Population
Swine
Lk -swine - Feeder to Finish 1 4,000 2,135
Total Design Capacity: 4,000
Total SSLW: 540,000
Waste Structures
Designed Observed
Type Identifier Closed Date Start Date Freeboard Freeboard
agoon 1 03/14194 20.40 25.40
n
Page: 2

Permit: AWS400160 Owner - Facility: Richard S Harper Facility Number: 400160
Inspection Date: 08/20/2012 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? ❑ ■ ❑ ❑
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? ❑ ■ ❑ ❑
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 property 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 ❑ ■ ❑ O
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: AWS400160 Owner - Facility: Richard S Harper Facility Number: 400160
Inspection Date: 08120/2012 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 Com, Wheat, Soybeans
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 andlor 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: AWS400160 Owner - Facility: Richard 5 Harper Facility Number: 400160
Inspection Date: 08/20/2012 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)?
❑
■ ❑ ❑
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: AWS400160 Owner - Facility: Richard S Harper Facility Number: 400160
Inspection Date: 0812012012 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? ❑ ■ ❑ ❑
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 ❑ ■ ❑ ❑
mortality rates that exceed normal rates?
29. At the time of the inspection did the facility pose an odor or air quality concem? 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 1 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?
■
1
■
Page: 6

0 Division of Water Quality
❑ Division of Soil and Water Conservation
❑ Other Agency
Facility Number: 400160 Facility Status: Active Permit: 6W5400160 D Denied Access
Inspection Type: Comoliance Inspection Inactive or Closed Date:
Reason for Visit: Routine County: Greene Region: Washington
Date of Visit: 09/2912011 Entry Time: 11:O l AM — Exit Time: 11:45 AM Incident #:
Farm Name: Rick Harper Farm , ,.. _._ .._ Owner Email:
Owner: Richard S Harper Phone: [phone]
Mailing Address: 960 Newell Rd Snow Hill NC 28580
Physical Address: 960 Newell Rd Snow Hill NC 28580
Facility Status: 0 Compliant ❑ Not Compliant Integrator: MUrohv-Brown LLC
Location of Farm:
Latitude: 35°27'07" Longitude: 77°39'33"
From Snow Hill, take 258 N approx. 2 miles. Turn left on SR 1328. Farm is on left about 112 mile down.
Question Areas:
Discharges & Stream Impacts Waste Collection & Treatment Waste Application
Records and Documents Other Issues
Certified Operator: Richard S Harper Operator Certification Number: 16529
Secondary OIC(s):
On -Site Representative(s): Name Title Phone
24 hour contact name Rick Harper Phone:
On -site representative Rick Harper Phone:
Primary Inspector: Marlene Salyer Phone:
Inspector Signature: Date:
Secondary Inspector(s):
Inspection Summary:
Waste analysis:
4-27-11 = 1.7
soil tested 2010
IRR records are complete & balanced out.
Freeboard & rainfall are recorded. Crop yield is recorded.
SS due in 2011 Calib_ in 2012
Page: 1

Permit: AWS400160 Owner - Facility: Richard S Harper Facility Number: 400160
Inspection Date: 09/29/2011 Inspection Type: Compliance Inspection Reason for Visit: Routine
Regulated Operations Design Capacity Current Population
Swine
Q Swine -Feeder to Finish 4,000 1,500
Total Design Capacity: 4,000
Total SSLW: 540,000
Waste Structures
Designed Observed
Type Identifier Closed Date Start Date Freeboard Freeboard
agoon 1 03/ 14194 20.40 22.01
Page: 2

Permit: AWS400160 Owner - Facility: Richard S Harper Facility Number: 400160
Inspection Date: 09/29/2011 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? ❑ ■ ❑ ❑
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 S Treatment Yes No NA NE
4. Is storage capacity less than adequate? 11000
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: AWS400160 Owner - Facility: Richard S Harper
Inspection Date: 09129/2011 Inspection Type: Compliance Inspection
Facility Number: 400160
Reason for Visit: Routine
Waste Application
Yes No NA NE
PAN?
❑
Is PAN > 10%/10 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
Corn, Wheat. Soybeans
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? ❑ N ❑ ❑
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?
❑ m ❑ ❑
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: AWS400160 Owner - Facility: Richard S Harper Facility Number : 400160
Inspection Date: 09/29/2011 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?
❑ 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. 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: AWS400160 Owner -Facility: Richard S Harper Facility Number. 400160
Inspection Date: 0912912011 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? ❑ ■ ❑ ❑
Otherlssues 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 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?
■
!
Page: 6

E Division of Water Quality
❑ Division of Soil and Water Conservation
❑ Other Agency
Facility Number: 400160 Facility Status: Active Permit: AWS400160 ❑ Denied Access
Inspection Type: Compliance Inspection Inactive or Closed Date:
Reason for Visit: Routine County: Greene — Region: Yoshinotgn
Date of Visit: 12/14/2010 Entry Time:10:55 AM Exit Time: Incident #:
Farm Name: Rick Harper Farm Owner Email:
Owner: Richard S HaMer Phone: [phone]
Mailing Address: 960 Newell Rd NC 285§Q
Physical Address: 960 Newell Rd Snow Hill NC 28580
Facility Status: 0 Compliant ❑ Not Compliant Integrator: Mumhv-Brown LLC
Location of Farm: Latitude: 352.7'07" Longitude: 77°39'33"
From Snow Hill, take 258 N approx. 2 miles. Turn left on SR 1328. Farm is on left about 112 mile down
Question Areas:
Discharges & Stream Impacts Waste Collection & Treatment Waste Application
Records and Documents Other Issues
Certified Operator. Richard S Harper Operator Certification Number: 16529
Secondary OIC(s):
On -Site Representative(s): Name Title Phone
24 hour contact name Rick Harper Phone:
On -site representative Rick Harper Phone:
Primary Inspector: Marlene Salyer
Inspector Signature:
Secondary Inspector(s):
Inspection Summary:
waste analysis:
1-20-10 = 1.3
10-12-09 = 1.2
one pulled in NOV soil tested 2010
IRR records are complete and balanced out. SS 2010 Caliberation 2010
#25 Please do appendix 3 on all future sludge surveys.
Freeboard range: 1/22/10 = 20" to 57" on 8114/10
Phone:
Date:
Page: 1

Permit: AWS400160 Owner - Facility: Richard S Harper Facility Number: 400160
Inspection Date: 10/10/2007 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?
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 (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: AWS400160 Owner - Facility: Richard S Harper
Inspection Date: 10/10/2007 Inspection Type: Compliance Inspection
Facility Number: 400160
Reason for Visit: Routine
Regulated Operations Design Capacity Current Population
Swine
O Swine - Feeder to Finish 4,000 2,500
Total Design Capacity: 4,000
Total SSLW: 540,000
Waste Structures
Type Identifier Closed Date Start Date Designed Freeboard Observed Freeboard
goon 1 03/14/94 20.40 44.00
Page: 2

Division of Water Quality
Division of Soil and Water Conservation
❑ Other Agency
Facility Number: 400160 Facility Status: Active Permit: AWS400160 ❑ Denied Access
Inspection Type: Compliance Inspection Inactive or Closed Date:
Reason for Visit: Routine _ County: GreeneRegion: Washington
Date of Visit: 10/10/2007 Entry Time:01:30 PM Exit Time:
Farm Name Farm
Owner: Richard S Hasoer
Mailing Address. 960 Newell Rd Znow
Incident #:
Owner Email:
Phone:[phone]
Physical Address: 960 Newell Rd Snaw LJill NC 28580 _
Facility Status: ❑ Compliant ❑ Not Compliant Integrator:
Location of Faun:
Latitude: 35'27'07" Longitude: 77° '3 "
From Snow Hill, take 258 N approx. 2 miles. Turn left on SR 1328. Farm is on left about 1/2 mile down.
Question Areas:
Discharges & Stream Impacts Waste Collection & Treatment Waste Application
Records and Documents Other Issues
Certified Operator: Richard S Harper Operator Certification Number: 16529
Secondary O1C(s):
On -Site Representative(s): Name Title Phone
24 hour contact name Rick Harper Phone:
On -site representative Rick Harper Phone:
Primary Inspector: Marlene Salyer Phone:
Inspector Signature: Date:
Secondary Inspector(s):
Inspection Summary:
waste analysis:
1-30-07 = 1.9
5-16-07 = 1.8
9-12-07 = 1.7
Page: 1

Facility Number: 467 — Date of Inspection
Required Records & Documents
19. Did the facility fail to have Certificate of Coverage & Permit readily available? ❑ Yes O No ❑ NA ❑ NE
20. Does the facility fail to have all components of the CAWMP readily available? If yes, check ❑ Yes B No ❑ NA ❑ NE
the appropirate box. ❑ WUP ❑ Checklists ❑ Design ❑Maps ❑Other
21.
Does record keeping need improvement? If yes, check the appropriate box below.
❑ Yes
[a o
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Waste Application ❑ Weekly Freeboard ❑ Waste Analysis ❑ Soil Analysis ❑ Waste Transfers
❑ Annual Certification
❑ Rainfall ❑ Stocking ❑ Crop Yield ❑ 120 Minute Inspections ❑ Monthly and i"
Rain Inspections ❑
Weather Code
22.
Did the facility fail to install and maintain a rain gauge?
❑ Yes
"No
❑ NA
❑ NE
23.
If selected, did the facility fail to install and maintain rainbreakers on irrigation equipment?
❑ Yes❑_,/No
[I NA
El NE
24.
Did the facility fail to calibrate waste application equipment as required by the permit?
❑ Yes
LL�1 No
❑ NA
❑ NE
25.
Did the facility fail to conduct a sludge survey as required by the permit?
❑ Yes
@ No
ElNA
ElNE
26.
Did the facility fail to have an actively certified operator in charge?
ElYes
D//o
❑ NA
❑ NE
27.
Did the facility fail to secure a phosphorus loss assessment (PLAT) certification?
❑ Yes
lrJ No
❑ NA
❑ NE
Other Issues
28. Were any additional problems noted which cause non-compliance of the permit or CAWMP?
❑ Yes
JZ/No
❑ NA
❑ NE
29. Did the facility fail to properly dispose of dead animals within 24 hours and/or document
❑ Yes
U No
❑ NA
❑ NE
and report the mortality rates that were higher than normal?
30. At the time of the inspection did the facility pose an odor or air quality concern?
❑ Yes
U No
❑ NA
❑ NE
If yes, contact a regional Air Quality representative immediately
31. Did the facility fail to notify the regional office of emergency situations as required by
❑ Yes
{RNo
❑ NA
❑ NE
General Permit? (ie/ discharge, freeboard problems, over application)
32. Did Reviewer/Inspector fail to discuss review/inspection with an on -site representative?
❑ Yes
LhIN ❑ NA
❑ NE
33. Does facility require a follow-up visit by sanic agency?
❑ Yes
Nu
❑ NA
❑ NE
Comments and/or
Page 3 of 3 12128104

Facility Number:
Date of Inspection
Waste Collection & Treatment
4. Is storage capacity (structural plus storm storage plus heavy rainfall) less than adequate? ❑ Yes QNo ❑ 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):
5. Are there any immediate threats to the integrity of any of the structures observed? ❑ Yes E2No ❑ NA ❑ NE
(ie/ large trees, severe erosion, seepage, etc.)
6. Are there structures on -site which are not properly addressed and/or managed ❑ Yes hd No ❑ NA ❑ NE
through a waste management or closure plan?
If any of questions 4-6 were answered yes, and the situation poses an immediate public health or environmental threat, notify DWQ
7. Do any of the structures need maintenance or improvement? ❑ Yes ®No ❑ NA ❑ NE
8. Do any of the stuctures lack adequate markers as required by the permit? ❑ Yes LiG No ❑ 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 PdNo ❑ NA ❑ NE
maintenance or improvement?
Waste Application
10. Are there any required buffers, setbacks, or compliance alternatives that need ❑ Yes 2 No ❑ NA ❑ NE
maintenance/improvement? ,//
11. Is there evidence of incorrect application? if yes, check the appropriate box below. El Yes E No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Excessive Ponding ❑ Hydraulic Overload ❑ Frozen Ground ❑ Heavy Metals (Cu, Zn, etc.)
❑ PAN ❑ PAN > 10% or 10 Ibs ❑ Total Phosphorus ❑ Failure to Incorporate Manure/Sludge into Bare Soil
❑ vutsidc of Acceptable Crop Windnw ❑ Evidence of Wind Drift ❑ Application Outside of Area
12. Crop type(s) C — / 5r, GtJ — f k�f Q, 3 .5,9` �
13. Soil type(s)
14. Do the receiving crops differ from those designated in the CAWMP?
❑ Yes VN
❑ NA
El NE
15. Does the receiving crop and/or land application site need improvement?
El Yes bQZo
❑ NA
El NE
16. Did the facility fail to secure and/or operate per the irrigation design or wettable acre determination?❑ Yes L7d
❑ NA
❑ NE
/
17. Does the facility lack adequate acreage for land application?
❑ Yes CIZo
Cl NA
❑ NE
18. Is there a lack of properly operating waste application equipment?
❑ Yes
❑ NA
❑ NE
Comments (refer to question ft 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):
WQQ.�L�
cl e9f 1��'
Reviewer/Inspector Name `o Lo Phone: 9���3Fr1�6
Reviewer/Inspector Signature: Date: d — —
­1
�u5V c VJ -,

W Division of Water Quality
Facility Number O Division of Soil and Water Conservation
Other Agency
Type of Visit 0 Compliance Inspection 0 Operation Review 0 Structure Evaluation 0 Technical Assistance
Reason for Visit 0 Routine 0 Complaint 0 Follow up 0 Referral 0 Emergency 0 Other ❑ Denied Access
Date of Visit: d — �%' Q / Arrival Time: (� Departure Time: County: Region: l
Farm Name:Owner Email:
Owner Name: Phone: / j
Mailing Address: La= 7'��G(�t'�j� ztl G
Physical Address: /
Facility Contact: �Title:
Onsite Representative:
Certified Operator:
Back-up Operator:
Phone No: 'P 9 -,
Integrator• .
Operator Certification Number:
Back-up Certification Number:
Location of Farm: Latitude: 0 e = ` = a Longitude: = ° = t =
is
Swine
Wean to Finish
Wean to Feeder
Feeder to Finish
Farrow to Wean
Farrow to Feeder
Farrow to Finish
Gilts
Boars
Other
❑ Other
Design Current Design Current
Capacity Population Wet Poultry Capacity Population
❑ La er
❑ Non-Layet
.rA A A —J �---1 - - -- - -
Dry Poultry
❑ Layers
❑ Non -La ers
❑ Pullets
❑ Turkeys
❑ 'Turkey POURS
❑ Other
Discharges & Stream Impacts
1. Is any discharge observed from any part of the operation?
Discharge originated at: ❑ Structure ❑ Application Field ❑ Other
a. Was the conveyance man-made?
b. Did the discharge reach waters of the State? (If yes, notify DWQ)
Design Current
Cattle Capacity Population
❑ Dairy Cow
❑ Dairy Calf
!__I Dairy rlci,ej
❑ Dry Cow
❑ Non -Dairy
❑ Beef Stocker
❑ Beef Feeder
❑ Beef Brood Cow
c. What is the estimated volume that reached waters of the State (gallons)?
Number of Structures:
d. Does discharge bypass the waste management system? (If yes, notify DWQ)
2. Is there evidence of a past discharge from any part of the operation?
3. Were there any adverse impacts or potential adverse impacts to the Waters of the State
other than from a discharge?
❑ Yes To ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes
❑ No ❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Yes
❑ No ❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Yes
❑ No ❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Yes
UNo< ❑ NA
❑ NE
El Yes
�❑ NA
❑ NE
12128104 Continued

Permit. AWS400160 Owner - Facility: Richard S Harper
Inspection Date: 11/06/2008 Inspection Type: Compliance Inspection
Facility Number: 400160
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?
❑
■ C3
Q
32. Did Reviewer/Inspector fail to discuss review/inspection with on -site representative?
0
■ 0
Q
33. Does facility require a fallow -up visit by same agency?
❑
■ Q
❑
Page: 6

Permit: AWS400160 Owner - Facility: Richard S Harper
Facility Number. 400160
Inspection Date: 11/06/2008 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?
Q
Weather code?
❑
Weekly Freeboard?
❑
Transfers?
Q
Rainfall?
❑
Inspections after > 1 inch rainfall & monthly?
❑
Waste Analysis?
❑
Annual soil analysis?
Q
Crop yields?
Q
Stocking?
Q
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)? ❑
■ Q ❑
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?
Cl
■ ❑ ❑
27. Did the facility fail to secure a phosphorous loss assessment (PLAT) certification?
❑
■ ❑ ❑
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 11000
Quality representative immediately.
Page: 5

Permit: AWS400160 Owner - Facility: Richard S Harper Facility Number, 400160
Inspection Date: 11/06/2008 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 Com, Wheat, Soybeans
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 andlor 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: AWS400160 Owner - Facility: Richard S Harper Facility Number: 400160
Inspection Date: 11/06/2008 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) ❑ ■ ❑ ❑
Z 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 ❑ 000
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 altematives 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: AWS400160 Owner - Facility: Richard S Harper Facility Number: 400160
Inspection Date: 11/0612008 Inspection Type: Compliance Inspection Reason for Visit: Routine
Regulated Operations Design Capacity Current Population
Swine
Q Swine - Feeder to Finish 4,000 3,835
Total Design Capacity: 4,000
Total SSi_W: 540,000
Waste Structures
Type Identifier Closed Date Start Date Designed Freeboard Observed Freeboard
�agoon 1 03/14/94 20.40 44.00
Page: 2

Division of Water Quality
❑ Division of Soil and Water Conservation
❑ Other Agency
Facility Number: 400160 Facility Status: Active Permit: AWS400160 ❑ Denied Access
Inspection Type: Comr)lianoe Inspection Inactive or Closed Date:
Reason for Visit: Routine _ County: GreengRegion: Washington
Date of Visit: 11 L0612008 Entry Time:11 QG AM - Exit Time:
Incident #:
Farm Name: Rick Harper Farm Owner Email:
Owner: Richard S Harper Phone: -7 7
Mailing Address: 26Q Newell
Physical Address: 960 Newell Rd _ Snow_FWl NG28580
Facility Status: ❑ Compliant ❑ Not Compliant Integrator: Premium Standard Farms Of North Carolina Inc
Location of Farm:
Latitude:35°27'07" Longitude:77°39'33"
From Snow Hill, take 258 N approx. 2 miles. Turn left on SR 1328. Farm is on left about 1/2 mile down.
Question Areas:
Discharges & Stream Impacts Waste Collection & Treatment Waste Application
Records and Documents Other Issues
Certified Operator: Richard S Harper Operator Certification Number: 16529
Secondary OIC(sj:
On -Site Representative(s): Name Title Phone
24 hour contact name Ride Harper Phone:
On -site representative Rick harper Phone:
Primary Inspector: Marlene Salyer Phone:
Inspector Signature: Date:
Secondary Inspector(s):
Inspection Summary:
waste analysis:
6-M8 = 2.5
2.5.08 = 2.1 4.6
soil test is current
Looks Good!
Page: 1

Permit: AWS400160 Owner - Facility: Richard S Harper Facility Number : 400160
Inspection Date: 10129I2009 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? ❑ ■ ❑ ❑
32. Did Reviewer/Inspector fail to discuss reviewlinspection with on -site representative? ❑ ■ ❑ ❑
33. Does facility require a follow-up visit by same agency? ❑ ■ ❑ ❑
Page: 6

Permit: AWS400160 Owner - Facility: Richard S Harper Facility Number: 400100
Inspection Date: 10/29/2009 Inspection Type: Compliance Inspection Reason for Visit: Routine
Records and DocUrllentS Yes No NA NE
Checklists? Q
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?
Q
Stocking?
❑
Annual Certification Form (NPDES only)?
Q
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)?
Q ■ ❑
Cl
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?
❑ 0 ❑
❑
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?
❑ ■ ❑
❑
Yaa NA NO
NF
28. Were any additional problems noted which cause non-compliance of the Permit or CAWMP? Q E Q Q
29. Did the facility fail to properly dispose of dead animals within 24 hours and/or document and report those ❑ ■ ❑ Q
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 ❑ ■ Q ❑
Quality representative immediately.
Page: 5

Permit: AWS400160 Owner - Facility: Richard S Harper Facility Number : 400160
Inspection Date: 10/29/2009 Inspection Type: Compliance Inspection Reason for Visit: Routine
Cischarces $ Stream Impacts Yes No NA NE
1. Is any discharge observed from any part of the operation? ❑ ■ ❑ ❑
Discharge originated at:
Structure Q
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 ❑ 0110
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 Q ■ ❑ ❑
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: AWS400160 Owner - Facility: Richard S Harper Facility Number: 400160
Inspection Date: 10/29/2009 Inspection Type: Compliance Inspection Reason for Visit: Routine
Regulated Operations Design Capacity Current Population
Swine
Swine - Feeder to Finish 4,000 0
Total Design Capacity: 4,000
Total SSLW: 540,000
Waste Structures
Type Identifier Closed Date Start Date Designed Freeboard Observed Freeboard
agoon
1
03/14/94 20.40
27.00
Page: 2

E Division of Water Quality
❑ Division of Soil and Water Conservation
❑ Other Agency
Facility Number: 400160 Facility Status: Active Permit: 6WS400160 ❑ Denied Access
Inspection Type: Compliance Insoection Inactive or Closed Date:
Reason for Visit: R12Wtine County: Greene Region: Washington
Date of Visit: 10/29/2009 Entry Time:10750 AM Exit Time:
Farm Name: Rick Harper Farm
Owner: Richard S Harper
Incident #.
Owner Email:
Mailing Address: 960 Newell Rd anow Hill NC 28580
Physical Address: 9QQ Newell Rd Snow Hill NC 28580
Facility Status: N Compliant ❑ Not Compliant Integrator: Murnhv-Brawn. LLC
Location of Farm:
Phone: [phone]
Latitude.35"27'07r, Longitude:77°39'33"
From Snow Hill, take 258 N approx. 2 miles. Turn left on SR 1328. Farm is on left about 112 mile down.
Question Areas:
Discharges & Stream Impacts Waste Collection & Treatment Waste Application
Records and Documents Other issues
Certified Operator: Richard S Harper Operator Certification Number: 16529
Secondary OIC(si:
On -Site Represent2*ve(s): Name Title Phone
24 hour contact name Rick Harper Phone:
On -site representative Rick Harper Phone:
Primary Inspector: Marlene Salyer Phone:
Inspector Signature: Date:
Secondary Inspector(s):
Inspection Summary:
Waste analysis:]
8-14-09 1.6
5-11-09 2.9
soil tested in 2008 and having samples pulled today
calibration 2007 and sludge survey 2008; remember to do the calibration and sludge survey for 2009
0 animals because of cleaning out houses
Page: 1

Permit: AWS400160 Owner - Facility: Richard S Harper Facility Number: 400160
Inspection Date: 1211412010 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 ■ Q 0
32. Did Reviewer/inspector fail to discuss review/inspection with on -site representative? ❑ ■ Q Q
33. Does facility require a follow-up visit by same agency? Q ■ Q Q '
Page: 6

Permit: AWS400160 Owner - Facility: Richard S Harper Facility Number: 400160
Inspection Date: 12/14/2010 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
Q
❑■❑❑
Waste Application?
❑
120 Minute inspections?
❑
Weather code?
❑
Weekly Freeboard?
❑
Transfers?
❑
Rainfall?
Q
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?
❑
■ ❑
Q
Y..
N. 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

r
Permit: AWS400160 owner - Facility: Richard S Harper
Facility Number: 400160
Inspection Date: 1211412010 Inspection Type: Compliance Inspection
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
Com, Wheat, Soybeans
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 1301113
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? 110 ❑ ❑
If yes, check the appropriate box below.
WUP? ❑
Page: 4

Permit: AWS400160 Owner - Facility: Richard S Harper Facility Number: 400160
Inspection Date: 12/1412010 Inspection Type: Compliance Inspection Reason for Visit: Routine
Discharges S 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 (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 001111
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: AWS400160 Owner - Facility: Richard S Harper Facility Number: 400160
Inspection Date: 1211412010 Inspection Type: Compliance Inspection Reason for Visit: Routine
Regulated Operations Design Capacity Current Population
Swine
Q Swine - Feeder to Finish 41000 3,600
Total Design Capacity: 4,000
Total SSLW: 540,000
Waste Stnictures
Type Identifier Closed Date Start Date Designed Freeboard Observed Freeboard
agoon 1 1 03/14/94 1 1 20.40
Page: 2

Permit: AWS400160 Owner - Facility: Richard S Harper
Inspection Date: 10/10/2007 Inspection Type: Compliance Inspeclion
Facility Number: 400160
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 crap window?
❑
Evidence of wind drift?
❑
Application outside of application area?
❑
Crop Type 1
Cam, Wheat, Soybeans
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
r
Sail 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: AWS400160 Owner - Facility: Richard S Harper Facility Number: 400160
Inspection Oats: 10/10/2007 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?
❑
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?
❑
■
❑
❑
Vnc
N.
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: AWS400160 Owner - Facility: Richard S Harper
Inspection Date: 10/10/2007 Inspection Type: Compliance Inspection
Other Issues
M. 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. 400160
Reason for Visit: Routine
Page: 6

W Division of Water Quality
Facility Number l} t7 0 Division of Soil and Water Conservation
0 Other Agencv
Type of Visit 40 Compliance Inspection 0 Operation Review 0 Structure Evaluation 0 Technical Assistance
Reason for Visit 0 Routine 0 Complaint 0 Follow up 0 Referral 0 Emergency 0 Other ❑ Denied Access
Date of Visit: Arrival Time: Departure Time: County: Region: aklfio-
Farm Name: Owner Email:
Owner Name: Phone: r��/?Y7�r�%3o2
Mailing Address:rd
Physical Address:
Facility Contact: Title: Phone No: 3.y/ `9 2 2
Onsite Representative: Integrator: ��
Certified Operator: # ni,✓ Operator Certification Number: /
Back-up Operator:
Back-up Certification Number:
Location of Farm: Latitude: = o = g ❑ « Longitude: = ° = 6 = L/
Design Current Design Current
Swine Capacity Population Wet Poultry Capacity Population Cattle
❑ Wean to Finish
❑ Wean to Feeder
Feeder to Finish 4QMR—
❑ Farrow to Wean
❑ Farrow to Feeder
❑ Farrow to Finish
❑ Gilts
❑ Boars
Other
❑ Other
❑ Layer
❑ Non -La et
Dry Poultry
❑ Layers
❑ Non -Layers
❑ Pullets
❑ Turkeys
❑ Turkey Puuets
❑ Other
Discharges & Stream Impacts
1. Is any discharge observed from any part of the operation?
Discharge originated at: ❑ Structure ❑ Application Field ❑ Other
a. Was the conveyance man-made?
b. Did the discharge reach waters of the State? (If yes, notify DWQ)
Design Current
Capacity Population
❑ Dairy Cow
❑ Dairy Calf
❑ Dairy Heifer
❑ Dry Cow
❑ Non -Dairy
❑ Beef Stocker
❑ Beef feeder
❑ Beef Brood Co
c. What is the estimated volume that reached waters of the State (gallons)?
Number of Structures:
d. Does discharge bypass the waste management system? (If yes, notify DWQ)
2. is there evidence of a past discharge from any part of the operation?
3. Were there any adverse impacts or potential adverse impacts to the Waters of the State
other than from a discharge?
❑ Yes LV1 No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes
❑ No
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Yes
❑ No
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Yes
❑ No
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Yes
❑ NA
❑ NE
El Yes
YNo
❑ NA
❑ NE
12128104 Continued

Facility Number: 110-1,60
Date of Inspection
Waste Collection & Treatment
4. Is storage capacity (structural plus storm storage plus heavy rainfall) less than adequate?
a. If yes, is waste level into the structural freeboard?
Structure 1
Identifier:
Structure 2 Structure 3 Structure 4
❑ Yes V No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes ❑ No ❑ NA ❑ NE
Structure 5 Structure 6
Spillway?:
Designed Freeboard (in):
Observed Freeboard (in):
5. Are there any immediate threats to the integrity of any of the structures observed? ❑ Yes No ❑ NA ❑ NE
(ie/ large trees, severe erosion, seepage, etc.)
6. Are there structures on -site which are not properly addressed and/or managed ❑ Yes No ❑ NA ❑ NE
through a waste management or closure plan?
If any of questions 4-6 were answered yes, and the situation poses an immediate public health or environmental threat, notify DWQ
7. Do any of the structures need maintenance or improvement?
❑ Yes
ETNNo
❑ NA
❑ NE
8. Do any of the stuctures lack adequate markers as required by the permit?
❑ Yes
hd No
❑ 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
5Z'No
❑ NA
❑ NE
maintenance or improvement?
Waste Application
10. Are there any required buffers, setbacks, or compliance alternatives that need
❑ Yes
U/No
❑ NA
❑ NE
maintenance/improvement?
11. Is there evidence of incorrect application? If yes, check the appropriate box below.
❑ Yes
lvNo
❑ 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 Drifl ❑ Application Outside of Area
12. Crop type(s) f� rt�(a//a.3 /7 (dL'..Itd�
13. Soil type(s)
14. Do the receiving crops differ from those designated in the CAWMP?
❑ Yes
NNo
[I NA
El NE
15. Does the receiving crop and/or land application site need improvement?
Yes
Elhd
,. _
No
❑ NA
❑ NE
16. Did the facility fail to secure and/or operate per the irrigation design or wettable acre
determination?[] Yes
N
❑ NA
❑ NE
17. Does the facility lack adequate acreage for land application?
El Yes
❑ NA
El NE
18. Is there a lack of properly operating waste application equipment?
ElL�/J Yes
,V. /No
No
❑ NA
❑ NE
Comments (refer to question ft 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):
Wl& -
� -3a - a7 = l• 9
Reviewer/Inspector Name Phone:
Reviewer/Inspector Signature: Date:
I2128104 Continued

Facility Number: //dd — 0 Date of Inspection
Required Records & Documents
19. Did the facility fail to have Certificate of Coverage & Permit readily available? ❑ Yes ❑ NA ❑ NE
20. Does the facility fail to have all components of the CAWMP readily available? If yes, check ❑ Yes No ❑ NA ❑ NE
the appropirate box. ❑ WUP ❑ Checklists ❑ Design El Maps El Other
21.
Does record keeping need improvement? If yes, check the appropriate box below.
❑ Yes
V/No
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Waste Application ❑ Weekly Freeboard ❑ Waste Analysis ❑ Soil Analysis ❑ Waste Transfers
❑ Annual Certification
❑ Rainfall ❑ Stocking ❑ Crop Yield ❑ 120 Minute Inspections ❑ Monthly and V
Rain Inspections
Weather Code
22.
Did the facility fail to install and maintain a rain gauge?
❑ Yes
7
❑ NA
El NE
23.
If selected, did the facility fail to install and maintain rainbreakers on irrigation equipment?
El Yes
❑ NA
❑ NE
24.
Did the facility fail to calibrate waste application equipment as required by the permit?
❑ Yes
o
❑ NA
El NE
25.
Did the facility fail to conduct a sludge survey as required by the permit?
El
o
El NA
El NE
26.
Did the facility fail to have an actively certified operator in charge?
❑ Yes
❑ NA
ElNE
27.
Did the facility fail to secure a phosphorus loss assessment (PLAT) certification?
ElYes
2 rNo
❑ NA
❑ NE
Other Issues
28. Were any additional problems noted which cause non-compliance of the permit or CAWMP?
❑ Yes
G3N
El NA
El NE
29. Did the facility fail to properly dispose of dead animals within 24 hours and/or document
El Yes
No
❑ NA
❑ NE
and report the mortality rates that were higher than normal?
30. At the time of the inspection did the facility pose an odor or air quality concern?
❑ Yes
M No
❑ NA
❑ NE
If yes, contact a regional Air Quality representative immediately
by
31. Did the facility fail to notify the regional office of emergency situations as required
❑ Yes
L�'J N
El NA
❑ NE
General Permit? (ie/ discharge, freeboard problems, over application)
32. Did Reviewer/Inspector fail to discuss review/inspection with an on -site representative?
❑ Yes
o
El NA
El NE
33. Does facility require a follow-up visit by same agency?
❑ Yes
WNo
❑ NA
❑ NE
Comments and/or Drawings:
12128104

Division of Water Quality
Division of Soil and Water Conservation
❑ Other Agency
Facility Number: 400160 Facility Status: Active Permit: NCA240160 ❑ Denied Access
Inspection Type: Compliance Inspection Inactive or Closed Date:
Reason for Visit: Routine „ County: Greene Region: Washington
Date of Visit: 03/07/2006 Entry TIme:02Q0 PM Exit Time: . Incident 9:
Farm Name: Rick Harper Farm Owner Email:
Owner: Richard S Harper
Phone:252-747-$Z,J2 _
Mailing Address: 960 Newell Rd Snow Hill NC 28580
Physical Address:
Facility Status: ❑ Compliant ❑ Not Compliant
Location of Farm:
Integrator:
Latitude:35"27'07" Longitude:77°39'33"
From Snow Hill, take 258 N approx. 2 miles. Turn left on SR 1328. Farm is on left about 1/2 mile down.
Question Areas:
Discharges & Stream Impacts Waste Collection & Treatment Waste Application
Records and Documents Other Issues
Certified Operator: Richard S Harper Operator Certification Number: 16529
Secondary OIC(s):
On -Site Representative(s): Name Title Phone
24 hour contact name Phone:
On -site representative Phone:
Primary Inspector: Marlene Salyer Phone:
Inspector Signature:
Secondary Inspector(s):
Inspection Summary: .
Soil test 12-12-05 & PLAT
Waste analyses:lbs N11000gal
4-29-05 = 2.8
7-20-05 = 2.6
11-7-05 = 1.6
1-17-05 = 2.1
Date:
Page: 1

Permit: NCA240160 . Owner - Facility: Richard S Harper Facility Number. 400160
Inspection Date: 03/0712006 Inspection Type: Compliance Inspection Reason for Visit: Routine
Regulated Operations Design Capacity Current Population
Swine
Swine - Feeder to Finish 4,000 3,882
Total Design Capacity: 4,000
Total SSLW: 540,000
Waste Structures
Type Identifier Closed Date Start Date Designed Freeboard Observed Freeboard
lagoon
1
03/14/94
20.40
30.00
Page: 2

Permit: NCA240160 Owner - Facility: Richard S Harper Facility Number: 400160
Inspection Date: 03/07MO6 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
11000
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
C�

Permit: NCA240160 Owner - Facility: Richard S Harper
Inspection Date: 03/07/2006 Inspection Type: Compliance inspection
Facility Number: 400160
Reason for Visit: Routine
Waste Application
Yes No
NA NE '
PAN?
Q
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
Com, Wheat, Soybeans
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?
❑ ■
❑ ❑
1B. 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?
❑ 0110
20. Does the facility fail to have all components of the CAWMP readily available?
❑ ■
Cl ❑
If yes, check the appropriate box below.
WUP?
❑
Page: 4

Permit. NCA240160 Owner - Facility: Richard S Harper
Facility Number : 400160
Inspection Date: 03/07/2006 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?
❑
■ ❑ ❑
If yes, check the appropriate box below.
Waste Application?
❑
120 Minute inspections?
Q
Weather code?
❑
Weekly Freeboard?
❑
Transfers?
❑
Rainfall?
Q
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?
❑
000
23. If selected, did the facility fail to install and maintain a rainbreaker on irrigation equipment (NPDES only)? ❑
000
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?
Q
■ 110
27. Did the facility fail to secure a phosphorous loss assessment (PLAT) certification?
❑
■ Q ❑
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 Q ■ Q Q
mortality rates that exceed normal rates?
30. Afthe time of the inspection did the facility pose an air quality concern? If yes, contact a regional Air ❑ ■ ❑ ❑
Quality representative immediately.
Page: 5

Permit: NCA240160 Owner - Facility: Richard S Harper Facility Number : 400150
Inspection Date: 03/07/2006 Inspection Type: Compliance Inspection Reason for Visit: Routine
i►.�__ ______ you Mn NA NP
31. Did the facility fail to notify regional DWQ of emergency situations as required by Permit? 0000
32. Did Reviewer/Inspector fail to discuss reviewfinspection with on -site representative? 0000
33. Does facility require a follow-up visit by same agency? 0000
Page: 6

Type of Visit O Compliance Inspection O Operation Review Q Lagoon Evaluation
Reason for Visit O Routine O Complaint O Follow up O Emergency Notification O Other ❑ Denied Access
Facility Number 40 1b0 Date of Visit: Time:
ZIZ6/2004 9:00
O Not Operational 0 Below Threshold
® Permitted' IffCertifiecr 0 Conditionally Certified [3 Registered Date Last Operated or Above Threshold: .................
Farm Name: FUckHa1C9Ar,Eat(1...................................................................................... County: fjxCsrm .............................................. 'S'.t3 ?.......
OwnerName: HICk.................... ................. Harper ........................................................ Phone No: Z52:7.47-#73.2................................... ........................
Mailing Address: 9.6Yg.W��l.Qt�............................................................................. SJgAW.'lll..NC........... ............................................ z5{1..............
FacilityContact: Rick....................................................................Title:................................................................ Phone No:...................................................
Onsite Representative: RjgJ......................................................... Integra to r:l'xelalilulAl. l>xl��X ,aKpCi&.lR K.R�xlx..........
Certified Operator:R,jrhArd.S............................. Uarpu ............................................. Operator Certification Number:16129..... ....... _...............
Location of Farm:
From Snow Hill, take 258 N approx. 2 miles. Turn left on SR 1328. Farm is on left about 112 mile down.
® Swine ❑ Poultry ❑ Cattle ❑ Horse Latitude 35 27 ' 0u Longitude 77 39 33 K
Design Current
Design Current
Design Current
Swine Capacity Population
Poultry
Capacity Population Cattle
Capacity Population
can to Feeder
❑ Layer
❑ Dairy
® Feeder to Finish
4000
4000
❑ Non -Layer
I
❑ Non -Dairy
❑ Farrow to Wean
❑ Farrow to Feeder
❑Other
❑ Farrow to Finish
Total Design Capacity
4,000
❑ Gilts
Total SSLW
540,000
❑ Boars
Number of Lagoons I 1
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? ElYes ® 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 b
Identifier: ..............................................................................
Freeboard (inches): 29

1 i/ 1 f./VJ 4U1lJi�/i{C1s
Facility Number: 40-160 Date of Inspection F2 /26 220 44
5. Are there any immediate threats to the integrity of any of the structures observed? (ie/ trees, severe erosion, ❑ Yes ® No
seepage, etc.)-
6. Are there structures on -site which are.not properly addressed and/or managed through a waste management or ❑ Yes ® No
closure plan?
(If any of questions 4-6 was answered yes, and the situation poses an
immediate public health or environmental threat, notify DWQ)
7. Do any of the structures need maintenance/improvement? ❑ Yes ® No
8. Does any part of the waste management system other than waste structures require maintenancelimprovement? ❑ Yes ® No
9. Do any stuctures lack adequate, gauged markers with required maximum and minimum liquid level ❑ Yes ® No
elevation markings?
Waste APRlication
10. Are there any buffers that need maintenance/improvement? ❑ Yes ® No
11. Is there evidence of over application? if yes, check the appropriate box below. ❑ Yes ® No
❑ Excessive Ponding ❑ PAN ❑ Hydraulic Overload ❑ Frozen Ground ❑ Copper and/or Zinc
12. Crop type Corn, Soybeans, Wheat
13. Do the receiving crops differ with those designated in the Certified Anirnal 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 atlor below ❑ Yes ❑ No
liquid level of lagoon or storage pond with no agitation?
18. Are there any dead animals not disposed of properly within 24 hours? ❑ Yes ® No
19. Is there any evidence of wind drift during land application? (i.e. residue on neighboring vegetation, asphalt, ❑ Yes ® No
roads, building structure, and/or public PIMPS y)
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
�8r1eI1e D:''_SalyeI;�
Reviewer/Inspector Signature: ly/,�,,,��„�� ,d�.�r�c Date: 13

12112103
Facility Number: 40-16Q Date of Inspection 2/26/2004
Continued
Required Records & Documents
21. Fail to have Certificate of Coverage & General Permit or other Permit readily available?
22. Does the facility fail to have all components of the Certified Animal Waste Management Plan readily available?
(ie/ WUP, checklists, design, maps, etc.)
23. Does record keeping need improvement? If yes, check the appropriate box below.
❑ Waste Application ❑ Freeboard ❑ Waste Analysis ❑ Soil Sampling
Ygs
❑ Yes ®Nb
® Yes NO , Fh
24. Is facility not in compliance with any applicable setback criteria in effect at the time of design?
25. Did the facility fail to have a actively certified operator in charge?
26. Fail to notify regional DWQ of emergency situations as required by General Permit?
(ie/ discharge, freeboard problems, over application)
27. Did. Reviewer/Inspector fail to discuss review/inspection with on -site representative?
28. Does facility require a follow-up visit by same agency?
29. Were any additional problems noted which cause noncompliance of the Certified AWMP?
NPDES Permitted Facilities
30. Is the facility covered under a NPDES Permit? (if no, skip questions 31-35)
31. If selected, did the facility fail to install and maintain rainbreakers on irrigation equipment?
32. Did the facility fail to install and maintain a rain gauge?
33. Did the facility fail to conduct an annual sludge survey?
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes ® No
❑.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.

Technical Assistance Site Visit Report
Division of Soil and Water Conservation
O Natural Resources Conservation Service
0 Soil and Water Conservation District
Q Other...
Facility Number 40 - 160 Date: 9130103 Time: 1 1140 Time On Farm: 60 WARO
Farm Name Rick Harper Farm County Greene
Mailing Address 950 Newell Road
Onsite
Representative Michele Christensen
Type Of Visit
® Operation Review
❑ Compliance Inspection (pilot only)
❑ Technical Assistance
❑ Confirmation for Removal
❑ No Animals -Date Last Operated:
❑ Operating below threshold
IN Swine ❑ Poultry ❑ Cattle ❑ Horse
Design Current
Capacity Population
❑ Wean to Feeder
® Feeder to Finish
❑ Farrow to Wean
❑ Farrow to Feeder
❑ Farrow to Finish
❑ Gilts
❑ Boars
4000
4000
Snow Hill NC
Phone: [phone]
Integrator lPremium Standard Farms
Purpose Of Visit
O Routine
O Response to DWQ/DENR referral
O Response to DSWC/SWCD referral
O Response to complaint/local referral
O Requested by prod ucerfintegrator
O Follow-up
O Emergency
O Other...
Design Current
C2D26W Population
❑ Layer
❑ Non -Layer
❑ Dairy
❑ Non -Dairy
❑ Other
28580
GENERAL QUESTIONS:
1. Is waste discharging from any part of the operation and reaching surface waters or wetlands? ❑ yes ® no
2. Is there evidence of a past waste discharge from any part of the operation that waste reached ❑ yes ® no
surface waters or wetlands?
3. Does any problem pose an immediate threat to the integrity of the waste structure (large trees, ❑ yes ® no
seepage, severe erosion, etc.)?
4. Is there evidence of nitrogen over application, hydraulic overloading or excessive ponding ❑ yes ® no
requiring DWQ notification?
5. Is there evidence of improper dead animal disposal that poses a threat to the environment ❑ yes ®no
and/or public health?
6. Is the waste level within the structural freeboard elevation range for any waste structure? ❑ yes ®no
Structurel Structure 2 Structure 3 Structure 4 Structure 5
Identifier
Level (Inches) 1 35
CROP TYPES lCom Soybeans Wheat
SPRAYFIELD
SOIL TYPES AuB GoA Ly
7. What type of technical assistance does the onsite representative feel is needed? (list in comment section)
1 03/10/03
❑ Dairy
❑ Non -Dairy
❑ Other
28580
GENERAL QUESTIONS:
1. Is waste discharging from any part of the operation and reaching surface waters or wetlands? ❑ yes ® no
2. Is there evidence of a past waste discharge from any part of the operation that waste reached ❑ yes ® no
surface waters or wetlands?
3. Does any problem pose an immediate threat to the integrity of the waste structure (large trees, ❑ yes ® no
seepage, severe erosion, etc.)?
4. Is there evidence of nitrogen over application, hydraulic overloading or excessive ponding ❑ yes ® no
requiring DWQ notification?
5. Is there evidence of improper dead animal disposal that poses a threat to the environment ❑ yes ®no
and/or public health?
6. Is the waste level within the structural freeboard elevation range for any waste structure? ❑ yes ®no
Structurel Structure 2 Structure 3 Structure 4 Structure 5
Identifier
Level (Inches) 1 35
CROP TYPES lCom Soybeans Wheat
SPRAYFIELD
SOIL TYPES AuB GoA Ly
7. What type of technical assistance does the onsite representative feel is needed? (list in comment section)
1 03/10/03
❑ Other
28580
GENERAL QUESTIONS:
1. Is waste discharging from any part of the operation and reaching surface waters or wetlands? ❑ yes ® no
2. Is there evidence of a past waste discharge from any part of the operation that waste reached ❑ yes ® no
surface waters or wetlands?
3. Does any problem pose an immediate threat to the integrity of the waste structure (large trees, ❑ yes ® no
seepage, severe erosion, etc.)?
4. Is there evidence of nitrogen over application, hydraulic overloading or excessive ponding ❑ yes ® no
requiring DWQ notification?
5. Is there evidence of improper dead animal disposal that poses a threat to the environment ❑ yes ®no
and/or public health?
6. Is the waste level within the structural freeboard elevation range for any waste structure? ❑ yes ®no
Structurel Structure 2 Structure 3 Structure 4 Structure 5
Identifier
Level (Inches) 1 35
CROP TYPES lCom Soybeans Wheat
SPRAYFIELD
SOIL TYPES AuB GoA Ly
7. What type of technical assistance does the onsite representative feel is needed? (list in comment section)
1 03/10/03

40 - 160 Date:
9/30/03
ER
QQ No assistance provided/requested
ffber
ste spill leaving siteTECHNICAL
ASSISTANCE Needed
Provided
ste spill contained on site
25. Waste Plan Revision or Amendment
❑vel
in structural freeboard
26. Waste Plan Conditional Amendment
❑
❑
❑ 11. Level in storm storage
27. Review or Evaluate Waste Plan wlproducer
❑
❑
❑ 12. Waste structure integrity compromised
28. Forms Need (list in comment section)
❑
❑
❑ 13. Waste structure needs maintenance
29. Missing Components (list in comments)
❑
❑
[114. Over application >= 10% & 10 lbs.
El
❑
[115. Over application < 10% or < 10 lbs.
30.2H.0200 re -certification
[116. Hydraulic overloading
31. Five & Thirty day Plans of Action (PoA)
❑
❑
32. Irrigation record keeping assistance
❑
❑
❑ 17. Deficient irrigation records
® 18. Late/missing waste analysis
33. Organizelcomputerization of records
❑
❑
❑ 19. Latelmissing lagoon level records
34. Sludge Evaluation
❑
❑
® 20. Late/missing soils analysis
❑ 21. Crop needs improvement
35. Sludge or Closure Plan
❑
❑
[122. Crop inconsistent with waste plan
36. Sludge removallclosure procedures
❑
❑
37. Waste Structure Evaluation
❑
❑
[123. Irrigation maintenance deficiency
❑ 24. Deficient sprayfield conditions
38. Structure Needs Improvement
❑
❑
39. Operation & Maintenance Improvements
❑
❑
40. Marker checklcalibration
❑
❑
Re-gulatory Referrals
41. Site evaluation
❑
❑
❑ Referred to DWQ Date:
42. Irrigation Calibration
❑
❑
❑ Referred to NCDA Date:
43. Irrigation desigNinstallatiori
El
El
El Other...
system
Date:
44. Secure irrigation Information (maps, etc.)
❑
❑
LIST IMPROVEMENTS
45.Operating improvements (pull signs, etc.)
❑
❑
MADE BY OPERATION
46. Wettable Acre Determination
❑
❑
1
47. Evaluate WAD certificationlrechecks
❑
❑
48. Crop evaluation/recommendations
❑
❑
2.
49. Drainage worklevaluation
❑
❑
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
❑
❑
s
58. Croplforage management education
❑
❑
69. Soil and/or waste sampling education
❑
❑
03/10/03

Facility Number 40 - 160 Date: 1 9/30103
COMMENTS:
Rain cut off switch installed on irrigation pump.
Rick Harper granted permission to enter farm and review records records.
+
0. Need to include soil test for 2002 crop year in record book.
Remember to take soil test for 2003 and follow lime requirements.
*Waste analysis dated 8/6103 nitrogen is 1.9 Ibs/1000 gallons
3112/03 nitrogen is 2.4 Ibs/1000 gallons
12/12/02 nitrogen is 4.10 Ibs11000 gallons
Need to place COC in record book.
18. There is not a current waste analysis to cover irrigation events from 5/17/03 thru 615/03. Waste analysis must be taken
0 days before160 days after irrigation events.
IRR2 records were made available for review.
*Make records available for 5 years.
Lagoon level is recorded weekly with drops in lagoon consistent with irrigation events.
*Waste plan dated Nov. 08, 2000 plan deficit -522 Ibs includes irrigation design with pulls corresponding to plan.
*Wettable Acre recheck complete.
TECHNICAL SPECIALIST IMartin McLawhorn
SIGNATURE
Date Entered: 10/3103
Entered By: Martin McLawhorn
03/10/03

Type of Visit O Compliance Inspection tij Operation Review O Lagoon Evaluation
Reason for Visit OO Routine O Complaint O Follow up O Emergency Notification O Other ❑ Denied Access
Facility Number 40 IGO ! Date of Vj%it: 6/Sf20t12 Time: 13{10
t -- O Not Operational O Below Threshold
Permitted ED Certified ® Conditionally Certified 13 Registered Date Last Operated or AboNre Threshold: .........................
Farm Name: Rick.Harper Earm...................... County: .Grmite............................................... WARO.......
Owner Name: Rick ...................
.......... UAlme.r..................................................... ... Phone No:T,Z2:74.?.,873Z............................................ ........... ...
Mailing Address: 9hp.Nteweltl.Read.................................................................................. S.nc:3y..I W.N.C.......,..........,.................................... 2A .............
Facilit. Contact: .............................................................................. Title:.......................................... Phone No:
Onsite Representative. .Q,i3CkHAmerJ.M idWe..Cht:isteUAont.................................. Integrator: plreminuu..Standard-Fanu.af North...........
Certii:ed Operator: Rkhard.S .................. Operator Certification Number:. 6529....... ......................
Location of Farm:
From Snow Hill, take 258 N approx. 2 miles. Turn left on SR 1328. Farm is on left about 1/2 mile down.
® Swine ❑ Poultry ❑Cattle ©Horse Latitude 1 35 ° 27 �7 Longitude 77 ° 34 33 u
Design Current
Ste Capacity. Poaulation.
❑ Wean to Feeder
® Feeder to Finish
4000
❑ Farrow to Wean
❑ Farrow to Feeder
❑ Farrow to Finish
❑ GiiL%
❑ Boars
Number of Lagoons I ... ❑ Subsurface Drains Present © Lagoon Area ID Spray- Field Area
HoldingPondssI Solid traps gement Systern a� ❑ No Liquid Waste A1ana.
Discharees & Stream Impacts
1. Is any discharge observed from an_v part of the operation? ❑ Yes N No
Discharge originated at: ❑ Lagoon ❑ Spray Field ❑ Other
a. If discharge is observed- was the conveyance man-made? ❑ Yes ❑ No
h, If'discharge is observed, did it reach Water of the State? (If yes, notit}' DWQ) ❑ Yea ❑ No
c. [fdischarge is obseii,4 what is the estimated dolt in gal/spin:'
d- Does discharge hvpass a lagoon wstenn? (11-yes, notit�: 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 puts storm storage) less than adequate? ❑ Spillway ❑ Yes ® No
Struclnre I Structure 2 Structure 3 Structure: 4 st1wittre 5 Structure 6
dellti ler:......................................................
Ireeboard (inches): ............... '3,1............... ................................... .................................... ................................... ................................... ...................................

05103101
r Facility Number. 40-160
Date of Inspection 6/5/2002
Continued
5_ Are there any immediate threats to the integrity of any of the structures observed? (ie/ trees, severe erosion,
sm-page, etc.)
6. Are there strictures 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 maintcnaucc/improvement?
8. Does any part of the waste management system other than waste structures require maintenance/improvement7
9. Do any stuctures lack adequate, gauged markers with required maximum and minimum liquid level
elevation markings?
Waste Application
10. Arc there any buffers that need mainttuance/ mprovemcnt?
11. 1s there evidence: of over application? ❑ Excessive Ponding ❑ PAN ❑ Hvdrauhc Overload
12. Crop type Corn, Soybeans, Wheat
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes ® No
® Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yeti 1Z 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 pcndcd for a wettable acre determination? ❑ Yes ❑ No
15. Does the receiving crop need improvement?
if. 1s there a lack of adequate waste application equipment?
Required Records & Documents
17. Fail to have Certificate of Coverage & General Permit or other Permit readily available?
18. Does the facility fail to have all components of the Certified Animal Waste Management Flan readily available?
(icl WUP, checklists, design, maps. etc.)
19. Does record keeping need improvement? (ic;/ 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 tobave 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/in-spector fail to discuss revicwrnspection with on -site rcpreseutative?
24. Does facility require a follow-up visit by same agency?
❑ Yes 0 No
❑ Yes ®No
❑ Yes IR No
0 Yes ❑ No
® Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes CR No
❑ Yes O No
❑ Yes R No
❑ Yes ®No
❑ Yes ® No
25_ Were any additional problems noted which cause noncompliance of the Certified AWMP? ❑ Yes ®No
No violations or deficiencies were noted during this visit You will receive no further correspondence about this visit.
Comments (refer to question
.0
offacto , . ,_ �....._... ., ...x:_ ..., _..�. w❑Field Copy ❑_
Final Note.-, _
*Soil test dated 11/20/01 time requirements are less than one ton per acre. Lime was applied at recommended rates. Cu and %u within
guidelines. Suggest keeping lime receipts.
19. IRR2 records, waste anal=sis, back three vears are not on site. linable to answer # 11 since records arc: not on site for 2001 crop year
and DSWC inspection was conducted on 8/10/01,
19. Lagoon freeboard levels from 8/10/01 until I/6/02 are not on site. lagoon level is recorded weekly from 1/6/02 thru 5/31/02.
*New waste analysis taken on 6/l/02 no results -
IS. Facility missing checklist and standards.
eviewer nspector Name Martin Mcl awizor i _.
r2nv:awnrlinennr#nr Cenn•ifr�rn• r1�#n-

a5,"J3101 Continued
41
Facility Number: 40-160 :1.atc a;! Ir3x;�cctiort 61512(f02
Odor Issues
26. Does the discharge pipe from the confinement building to the storage pond or lagoon fail to discharge at/or below
liquid level of lagoon or storage pond with no aghaliuu?
27. Are there any dead animals not disposed of properly within 24 hours?
28. 1 there any evidence of wind drift during laird application? (Le. residue on neighboring vegetation, aaphalt,
roads, building structure, and/or public property)
29. is the land application spray system intake not located near the liquid surface of the lagoon?
30. Were any major maintenance problems with the ventilation fans) noted? (i.e. broken fan belts.. Missing or
or broken fan blade(s), inoperable shutters, etc.)
3 f. Do the animals feed storage bins fail to have appropriate cover?
32. Do the flush tanks lack a submerged fill pipe or a permanent/temporary cover?
Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes ® No
Yd5 No
[3 Yes M No
[] Yes ® No
0 Yes ti No
[` Yes ❑ No
Additional tonal ammcn#s and/or. Drawinos.:_ �,. ,r
8. Leaking air relief vah,c at hydrant b}irrigation pump. Small amount of waste ponding at hydrant. May need to : ontact irrigation a
Spec. for repairs.

Type of Visit O. Compliance Inspection O Operation Review O Lagoon Evaluation
Reason for Visit OO Routine O Complaint O Fallow up O Emergency Notification O Other ❑ Denied Access
Facility Number 40 y160m--� Date of Visit: Time:
12-23-20{12 $S5
0 NNot Operational Q Below Threshold
Permitted U Certified 0- Conditionally Certified 0 Registered Date Last Operated or Above Threshold: _.....
Farm Name: Rich.Hairpgjr.Fu m...••-•••-•............................•—•••-•••---... County: .Greexte............................................... WA.1 O...----
Owner Name. Rick .... .,... ................ ............ Jffa mcr............. :_... .................... .......... ... Phone No: 252.:74: -A2,3..................................................
Mailing Address: 9..6Q.NpW..ell.Rxlad........................................................................... ... SROW.H-NC............................ ......... Usso............
FacilityContact: ............................................................................... Title:................................................................ Phone No:...................................................
Onsite Representative:$i&Ijaxper ..... ._.................. .. Integrator: Ptc�elmlilu7m.Sjandard.Farm&.of.KaL1h...........
........................................... .....
Certified Operator:$LCIIoxti.&............................ H80jeir...... ...................................... Operator Certification Number: ,i652Q„.........................
Location of Farris:
From Snow Hill, take 258 N approx. 2 miles. Turn left on SR 1328. Farm is on left about 112 mile down.
® Swine ❑ Poultry ❑ Cattle ❑ Horse Latitude ?! 35 ° 27 —�7 — ;� Longitude
Design Current
Design Current
Design Current
Swine Capacity Population
Poultry
Capacity Population Cattle
Capacity Population
0 Wean to Feeder
0 Laver
I
1[j Dairy
® Feeder to Finish
4000
3915
10 Non -Layer
❑Non -Dairy
❑ Farrow to Wean
❑ Farrow to Feeder
❑ Other
❑ Farrow to Finish
Total Design Capacity
4,000
❑ Gilts
Total SSLW
540,000
Boars
K.❑
Number of Lagoons 1 ❑ Subsurface Drains Present ❑ Lagix,n Area ❑ Spray Field Area
Holding Ponds 1 Solid Traps ❑ No Liquid Waste Management System
1. Is any discharge observed from any part of the operation? ❑ Yes ' No
Dischargt; origivated at: ❑ Lagoon ❑ Spray Field ❑ Other
a. If dischLu"ge is observed. was the conveyance titan -made'' ❑ Yes ❑ No
b. If discharge is observed. did it reach Water of the State'? (If Iles. notil�� DWQ) ❑yes ❑ No
c. If discharge is observed. what is the eslunated flow in gallynin?
d. Does dis(;harm; lagoon-,yAt:m9 flf ves, nollf'-DWQ) ❑ Yes ❑ No
2. Is there evidence of past discharge from any part of the operation? ❑ Yes 9 No
3. Were there any adverse impacts or potential adverse impacts to the Waters of the State other than from a discharge? ❑ Yes 0 No
;Waste Collection se: 'Treatment
4. Is storage capacity (freeboard plus storm storage) less than adequate? ❑ Spillway ❑ Yes ® No
Structure I Stru tune - Stnlctilre 3 Stmoture 4 5truotm-c 5 Structure %
Iaentlher:.................... ..-.......... ............ ... ................ ......... ..... ........ ........ ..................
Freeboard( ruches)" Z 1,5 ............. .........I..........................................................................................................

UJ/V-VV.1
Facility Number: 40-160
Date of Inspection 12-23-2002
w�r�uz.iru
'i
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, notfy DWQ)
7. Do any of the structures need maintenance/improvement?
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes ® No
❑ 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 Applic..dion
10. Are there any buffers that need maintenance/improvemeut? ❑ Yes ® No
11. Is there evidence of over application? ❑ Excessive Ponding ❑ PAN ❑ Hydraulic Overload ❑ Yes ® No
12. Crop type Corn (Silage & Grain) Small Grain (Wheat, Barley, Soybeans
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 lei No
16. Is there a lack of adequate waste application equipment? ❑ Yes ® No
Required Records & Docu££ientN
17. Fail to have Certificate of Coverage & General Permit or other 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.) G 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 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 O 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 19 No
® No violations or deficiencies were noted during this visit. You will receive no further 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 sltuathms. (use additional pagesas necessary): [j Field Copy ❑Final Notes
Unannounced inspection. Records available for review.
Waste analysis - 12-12-02 = 4.1 lbs, 7-17-02 = 1.6 lbs, 3-4-02 = 3.0 lbs
Soil test - 11-20-01 - Pulling this year's samples now.
Irrigation records are complete
Freeboard levels are recorded weekly.
Lagoon level is high for this time of year. If your level rises to 19" or less, notify the WaRO-DWQ office as required by
your permit. A plan of action may need to be completed.
Reviewer/Inspector Name
Reviewer/Insvector Siffnature:
in
B. Hardison
Date: rt _ P 3 -<f)Z

WWI Continued
Facility Number. 40-160 Date of Inspection 12-23-2002
Odor Issues
26. Does the discharge pipe from the confinement building to the storage pond or lagoon fail to discharge attor below
liquid level of lagoon or storage pond with no agitation?
f
27. Are there any dead animals not disposed of properly within 24 hours?
28. Is there any evidence of wind drift during land application? (ie. residue on neighboring vegetation, asphalt,
roads, building structure, and/or public property)
29. Is the land application spray system intake not located near the liquid surface of the lagoon?
30. Were any major maintenance problems with the ventilation fan(s) noted? (i.e. broken fan belts, missing or.
or broken fan blade(s), inoperable shutters, etc.)
31. Do the animals feed storage bins fail to have appropriate cover?
32. Do the flush tanks lack a submerged fill pipe or a permanent/temporary cover?
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes CO No
■ �i
❑ Yes 0 No
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes ❑ No
8 - Need to repair the leaking valve (air valve or joint) at the irrigation pump. Contact your Irrigation Specialist for
you have any questions, contact us @ 252-946-6481.
J

1
{Type of Visit O Compliance Inspection O Operation Review O Lagoon Evaluation .
I Reason for Visit O Routine O Complaint O Follow up O Emergency Notification Q Other © Denied Access
Facility Number qp 160 Date orvimt: 3-27-2001 Time: 1110
O Not Operational 0 Below Threshold
0 Permitted ■ Certified 0 Conditionally Certified 0 Registered Date Last Operated or Above Threshold: W._. —-.-....
Farm Name: Rice iiaa F County:
Owner Name: Rites_ - _ iAarneL— - - - -- Phone No:
Mailing Address: Ku.L w&jLRQ.Ad_ Sxt�R. lll�. )![.--...._- .........................�._ . 4_............
Facility Contact _ _ —__ __ Title- Phone No:
OnsiteRepresentative: B1>r]CH�>ReL..._^ —... _ .. Integrator: L.LMvxphrry:..Co.............................
_............_....
Certified Operator.Ridarc ._._ -_.. „._. J a7���..._......Operator Certification Number:lfiS.79...._..........
Location of Farm:
From Snow Hill, take 258 N approx. 2 miles. Turn left on SR 1328. Farm is on left about 1/2 mile down.
® Swine [] Poultry ❑ Cattle ❑ Horse Latitude 1 35 ' Longitude 77 'F 39 33
Design Current
Swine Caoacitv Population
❑ Wean to Feeder {
OK Feeder to Finish { 4000 { 3400
I!J Farrow to Wean ^ {
10 Farrow to Feeder {
10 Farrow to Finish I {
0-Gilts I
❑ Boars { {
Design Current Design , Current
Poultry Capacity Population Cattle Capacity Population
0 Layer 1 10 Dairy
[❑ Non -Layer, I i1 Non -Dairy
10 Other I {
Total Design Capacity 4,000
Total SSLW 540.000
Number of Lagoons {0 Subsurface Drains Present f❑ Lagoon Arm o Spray Field Area
Holding Ponds/Solid Traps 10 No Liquid 'Waste Management System•
Dischareec S Stream Impacts
I. Is any discharge observed -from any part of the operation?
❑ Yes ® No
Discharge originated at: ❑ Lagoon ❑ Spray Fieid 0 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 DR7Q) ❑Yes IR No
c. If discharge is observed. what is the estimated flow in gal/min? n/a
d. Doe: discharge bypass a lagOon system? (If yes. notify DWQ) ❑ Yes 0 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
Waete C(Olection & Treatment
4. Is storage capacity (freeboard plus storm storage) less than adequate? ❑ Spillway ❑ Yes gj No
Structure 1 Structure 2 Structure : Structure 4 Structure 5 Structure 6
Identifier: ............... ................. ___._.........
Freeboard (inches): ^?
05103101 Continued

Facility Number: 40-160 Date of Inspection .. 3-27-20QI
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 maintenanceTmprovement?
8. Does any part of the waste management system other than waste structures require maintenancelimprovement?
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 maintenancefimprovement?
11. Is there evidence of over application? ❑ Excessive Ponding ❑ PAN ❑ Hydraulic Overload
12. Crop type Corn, Soybeans, Wheat
❑ Yes
IN No
❑ Yes
® No
❑ Yes
® No
❑ Yes
® No
❑ Yes
®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?
16. Is there a lack of adequate waste application equipment?
Required Records d Documents
17. Fail to have Certificate of Coverage & General Permit or other Permit readily available?
18. Does the facility fail to have all components of the Certified Animal Waste Management Plan readily available?
(ie/ WUP, checklists, design, maps, etc.)
19. Does record keeping need improvement? (ie/ irrigation, freeboard, waste analysis & soil sample reports)
20. Is facility not in compliance with any applicable setback criteria in effect at the time of design?
21, Did the facility fail to have a actively certified operator in charge?
22. Fail to notify regional DWQ of emergency situations as required by General Permit?
(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?
❑ Yes 0 No
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes gj No
❑ Yes Z No
❑ Yes g No
E3 Yes g No
❑ Yes Z No
❑ Yes %,y No
❑ Yes X No
❑ Yes ®No
ei No violations or deficiencies were noted during this visit. You will receive no further correspondence about this visit.
IF ken
❑ Field Copy ® Final Notes
» Records available for review.
* New waste plan dated 11-8-00.
* Waste analysis: 9-6-00 = 1.7 lbs, 3-19-01 = 3.1 lbs
* Soil analysis up thru 2000 available. Awaiting results from this years samples.
* Continue sampling the lagoon quarterly.
* Irrigation records are complete and balanced out_
* Freeboard records are kept as required.
Reviewer/Inspector Name Lyn B. Hardison-
Reviewer/Inspector Signature: i, �� �/ .. .J t— Date: ' - i n /
05103101 �iContinued

i + Fw:Wty Number:_ 40_160 Date of ]nsppaki 3-27-2MI _ 5/'l8l200'1
_ Printed on:
F � -
Does the discharge pipe froth the_canfinemt it bur�ding tti the stoic pond oT lagoon faiil tD`aiseharge at/or below ❑Yes ❑ No
liquid level of lagoon or iaozage po?� with no agitation. - -
t• ` 27.' Ale there any dead saimals not disPoscil of pioprsly within 24 hours? . � - _ . ❑ Yes 0 No
=28. ; Is there"any evidence of wind ariff during land application? CLe.-i,esidue on neighboring vegetation, asphalt, El Yes ®No
roads, building strucnnti, and/or public property)
29.- Is the land application spray_system intake not located near the liquid surface of she lagoon? ❑ Yes ® No
30. Were any major maintnnarice 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 aniriials feed storage bins fail to bave appropriate cover? ❑ Yes ® No
32. Do the flush tanks lack a submerged fill pipe or a permanent/tempdrary cover? ❑ Yes ❑ No
Consult with your area agronomist for guidance with cropping window.
Grounds are well kept
Suggest to calibrate the irrigation system every 3 years.
Suggest to check the accuracy of lagoon marker to the lagoon design.
If you have any questions consults with your Technical Specialist or contact me @ 252-946-6451, ext. 318.
A�I
05103101
�I

o�o� wArE9��
0 �
To: Producers
From: Lyn B. Hardison '
Environmental Specialist J
Washington Regional Office
Date: May 18, 2001
Subject: Animal Compliance Routine Inspection
Year 2001
Michael F. Easley
Governor
William G. Ross, Jr., Secretary
Departrnent of Environment and Natural Resources
Karr T. Stevens
Division of Water Quality
Enclosed please find a copy or copies of the Compliance Site Inspection(s) (as viewed in DWQ database) conducted at the
referenced facility by the Division of Water Quality from the Washington Regional Office. Please read this inspection and
keep with all other documents pertaining to your animal operation for future inspections.
In general, these inspections included 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.
As a reminder, please note the following which are conditions of the Certified Animal Waste Management Plan and the general
permit; therefore, these items must be implemented:
tP The maximum waste level in lagoons/storage ponds shall not exceed that specified in the CAWMP. At a minimum,
maximum waste level for waste for lagoons/storage ponds must not exceed the level that provides adequate storage to
contain 25 year, 24 hour storm event plus an additional foot of structural freeboard.
cp An analysis of the liquid animal waste from the lagoon shall be conducted as close to the time of application as practical and
at least within 60 days (before or after) of the date of application. This analysis shall include the following parameters:
Nitrogen, Phosphorus, Zinc and Copper.
(p Soil analysis is required annually.
T The followin, records are required: off -site solids removal, maintenance, repair, waste/soil analysis and land irrigation
records. These records should be maintained by the facility owner/manager in chronological and legible form for a
minimum of three years.
cp Land application rates shall be in accordance with the CAWMP. In no case shall land application rates exceed the Plant
Available Nitrogen (PAN) rate for the receiving croD or result in runoff during anv given application.
cp All grassed waterways shall have a stable outlet with adequate capacity to prevent ponding or flooding damages. The outlet
can be another vegetated channel, an earth ditch, stabilization structure, or other suitable outlets.
tp It is suggested. not required, to keep crop yield information for future use to update your waste management plan. You will
need three. years of crop yield data before your plan can be updated.
For your information, any swine facility that has a discharge to surface waters of the State will have to apply for a National
Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) permit with the Division of Water Quality, effective January 1, 2001.
Thank you for your assistance and cooperation during the inspection. If you have any questions, please contact your Technical
Specialist or me at 252-946-6481, ext. 318.
Cc: �VaRO
LBH Files (inspection form only)
943 Washington Square Mall Washington, NC 27889 252-946-6481 (Telephone) 252-946-9215 (Fax)

i
i
IF
NCDENR
f JAMES13. HSiNT JR. w
GOVERNOR 'itl
r T,
!3!L1_'HOLMAN .
r'SECRETARY
KER__ T."'STEVENS
SF sDIRECTOR� - V +`
`. r,::
zi
jx
f
r}r,
"
r �. 1•..'y.
4.
W0. Rr_)
NORTH CAROLINA DEPARTMENT OF
ENVIRONMENT AND NATURAL RESOURCES
DIVISION OF WATER QUALITY
WASHINGTON REGIONAL OFFICE
August 23, 2000
Mr. Rick Harper
Rick Harper Farm
Route 1. Box 308
Snow Hill. NC 28580
SUBJECT: Animal Feedlot Operation Compliance Inspection &
Request for Information
Facility No. 40-160
Greene County
Dear Mr. Harper:
On June 8, 2000, I conducted an Animal Feedlot Operation Compliance Inspection at the referenced
facility. The Certified Animal Waste Management Plan (CAWMP) was not readily available for review at
this facility. "Therefore, the records and documents of the CAWMP could not be reviewed during the
inspection
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 ofthe State Rules 15 NCAC 2H.0217,
Senate Bill 1217, and the Certified Animal Waste Management flan; (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.
You are requested within 10 days of receipt of this letter to send a copy of your last two waste analysis
reports, the last soil analysis report, freeboard level retards and complete copies of your IRR-1 and IRR-2
forms for the last receiving crop and current receiving crop. Once this information is received in the
Washington Regional Office, it will be reviewed and the Compliance lnspedion completed. If this
information is not received within 10 days by the washiaalton Regional Office, this facilii�w$1 be in
violation of its General Permit and subiect to an appropriate enforcement action. The requested
information should be mailed to the following address:
Daphne B. Cullom
Division of water Quality
Washington Square Mali
Washington, NC 27889
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.
Thank you for your cooperation and assistance. Should you have further questions or comments
regarding this inspection, do not hesitate to call me at [phone], ext. 321.
- cerely,
Daphne B. Cullom
Environmental Specialist Il
cc: WaRO-Animal Compliance
rtp
2 U I U
948 WASHINGTON SQUARE MALL, WASHINGTON, NORTH CAROLINA 27889
PHONE [phone] FAX [phone]
AN EQUAL OPPORTUNITY / AFFIRMATIVE ACTION EMPLOYER - SO% RECYCLED/10% POST -CONSUMER PAPER

s
Type of Visit Q Compliance Inspection O Operation Review O Lagoon Evaluation
Reason for Visit O Routine O Complaint Q Follow up O Emergency Notification Q Other 17 Denied Access
Facility Number 40 160 Date of Visit: 6/8/2000 Time: I1:I7 AM Printed on: 6112=00
O Nat O erational 0 Mow Threshold
® Permitted 0 Certified 0 Conditionally Certified 0 Registered Date Last Operated or Above Threshold:._ ..........._
Coun • Grune........................ 1'A Q Farm Name: �itc>�.�Xazxte� kAUfilt....... ...................... ,..... ........ .... _.....-........1;.......... County: _ .
Owner Name: RiG ..... _ ... .. ._. �1 ..........� _. .. Phone No:2 5.2:�4 :B ..fix.._
Facility Contact: ......................................................................... Title:...................... Phone No:
Mailing Address: FJ_I.BAX.Q8 ............................... .-. _ SAQ1V.Bj11..NC ........ -......... ....................... 28.5'"i ...... .....
Onsite Representative: Ltt.R�llr.Rq� Sil........................ .... ........................ ............ ........ Integrator: ... ............. ..................
Certified Operator: Rkjh rd.Sze............................ 1rR�1C... .... Operator Certification
Location of Farm:
;;M:................ .....-- -..........-....... _... ...... ......... _. .............................. -...... .......... _..... ...... _ ... _....... .416
® Swine ❑Poultry ❑Cattle ❑Horse Latitude 35� • 27 Longitude "" 77 • 39 33 u
ai��s av ,Currents_ Y Yy DCSlg]! � .C1lrlBllt � r'V� tDas 11]Cnt
Swine: z . �. , � 'Cut�acity . Poaulateon;;� 1'oulfry " *�' - Canacrtvv Population � Cat#Ie .�'.__+Cat�scitvr �onu7ationn�'
I
❑ Wean to Feeder
® Feeder to Finish
4000
0
❑ Farrow to Wean
❑ Farrow to Feeder
❑ Farrow to Finish
❑ Gilts
❑ Boars
❑ Other
❑ Non -Dairy
y -T €
4,000
540,000
Discharges & Stream Impacts
1. is any discharge observed from any part of the operation? ❑ Yes 0 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
Structure 1 Structure 2 Structure 3 Structure 4
Identifier: ............... ._.•-•- - �_._...... .
Freeboard (inches): 31
❑ Yes ® No
Structure 5 Structure 6

i
Continued on back
Facility Number: 40--160 Date of inspection F6500070 Printed on: 6/12/2000
S. Are there any immediate threats to the integrity of any of the structures observed? (ie/ trees, severe erosion, ❑ Yes 19 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 19 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 ❑ Hydraulic Overload ❑ Yes ❑ No
12. Crop type Corn, Soybeans, Wheat
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 0 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 A WMP?
0o Yiolatiotis_or delYciet�cies ...........d:ag this visit::3z'on:will:receive nb further
:: correspoudence about this:vist........ . • • .... • .. . • ..::. • ... .
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes [:]No
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes ❑ No
11, 13, 17-19, 24, 25 - Unable to commenttcomplete inspection due to records being unavailable for
review. Mr. Harper will be contacted to submit requested records of CAWMP to WARO DWQ.
Adequate freeboard level.
Well maintained and neat facility.
* Unable to contact Mr. Harper prior to inspection.
Reviewer/Inspector Name B:.0 71om `� a� dill yAU
-1 r Z 7.- dx=.

i
Reviewer/inspector Signature: Date:
Facility Number: 40-160 Date of Inspection 6/8/2000 Printed on: 611212000
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
ALi

State of North Carolina
Department of Environment
and Natural Resources r,
James B. Hunt, Jr., Governor
Wayne McDevitt, Secretary NCDENR
Kerr T. Stevens, Director NORTH CAROUNA DEPARTMENT OF
ENVIRONMENT AND NATURAL RESOURCES
July 6,1999
Rick Harper
Rt 1 Box 308
Snow Hill NC 28580
Subject: Compliance Inspection
Rick Harper Farm
Facility Number 40 - 160
Greene County
i
Dear Rick Harper,
On 6/16/99, Carl Dunn from the Washington Regional Office of the Division of Water Quality
conducted an inspection of your animal operation. Please review the enclosed inspection form. This
inspection form should be maintained as part of the records for your facility. Please note any items that
may be marked with a yes answer and make every effort to correct these deficiencies. You are advised
ti that you must maintain a freeboard of at least one foot in your lagoon(s) plus a storage volume sufficient
to accommodate the rainfall and subsequent runoff from a 25 year 24 hour storm event to remain in
compliance. You should consult your lagoon design for the exact freeboard requirement. Please
remember that you must follow your waste management plan at all times.
Thank you for your cooperation in this inspection. If you have any further questions in regard to this
matter or if I may be of any assistance, I can be contacted at [phone] ext. 208.
Sincerely,
Carl Dunn
Environmental Engineer
cc: WaRO
L L Murphrey Co.
943 Washington Square Mall, Washington, NC 27889 Telephone [phone] Fax [phone]
An Equal Opportunity Affirmative Action Employer 50% recycled/10% post -consumer paper

r
13 Division of Soil and Water Conservation - Operation Review.'-
[3 Division of Soil and Water-Conseryation'- Complianc07 Inspection r
®;Division of Water QualEty - Compliance Inspection ©Other Agency = Opera6on Review _ &x
1I0 Routine 0 Complaint 0 Follow-up of DWQ inspection 0 Follow-up of DSWC review _ 0 Other
Facility Number Date of inspection (?
Time of Inspection 1 1 = 3 D 24 hr. (hh:mm)
0 Permitted Q Certified Q Conditionally Certified [] Registered JE3 Not O erational Date Last Operated:
Farm Name: �tC k
IeA 'tom County. 1e_en.C-
...........................................
OwnerName: ...................C 146!r (/ Phone No:..............................................................-.............................................................. ........................
Facility Contact: .. ...................................... ..... .. Title:................. .................. Phone No:................
MailingAddress:..............................................................,...../....................................................................................................................................... ..........................
OnsiteRepresentative : ���k.... x'�'....................................................... Integrator: ... ...Z..L......!'''.c�!....................................
i�
Certified Uperator;,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,.,. T c �� �? ...r ........ .. Operator Certification Number:..........................................
........ ........ ...............................
Location of Farm -
A.
..................:..........................................................................................................................................................................................................•................................I...........
Latitude • 6 C .6 Longitude • 4 66
Design Current
Swine Capacity Ponulation
❑ Wean to Feeder
❑ Feeder to Finish
LtOOO
39Z
❑ Farrow to Wean
❑ Farrow to Feeder
❑ Farrow to Finish
❑ Gilts,
❑ Boars
Design Current Design Current
Poultryy £apacity Population "Cattle Capacity Po ulation
❑ Layer ❑ Dairy
❑ Non -Layer ❑ Non -Dairy
❑ Other
Total Design Capacity
_ Total SSLW
�Numberof Lagoons. ❑ Subsurface Drains Present ❑ Lagoon Area 10 Spray Field Area
'Holding Ponds / Solid Traps ❑ No Liquid Waste Management System
0 a
Discharges & Stream Impacts
1. Is any discharge observed from any part of the operation?
Discharge originated at: ❑ Lagoon ❑ Spray Field ❑ Other
a. If discharge is observed, was the conveyance man-made?
b. If discharge is observed, did it reach Water of the State? (If yes, notify DWQ)
c. If discharge is observed. what is the estimated flow in gaVmin?
❑ Yes NNo
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes ❑ No
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? El Yes qNo
Waste Collection & Treatment
4. Is storage capacity (freeboard plus storm storage) less than adequate? ❑ Spillway ❑ Yes hfNo
Structure i Structure 2 Structure 3 Structure 4 Structure 5 Structure b
Identifier:
Freeboard (inches): .......2:3. ................. ...................
5. Are there any immediate threats to the integrity of any of the structures observed? (ie/ trees, severe erosion, ❑ Yes J9 No
seepage, etc.)
3/23/99 Continued on back

Facility Number: Date of Inspection
6. Are there structures on -site which are not properly addressed and/or managed through a waste management or
closure plan? ❑ Yes IXNo
(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 M No
8. Does any part of the waste management system other than waste structures require maintenance/improvement? ❑ Yes P9 No
9. Do any stuctures lack adequate, gauged markers with required maximum and minimum liquid level
elevation markings? ❑ Yes ® No
Waste Anolicatlon
10. Are there any buffers that need maintenance/improvement?
❑ Yes]
No
1. Is there evidence of over application? []Excessive Ponding []PAN
❑ Yes]
No
12. Crop type (��f w �oa_� �e-j n _
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
9 No
Required
Records & Documents
IT
Fail to have Certificate of Coverage & General Permit readily available?
❑ Yes
9No
18.
Does the facility fail to have all components of the Certified Animal Waste Management Plan readily available?
412AW No
(ie/ WUP, checklists, design, maps, etc.)
❑ Yes
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
No
22.
Fail to notify regional DWQ of emergency situations as required by General Permit?
(ie/ discharge, freeboard problems, over application)
❑ Yes
14 No
23.
Did Reviewer/Inspector fail to discuss review/inspection with on -site representative?
❑ Yes
PS No
24.
Does facility require a follow-up visit by same agency?
❑ Yes
C( No
25.
Were any additional problems noted which cause noncompliance of the Certified AWMP?
❑ Yes
19 No
0: NO violafi i is;ot- & cWndp' s -were noted• diming (bis'visit: - Y:oir will -eep*ti Rio furtber ;
corresnondence: ahnuti this visit ::::: :.. ..:::::::::::..:..:::.::::: ,
3123/99

Facility Number: �O — j6Q Date oi' inspection 6'-16-9
Odor Issue's
26.
Does the discharge pipe from the confinement building to the storage pond or lagoon fail to discharge at/or below
❑ Yes
CZNo
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
(A 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?
PK Yes
❑ No
Additional Comments an or rawin _ . . - .
&s'.
LI
3/23/99

/i/ -/6 (:)
,MAIL° RE_CEIP�T
jr I c_a UL-&--ArivUZC1Arv
r3
F I
r-i ad Mall Fee -
Q v3.320 q1
o. $ 1.g�
�; a �e� frradcdac.dfilea
P-GIPR®rdoapy} : € € €Al
C3 ❑ndM RBWtfseo'-" a
a e $6.47
Ln
p�gw�--.h_____----- •-. _. - _.. ._.
C3 s .
-o sem7 RICK HARPER FARM
� �,i& ATTN: RICHARD S. HARPER
r- -- 950 NEWELL ROAD
SNOW HILL, NC 28580
0Complete items 1, 2 and 3. "
A. Signs re
i' 13 Print your name and address on the'reverse
Agent
{
so that we can re#urn the card fo you.dre
0
© Attach.this card to the backof the mail reCe,
p '
13� e by Tint Na ,,JC. Date.of Del'v
l 1 /U �r
or on the front if space permits.
f !f `�' ` /
i 1.-Article Addressed to: - - -
D. Is delivery address different from item 1? ❑ Yes ;
-
- if YES, enter delivery address below:, ❑ No
RICK HARPER FARM
ATTN:- RICHARD S. HARPER
i
960 NEWELL ROAD
SNOW HILL, NC 28580
3. Service Type E 0 Priority Mate Expresso
iI11I1 I1I_ fl1 11I 1ii !lI
4
IjI
1II..Ifin{r
ll�l��
l �ly3l�lllll�I,
[1r111
�I�Ii�I
0%AddultSgnatureRestricledDslivery i*.0Re%isteredMailRestria dit
='I���E
HIIli7
'Certified Mails - Delivery
9590 9401 0100 5168 9312 32
'❑❑ Collect Mall Delivery ncted Delivery -Q Retum Rece€ptfor =
Merchandise
2 Article Number (Transfer'from_ service label)
❑ Collect on Delivery Restricted Delivery ❑ Sigriwure Confirmation*
0 signature Confirmation _?
7 ❑ 16 : ❑ 7 5 ❑ 0 0 01 0 9 01 ' 5 3119 r ; ! i �trictecl Dailvery; t � iRestricied Delivery
PS Form 3811, April-2015 PSN�7530-02-000-9U53 f bomesiic Return Receipt
fit#; � ;l;• tt 1 it If�.f :_Etl.'`�.�t r:� f I.�� ,,, , _ _ t

of Soil:and_Water Coaser.16ati
Type of Visit O Compliance Inspection O Operation Review O Lagoon Evaluation
Reason for Visit OO Routine O Complaint O Follow up O Emergency Notification O Other ❑ Denied Access
Facility Number 40 160 Date of Visit: 618/2tHl0 Time: lla7 AM Printed on: 8232000
0 Not Operational Q Below Threshold
® Permitted E9 Certified [] Conditionally Certified © Registered Date Last Operated or Above Threshold: .........................
Farm Name: Rack.Harter.k'.a,m...................................................................................... County: G=jmr ............................................... W.ARO.......
Owner Name: Rick ................................
......... Harper ........................................................ Phone No: T.52.-Z4.7.-..87,3z..........................................................
Facility Contact:
Title:
........................... Phone No:
MailingAddress: RU.11ad.30.8.......................................................................................... SRQWJJZ..N.0 ....................................................... 285BO .............
Onsite Representative: 1No.ame.wLsitc......................._...................................................... Integrator: L.L.Mu.rphuy..Co................................................
Certified Operator: Rkhmd.S ............................ Hatveir.............................................. Operator Certification Number: .1h529 .......................
......
Location of Farm:
From Snow Hill, take 258 N approx. 2 miles. Turn left on SR 1328. Farm is on left about 112 mile down. +
® Swine ❑ Poultry ❑ Cattle ❑ Horse Latitude 35 ° Longitude 1 77 10 39 33 u
Design. Current
Design Current
-
Design Current
Swine Capacity Population
Poultry
Capacity Population Cattle
Capacity Population
❑ Wean to Feeder
❑ Laver
❑ Dairy
® Feeder to Finish
4000
0
❑ Non -Layer
I
Non -Dairy
❑ Farrow to Wean
❑ Farrow to Feeder
JEI Other
❑ Farrow to Finish
Total Design Capacity
4,000
❑ Gilts
Total SSLW
540,000
❑ Boars
Number of Lagoons JE1 Subsurface Drains Present ❑ Lammin Area ❑ Spray Field Area
Holding Ponds / Solid'Traps ❑ No Liquid Waste Management System
DischarUs & 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 conveyancc 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 Stricture 2 Structure 3 Structure 4 Structure 5
Structure 6
Identifier:
Freeboard(inches): ...............a] ................ .................................... .............................. .... .............................................................................................................

5/00
Facility Number: 40-1 00 Date of Inspection 61812[Id0 Printed on
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 Armlication
10. Are there any buffers that need maintenance/improvement?
11. Is there evidence of over application? ❑ Excessive Ponding ❑ PAN ❑ Hydraulic Overload
Continued on back
8/23/2000
❑ Yes
® No
❑ Yes
® No
❑ Yes
® No
❑ Yes
N No
❑ Yes
N No
❑ Yes
N No
❑ Yes
❑ No
12. Crop type Corn, Soybeans, Wheat
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?
b) Does the facility need a wettable acre determination?
c) This facility is pended for a wettable acre determination?
15. Does the receiving crop need improvement?
16. Is there a lack of adequate waste application equipment?
Required Records & Documents
17. Fail to have Certificate of Coverage & General Permit readily available?
18. Does the facility fail to have all components of the Certified Animal Waste Management Plan readily available?
(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?
P.'No violations;or:d_ kkiericies'were;noted:during this•visit:: You will:rtceive'no'fd'ft'her:•.
... � correspondence about..
visit
Comments -(refer to question #): Explain any YES answers -and/or any recommendations or -any other comments.
Use_drawiags of facility_to better explain situations. (useadditional pages as necessary)_
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes [:]No
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes N No
❑ Yes N No
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes N No
❑ Yes N No
❑ Yes N No
❑ Yes N No
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes ❑ No
11, 13, 17-19, 24, 25 - Unable to comment/complete inspection due to records being unavailable for
review. Mr. Harper will be contacted to submit requested records of CAWMP to WARO DWQ.
Adequate freeboard level.
Well maintained and neat facility.
" Unable to contact Mr. Harper prior to inspection.
1 l�l
Reviewer/Inspector Name =Daphne B. Etrllom Enteced,by:Anfl_Tyndall

t1m
Division of Soil and Water Conservation - Operation Review
p Division of Soil and Water Conservation - Compliance Inspection
p Division of Water Quality - Compliance Inspection
p Other Agency - Operation Review
e p complaint p hollow -up
Facility Number
on p
N Permitted 0 Certified p Conditionally Certified p Registered
OW -Up of i1Jvvi, review p utner
Date of Inspection
Time of Inspection ® 24 hr. (hh:mm)
in Not Operattona Date Last Operated:
Farm Name: RirkHarper.Farrm................. County: Greene WARO
.......................................................... .
OwnerName: Rick ........................................ Harper ....................................................... Phone No: 252-.7.47-8.7.32 .......................................................
Facility Contact:............................................................. .............Title: .... Phone No:
Mailing Address: RU.Bos..108...............
......... Snow.Hill... N.0....................................................... 285811.............
Onsite Representative: Hick.Harper:.................... g pbt: y.. pt ny..................... ... ........................................................... Inte rotor: Ju>: £ m�
Certified Operator: Bitchard.S................... .. Harpte.............................................. Operator Certification Number:1652Q.............................
Location of Farm:
NV
Latitude ©0 ©i ©44 Longitude ©� ®& ©41
Swine Capacity Population
❑ can to Feeder
®Feeder to Fin
p Farrow to Wean
p Farrow to ee er
p Farrow to Finish
p Gilts
p Boars
Poultry Capacity Population Cattle Capacity Population
❑ ayer 3 airy
❑ Non -Layer p Non -Dairy
p Other
Total Design Capacity 4,000
Total SSLW 540,000
Number of Lagoons i1 1[3 �uosurtace crams rresent l p uagoon Area p spray rein Area I
Holding Ponds / Solid Traps I p o Liquid waste Management System
arRes & Stream Impacts
1. Is any discharge observed from any part of the operation? ❑ Yes ® No
Discharge originated at: ❑ 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 Water of the State? (If yes, notify DWQ) ❑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
2. Is there evidence of past discharge from any part of the operation? 0 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 p Yes N No
Structure 1 Structure 2 Structure 3 Structure 4 Structure 5 Structure 6
Identifier: jj'1...
Freeboard(inches):..2.4...............................................................................................................................................................................................
5. Are there any immediate threats to the integrity of any of the structures observed? (iel trees, severe erosion, [3 Yes I& No
seepage, etc.}
3/23/99 Continued on bac t,

.-VW
Facility Number: 40-160 Mite of lnspectiorl
6. Are there structures on -site which are not properly addressed and/or managed through a waste management or
closure plan?
p 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?
p Yes
N No
8. Does any part of the waste management system other than waste structures require maintenance/improvement?
r3 Yes
R No
9. Do any stuctures lack adequate, gauged markers with required maximum and minimum liquid level
elevation markings?
p Yes
H No
Waste Application
10. Are there any buffers that need maintenance/improvement?
p Yes
N No
11, is there evidence of over application? p Excessive Ponding p PAN
p Yes
N No
12. Crop type Corn, Soybeans, Wheat
13. Do the receiving crops differ with those designated in the Certified Animal Waste Management Plan (CAWMP)?
p Yes
N No
14. a) Does the facility lack adequate acreage for land application?
p Yes
®No
b) Does the facility need a wettable acre determination?
p Yes
®No
c) This facility is pended for a wettable acre determination?
N Yes
p No
15. Does the receiving crop need improvement?
p Yes
®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?
p 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)
p Yes
®No
20. Is facility not in compliance with any applicable setback criteria in effect at the time of design?
p Yes
®No
21. Did the facility fail to have a actively certified operator in charge?
p Yes
®No
22. Fail to notify regional DWQ of emergency situations as required by General Permit?
(ie/ discharge, freeboard problems, over application)
p Yes
N No
23. Did Reviewer/Inspector fail to discuss review/inspection with on -site representative?
p Yes
®No
24. Does facility require a follow-up visit by same agency?
p Yes
N No
25_ Were any additional problems noted which cause noncompliance of the Certified AWMP?
p Yes
®No
a : N o.viatations.or. deficiie>ncies.were ,ntited _during- this visit. - �taq will ;receive na further.
........ ............ ... ... ....... .. ...........
...ckresnandekc aboir( 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):
Kecommend signing up for local Neuse Kule options by 75/l/99 with Greene Soil & water Gonservatron District
* Given Integrator Registration card
" Waste sample dated 1/29/99 at 2.1 lbs/1000 gal
* Soil test report dated 5/7199
* Has signed 0.200 certification and is keeping weekly lagoon level records as required and noted during previous inspections
14c. Operation in process of securing wettable acre determination. Pulls have been measured and Brian Tingen with Greene Soil
and Water Conservation District in process of amending waste utilization plan. Mr. Harper does have map with pull and pull
numbers noted on map. It is permissible to go ahead and pump on corn if needed - record times and volumes and reconcile
IV
Reviewer/Inspector Name Pat Hooper 252/946-6481
Reviewer/Inspector Signature: Date:

p Division of Soil and Water Conservation - Operation Review
p Division of Soil and Water Conservation - Compliance Inspection
N Division of Water Quality - Compliance Inspection
g Other Agency - Operation Review
19 Routine p comptatnt 'p Poltow-up of UWQ inspection p follow-up of DSWC review O Other
Facility Number Date of Inspection
I"ime of Inspection 24 hr. (hh:mm)
Permitted p Certified p Conditionally Certified p Registered in Not Operational I Date Last Operated:
Farm Name: Rick.Harpter..Farm............................................................ .. ........................ County: Greene WARO
Owner Name: Rick ........................................ Harper........................................................ Phone No: 252-.7417-8.732.................... ........................... I ......
...
Facilitv Contact: ............................................................. .......Title: .... Phone No:
MailingAddress: Rt.1.Rox.308........................:................................................................. Saaw-HULN.0 ....................................................... Z8580 .............
Onsite Representative: R,iek.Rar.pex............................................................................... Integrator: L.L.Mur[thlt:ey..C.%............................................ -
Certified Operator:RlcharA.S............................ Harper ............................................. Operator Certification Number:16529.............................
Location of Farm:
Latitude ©� ©� ©44 Longitude ©� ®� ©61
Swine Capacity Population
13 Wean to Feeder
® Feeder to tuts
E3 Farrow to can
p Farrow to Feeder
p Farrow to Finish
o Gilts
p Boars
Poultry Capacity Population Cattle Capacity Population
p ayer p airy
13 Non- ayer JE3 Non -Dairy
p Other
Total Design Capacity 4,000
Total SSLW 540,000
Number of Lagoons 0 13 u sur ace Drains Present rea p Spray �e rea
Holding Ponds I Solid Traps p o Liquid Waste Management System
Disc�harpes & Stream Impacts
1. Is any discharge observed from any part of the operation? p Yes M No
Discharge originated at: p Lagoon p Spray Field p Other
a. If discharge is observed, was the conveyance man-made? [3Yes N No
b. If discharge is observed, did it reach Water of the State? (If yes, notify DWQ) 0 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
2. Is there evidence of past discharge from any part of the operation? p Yes N No
3. Were there any adverse impacts or potential adverse impacts to the Waters of the State other than from a discharge? 0 Yes N No
Waste Collection & Treatment
4. Is storage capacity (freeboard plus storm storage) less than adequate? p Spillway p Yes N No
Structure I Structure 2 Structure 3 Structure 4 Structure 5 Structure 6
Identifier:
...........................................................................................................
Freeboard(inches): .............. Z............... ................................................................................................................................................................................
5. Are there any immediate threats to the integrity of any of the structures observed? (ie/ trees, severe erosion, 0 Yes N No
seepage, etc.}
3/23/99 Continued on 6act

Facility Number: Date of Inspection
6. Are there structures on -site which are not properly addressed and/or managed through a waste management or
closure plan?
p 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?
p Yes
N No
8. Does any part of the waste management system other than waste structures require maintenance/improvement?
p Yes
N No
9. Do any stuctures lack adequate, gauged markers with required maximum and minimum liquid level
elevation markings?
❑ Yes
N No
Waste AVplication
10. Are there any buffers that need maintenance/improvement?
p Yes
® No
11. Is there evidence of over application? p Excessive Ponding p PAN
p Yes
®No
12. Crop type Corn, Soybeans, Wheat
13. Do the receiving crops differ with those designated in the Certified Animal Waste Management Plan (CAWMP)?
p Yes
.® No
14. a) Does the facility lack adequate acreage for land application?
p Yes
p No
b) Does the facility need a wettable acre determination?
p Yes
p No
c) This facility is pended for a wettable acre determination?
p Yes
p No
15. Does the receiving crop need improvement?
p Yes
®No
16. Is there a lack of adequate waste application equipment?
p Yes
®No
Required Records & Documents
17. Fail to have Certificate of Coverage & General Permit readily available?
p 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.)
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?
C[ N.0viotations.or-deficiencies:were•noted during. thisvisit.•Yoiiwill-receiveuafurther-'
:. icorjres}wrideince. aboirt tbis:visit: .................................
Comments (refer to question #): Explain any YES answers and/or any recommendations or any other com
Use drawings of facility to better explain situations. (use additional pages as necessary):
p Yes N No
p Yes ® No
p Yes ® No
p Yes N No
p Yes ® No
p Yes N No
p Yes N No
p Yes N No
All
Reviewer/Inspector Name Carl Dunn Entered by Ann Tyndall
Reviewer/Inspector Signature: Date:

rrinted on rl,
Facility Number: 40_160 Date of Inspection
Odor Issues
26. Does the discharge pipe from the confinement building to the storage pond or lagoon fail to discharge at/or below p 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? p Yes ® No
28.
Is there any evidence of wind drift during land application? (i.e. residue on neighboring vegetation, asphalt,
p Yes
® No
roads, building structure, and/or public property)
24.
Is the land application spray system intake not located near the liquid surface of the lagoon?
p 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.)
p Yes
® No
31.
Do the animals feed storage bins fail to have appropriate cover?
p Yes
® No
32.
Do the flush tanks lack a submerged fill pipe or a permanenthemporary cover?
® Yes
p No

State of North Carolina
Department of Environment and
Natural Resources
Washington Regional Office
James B. Hunt, Jr., Governor
Wayne McDevitt, Secretary
CERTIFIED MAIL
RETURN RECEIPT REQUESTED
• • M4
�!
NC'DE N R
NORTH GAMMA-INA DEPARTMENT OF"
ENVIRONMENT Aron N.mrumA- RESOURCES
DIVISION OF WATER QUALITY
February 3, 1999
Mr. Rick Harper
Rick Harper Farm
Rt. 1, Box 323H
Snow Hill, North Carolina 28580
SUBJECT: Notice of Deficiency
Animal Feedlot Operation Site Inspection
Rick Harper Farm
Facility No. 40-160
Greene County
Dear Mr. Harper:
On June 26, 1998, 1 conducted an Animal Feedlot Operation Site Inspection at
the Rick Harper Farm in Greene County. A copy of the inspection report is
attached for your review.
In general, this inspection included verifying that: (1) the farm has a Certified
Animal Waste Management Plan (CAWMP) and the General Permit; (2) the farm
is complying with requirements of the State Rules 15 NCAC 2H.0217, Senate Bill
1217, the Certified Animal Waste Management Plan and the General Permit; (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 following deficiencies
were observed during the inspection.
➢ The Certified Animal Waste Management Plan records did not include a soil
analysis for 1997.
943 Washington Square Mall, Washington, North Carolina 27889
Telephone [phone] FAX [phone]
An Equal Opportunity Affirmative Action Employer

Page Two
Rick Harper Farm
Facility No. 40-160
February 3, 1999
➢ Failed to have the required waste analysis. The wastewater must be sampled
within sixty (60) days of application. It is suggested to collect a sample for
analysis every 120 days to meet the requirement.
➢ The CAWMP needs a copy of the DWQ Certification form.
It is very important as the owner and the Operator in Charge that you resolve
these aforementioned deficiencies and any other problems that may arise, as
soon as possible. For additional assistance, please contact your Technical
Specialist. Nothing in this letter should be taken as absolving this facility of the
responsibility and liability of any violations that have resulted or may result from
these deficiencies.
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 at [phone], ext. 321.
Sincerely,
Daphne B. Cullom
Environmental Specialist
cc: .lake Barrow, L.L. Murphrey Hog Company
Greene County SWCD Office
Mike Regans, Greene County NCCES Office
DSWC-WaRO
Compliance Group
WaRO

Facility Number Date of Inspection 6-26-98
Time of Inspection 24 hr. (hh:mm)
0 Registered 0 Certified p Applied for Permit N Permitted 17 Not Operational Date Last Operated:
Farm Name: Rick. ar{ter.Farsn....................................................................................... County: Greene WARO
Owner Name: Rick ......................................... Harper........................................................ Phone No: 919=141-.8132 ..........................................................
Facility Contact ......Title: .. Phone No:
Mailing Address: RU.Hox.323H...................................................................................... Snow.HUL.NC............. ........... ................................. 2858.Q ..............
Onsite Representative: Wck.Har er............................................................................... Integrator: R.L.MiLrght:ey.Ci mpiaxty..................................
Certified Operator: RicharAS............................ Harper .............................................. Operator Certification Number: 16529 ............................
Location of Farm:
Latitude ©• ©4 ©K Longitude ©O ®, ©"
General
1. Are there any buffers that need maintenance/improvement? p Yes ® 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 gal/min?
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 lagoonslitolding ponds) require
maintenance/improvement?
b. Is facility not in compliance with any applicable setback criteria in effect at the time of design?
E3 Yes N No
p Yes p No
p Yes p No
p Yes p No
p Yes N No
p Yes ® No
p Yes ® No
13 Yes ® No
7. Did the facility fail to have a certified operator in responsible charge?
7/25/97
p Yes ig No

aci,ty Number: 40_16o Date of Inspection -
8. Are there lagoons or storage ponds on site which need to be properly closed?
Structures (La oonsZolding Ponds, Flush Pits, etc.)
9. Is storage capacity (freeboard plus storm storage) less than adequate?
Structure 1 Structure 2 Structure 3 Structure 4
Identifier: ...........................
Freeboard (11): 2.3 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
p Yes N No
Structure 5 Structure 6
15. Crop type ................... Soyheans....................... ....................�mat....................... ..................................................
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.. ovi( tions.or erencies•were.note rintgt tsvisit:. You will -receive er.
: : .e"r.e'spoA�CUe� .................................
p Yes N No
13 Yes N No
p Yes ® No
p Yes ® No
p Yes ® No
p Yes N No
p Yes N No
p Yes ®No
p Yes ®No
p Yes ® No
p Yes ®No
la `]I'es N No
p Yes ® No
p Yes ® No
® Yes p No
Reviewer/Inspector Name Ii aWe_B:�u om w .
Reviewer/Inspector Signature:
Date:

Date of Inspection —R
Facility Number
Time of Inspection 24 hr. (hh:mm)
0 Registered Certified U Applied for Permit ermitted [3 Not Operational Date Last Operated:......
Farm Name: i. ......�!!....� ` County: ... �...
Owner Name :.......... ............. l.Q- s� ..................................... Phone No:... � ..�. 7.. `... 3............
Facility Contact:..................................................... ......................... Title: Phone No:
Q �l `
Mailing Address:. ,.....,..k.? X.....s�? J....................................... ..... �`1.C151-�. .1.�'....}.ice.....}}.........
Onsite Rep resentative+--'-C�. Integratcfr:.-.....- V1f.�J1l.�!�?.h.... .........r....
` ......................................
Certified Operator ?:....................`�..........P .. ....--- Operator Certification Number :....�.(a.-?. � ............
p � p
Location of Farm:
C5 ........( � zg.............................................................................................•--.--.------.............---......................................................................... .
General
1. Are there any buffers that need maintenance/improvement? ❑ Yes �ON-10
2. Is any discharge observed from any part of the operation? ❑ Yes l]1'1Qo
Discharge originated at: ❑ Lagoon ❑ Spray Field ❑ Other
a. If discharge is observed, was the conveyance man-made?
b. If discharge is observed, did it reach Surface Water? (If yes, notify DWQ)
c. If discharge is observed, what is the estimated flow in gal/min?
d. Does discharge bypass a lagoon system? (If yes, notify DWQ)
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?
7. Did the facility fail to have a certified operator in responsible charge?
7/25197
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes
❑ No
❑ YesLv1'No
❑ Yes
L2<0
❑ Yes
0<0
❑ Yes
I]K
❑ Yes
0110
Continued on back

Facility Number: - bd
8. Are there lagoons or storage ponds on site which need to be properly closed?
Structures (Lagoons.11olding Ponds, Flush Pits, etc.)
9. Is storage capacity (freeboard plus storm storage) less than adequate?
Structure I Structure 2 Structure 3
Identifier:
Freeboard (ft): ....... ... L..►{1.......
10. is seepage observed from any of the structures?
Structure 4
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?
❑ Yes
w-1<.
❑ Yes
L.W�o
Structure 5 Structure 6
.................................. I................
❑ Yes
&�<o
❑ Yes
R-I�o
❑ Yes
LI-No
❑ Yes
Waste Application
plication
14. Is there physical evidence of over application?
(If in excess of WMP,ior runoff entering waters of the State, notify DWQ)
15. Crop type ,111Vi.................... ....t...................... .... ..... .vS.............................................
.
16. Do"the receiving crops differ with those designated in the Anim ante Management Plan (AWMP)?
17. Does the facility have a lack of adequate acreage for land application?
I S. 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?
0 No.violations-or deficiencies.were-note' during this. visit.- Nou4ill receive no ftirther
correspondence about this'.visit:-
❑ Yes GKO
❑ Yes [aKo
❑ Yes N oo
❑ Yes GKO
❑ Yes ,h��11<0
Eli� Yes 'lvo
❑ Yes E940
❑ Yes 9 1 To
❑ Yes Ek"O
❑ res
No
EF ❑ No
Comments (refer to question #) E*plain any_ YES answers andlor any recommendations vrany other comments
o.. � w
Use drawings of facdrty to:betterviplatni situations (use addtiional pages as necessai v)
VQ0L ` S - S� r'l 7 } � - 1 i - � Qj � `SA��i"' o w"- cL N�Ao be- - �
os�-� �oo�e�a-�ivL� �rrsZt La Sa;�
��t`1
"4�1,e i )o-.s� i�
^^���'' ` ` � n � 's`I-�� Cam-- "
l� �- ca \gyp
Eje
wer/Inspector Name
ewer/Inspector
Signature: v%A--- Date: (r, _ Cf g

0z
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 22, 1997
Mr. Rick Harper
Rick Harper Farm
Rt. 1, Box 323H
Snow Hill, NC 28580
SUBJECT: Animal Feedlot Operation Site Inspection
Rick Harper Farm
Facility No. 40-160
Greene County
Dear Mr, Harper:
On October 2, 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,
Daphne B. Cullom
Environmental Specialist II
cc: Greene County SWCD Office
Mike Regans, Greene County NCCES
Jake Barrow, L.L. Murphrey Hog Company
VaRO
943 Washington Square Mall, Washington, NC 27889 Telephone [phone] FAX [phone]
An Equal Opportunity Affirmative Action Employer

p Routine p Complaint p Follow-up o inspection p Follow-up of DSWC review p ITher
Date of Inspection
Facility Number
Time of Inspection 0 24 hr. (hh:mm)
p Registered ■ Certified 0 Applied for Permit p Permitted in Not 0peratsona Date Last Operated:
Farm Name: Rick.Harper.Farm..................................... ................................................. County: Greene WARO
OwnerName: Rick ........................................ Harper........................................................ Phone No: 9.19m7.47=8732 ..........................................................
FacilityContact: ........Title: ...................................................................................................................................... Phone No:
MailingAddress: RU.Box.323.H...................................................................................... SAO.W.AU.B.0 ....................................................... 28580 ..............
Onsite Representative: Rick.Haxprx............................................................................... Integrator: L.L.Murp►lixey..Hag.Company.......................
Certified Operator:Ricb=&S............................ Harper ............................................. Operator Certification Number: 16.42Q.............................
Location of Farm:
Latitude ©• ©� ©" Longitude ©• ®4 ©u
p Wean to Feeder
® Feeaer to Finish
13 Farrow toWean'
p Farrow to Feeder
p Farrow to Funs
13 Gilts
13 Boars
0
1. Are there any buffers that need maintenance/improvement? p Yes N 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) p 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) E3 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
7/25/97

Facility Number: 40_ 160
8. Are there lagoons or storage ponds on site which need to be properly closed?
Structures (Lagoons,HoldinZ Ponds. Flush Pits etc.
9. Is storage capacity (freeboard plus storm storage) less than adequate?
Structure 1 Structure 2 Structure 3 Structure 4
Identifier: ................................... ..
Freeboard (ft): 2.6 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)
Structure 5
p Yes H No
13 Yes ® No
Structure 6
o Yes ® No
p Yes H No
p Yes ®No
0 Yes ® No
p Yes ® No
15. Crop type .......Cara.(Silage.&..Graint................................
16. Do the receiving crops differ with those designated in the Animal Waste Management Plan (AWMP)? 17 Yes N No
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 reviewlinspection 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 A WMP?
25. Were any additional problems noted which cause noncompliance of the Permit?
Q . . wiq tions.or �cienries-were.note unng t is visit:. na will.receive noF urt er . .
:: �ext6odnde� cO aWlit b;�:y�si ;:... .
13 Yes ® No
Yes ®No
Yes H No
13 Yes ®No
17 Yes ®No
13 Yes N No
13 Yes ® No
r3 Yes ® No
p Yes ® No
Reviewer/Inspector Name
Reviewer/Inspector Signature: _ ����� �'� ��! Date: j p •— Z6 c 1 "(

{Facility umber: 40_160 Date of inspection
21
M=
at
soil_analysis;and '
l'1egi�ileform�for a��
tY P Y A{i
J-1

outtne p omp am p Follow-up of DWWinspection p o ow -up o review 00ther
Date of Inspection
Facility Number
Time of Inspection ® 24 hr. (hh:mm)
p Registered ■ Certified ■ Applied for Permit o Permitted in Not 0perattona Date Last Operated:
Farm Name: Rick.Harper-Earin...................................................................................... County: Greene WARO
OwnerName: Ricic....................................----- H.arper........................................................ Phone No: 919-.14.7.:8.732..........................................................
Facility Contact: Rick.Harper.................................................... Title: owner ................................................. Phone No: 919174.1-8732........................
Mailing Address: Rt.l..>dos.3i23H...................................................................................... Snox.ElilLAC ....................................................... 285811..............
Onsite Representative: Rick.Harprx,.Rri=5hackWard..................................... Integrator: L.L.Morphs:cyAog.Calo parry........................
Certified Operator: Richard.S......... ................... Harp►eir.............................................. Operator Certification Number: 16529....... ......................
Location of Farm:
Latitude ©•©' ©" Longitude ©• ®° ©;'
resign Current
Swine " Capacity Population-
pWean to Feeder
® Feeder to inis4000
p arrow to Wean
p Farrow to Feeder
p farrow to Finis
p Gilts
p Soars
<Number of Lagoons Holding Ponds 13 u sur ace rains resen p agoon rea p pray �e rea
p o Liquid Waste anagement 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? 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 ®No
b. If discharge is observed, did it reach Surface Water? (If yes, notify DWQ) p 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) l7 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 p 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

Yacility Number- 40_160
8. Are there lagoons or storage ponds on site which need to be properly closed?
p Yes
N No
Structures (Lagoons,Holding Ponds, Flush Pits, etc.)
9. Is storage capacity (freeboard plus storm storage) less than adequate?
p Yes
® No
Structure I Structure 2 Structure 3 Structure 4
Structure 5 Structure
6
Identifier:
Freeboard (ft): 3.0
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
® No
(If in excess of WMP, or runoff entering waters of the State, notify DWQ)
15. Crop a ................ Corn. ain ......Soybeans . ................... ....................... Wheat.......................................................................-.-------.-
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?
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 .. o_vta ttons.or erencies•were.no a artng is visit.,.nn , receive nafurther.-7
. � . �e�e's�op��rie� abQu>: ��is-visit: - - - - - - � ....... --- - - - - - - - - - - � . .
n Yes ®No
p Yes ® No
p Yes ® No
p Yes N No
p Yes ® No
p Yes ® No
® Yes p No
p Yes N No
p Yes p No
lo
Qthn eats-(refeeto quest�6n #) Ezphdn any YES answers and/or any feeominendations or;any other comments ..
se,drawingso# facility to better_ezplatn situatiaris. (use additional pages as necessary:)
subsurface drainage on site according to Mr. Harper
Pulled soil samples for 1997 - have not received results
Utilizes third party land - has lease agreements
3. Need to secure copy of completed certification form
" Not required at time of certification but will need for General Permit: odor control, insect control and mortality checklists
11/19/97
.•
Reviewer/Inspector Name raf o6per,
Reviewer/Inspector Signature: Date:

_❑ DSWC Animal Feedlot Operation Reviewm zl
r 13DWQ Animal Feedlot Operation Site. Inspection
kutttine O Complaint Q Follow-up of DWO inspection O Follow-up of DSWC review O Other
Date of Inspection !Q- Z-e17
Facility Number U
���� C ���� Time of Inspection i�_t7 Ni 24 hr. (hh:mm)
© Registered E3 ertified pplied for Permit © Permitted JE3 Not Operational Date Last Operated:......... „
Farts Name:...�iC'L-4 Lo..t..�Q.trl.......�'ItAr1!?(1... County:......... ............................. ?. w
` �' 1 `1
Owner Narrte:....... � �-..`�:........................' ...... i.r............................... Phone No; a..9... .... ......
Facility Contact:... ......................................... ......... .. Title Phone No:
�p L
TMailing Address: .... ��`.r ....... 8,0K.... az.ai%.... .sJtl.�,(?. .......................
Onsite Representative:....�.1.0 .-..' `�.0. .e11 .................. ..................... Integrator:.......-.4.,,.�.. -.......1['�U.J1f.°.Q.k : 11 ..............
Certified O erator............... �...... 1 Number;....`...............J�
p &........... �............... ....... Operator Certification ...-...e� .....
Location of Farm:
Latitude • �7. ` ® 46 Longitude 4
Design Current
Swine Capacity Population
❑ Xan to Feeder
Feeder to Finish
OU
3glo
❑ Farrow to Wean
❑ Farrow to Feeder
❑ Farrow to Finish
❑ Gilts
❑ Boars
Design Current Design Current
Poultry Capacity Population Cattle Capacity: Population
❑ Layer JE1 Dairy
❑ Non -Layer 10 Non -Dairy
❑ Other
` Total Design Capacity 41DOO
Total SSLW cvn 7n7
Number of Lagoons / Holding Ponds JE1 Subsurface Drains Present ❑ Lagoon Area 10 Spray Field Area
❑ No Liquid Waste Itilanagement System
General
1. Are there any buffers that need maintenance/improvement?
2• Is any discharge observed from any part of the operation?
Discharge originated at: ❑ Lagoon ❑ Spray Field ❑ Other
a. If discharge is observed, was the conveyance man-made?
b. if discharge is observed. slid it reach Surface Water? (if yes, notify DWQ)
c. If discharge is observed, what is the estimated flow in galhnin?
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?
5. Is facility not in compliance with any applicable setback criteria in effect at the time of design?
7. Did the facility fail to have a certified operator in responsible charge?
7125/97
❑ Yes
Wwo
❑ Yes
2<0
❑ Yes
❑ No
❑ Yes
❑ No
❑ Yes
❑ No
❑ Yes
B"No
❑ Yes
❑ Yes
�M/No
L7 No
❑ Yes
grNo
❑ Yes
No
Continued on back

Facility Number: —
8. Are there lagoons or storage ponds on site which need to be property closed'?
Structures ILagoons.11olding Ponds Flush Pits etc.
9. Is storage capacity (freeboard plus storm storage) less than adequate?
Structure 1 Structure 2 Structure 3 Structure 4
Identifier:
Freeboard(ft):..........511-MA-................................................................................................................
10. Is seepage observed from any of the structures?
11. Is erosion, or any other threats to the integrity of any of the structures observed?
❑ Yes 2<0
❑ Yes 03,N`o
Structure 5 Structure 6
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 W P, or runoff entering waters of the State, notify DWQ)
15. Croptype ............ ....I4..�11•................................................................................ ................................ I ............. ................
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?
2 L 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?
[] No.violations or deficien' des4ere noted -during this.visit.- .You.Mill receive no further :
correspondence about this:visit:..
omrheiits (referto question#): Explain any YES answers and/or any;recoRunendations`or a
se drawings:of facility to better explain situations. (use additioral pages as necessary)
t S _ Las be 'ta�i� ✓1.� 5
het CaL A XA 4 ,k
❑ Yes [u <0
❑ Yes to
❑ Yes 2 io
❑ Yes 5 o
❑ Yes � o
❑ Yes
9'Ko
0 Yes
Ga'KIo
❑ Yes
2<0
❑ Yes
[2,No
❑ Yes
&Ko
❑ Yes
K?lq'o
❑ Yes
5?IC0
❑ Yes ilo
❑ Yes 2'1�0
❑ Yes ❑ No
eats
UJUP ewzt�i_Q,",
lea `mx. fe tine cue_
6&0� .
7/25/97
Reviewer/Inspector Name M.
Reviewer/Inspector Signature: �j , Date: _ Z _ 52

State of North Carolina
Department of Environment,
Health and Natural Resources
Division of Water Quality
James B. Hunt, Jr., Governor
Wayne McDevitt, Secretary
A. Preston Howard, Jr., P.E., Director
CERTIFIED MAIL
RETURN RECEIPT REQUESTED
Rick Harper
Rick Harper Farm
Rt I Box 323H
Snow Hill NC 28580
Farm Number: 40-160
Dear Rick Harper:
September 11, 1997
M1.9;V'A
I'T 0 0
EDEHNR
WASNINGT6NF'OFFtCF
SEP 1 5 1997
DEEM,
You are hereby notified that Rick Harper Farm, in accordance with G.S. 143-215.10C, must apply
for coverage under an Animal Waste Operation General Permit. Upon receipt of this letter, your farm has
thirty (30) days to submit the attached application and all supporting documentation. In accordance
with Chapter 626 of 1995 Session Laws -(Regular Session 1996), Section 19(c)(2), any
owner or operator who fails to submit an application by the date specified by the
Department SHALL NOT OPERATE the animal waste system after the specified date.
Your application must be returned within thirty (30) days of receipt of this letter. Failure to submit the
application as required may also subject your facility to a civil penalty and other enforcement actions for
each day the facility is operated following the due date of the application.
The attached application has been partially completed using information listed in your Animal
Waste Management Plan Certification Form. If any of the general or operation information listed is
incorrect please make corrections as noted on the application before returning the application package. The
signed original application, one copy of the signed application, two copies of a general location map, and
two copies of the Certified Animal Waste Management Plan must be returned to complete the application
package. The completed package should be sent to the following address:
North Carolina Division of Water Quality
Water Quality Section
Permits and Engineering Unit
Post Office Box 29535
Raleigh, NC 27626-0535
If you have any question concerning this letter, please call J R Joshi at [phone] extension
363 or Carl Dunn with the Washington Regional Office at [phone].
Sincerely,
f
A. Preston Howard, Jr., P.E.
cc: Permit File (w/o encl.)
Washington Regional Office (w/o encl.)
P.O. Box 29535, Raleigh, North Carolina 27626-0535 Telephone [phone] FAX [phone]
An Equal Opportunity Affirmative Action Employer 50°/k recycled/ 10% post -consumer paper