930001_PERMIT FILE_20171231

Animal Waste Management System Operator Designation Form
WPCSOCC
NCAC 15A 8F .0201
Facility/Farm Name: i1 i� G i r 5 -- Y (6 • pa rll I ' S r vA 5
Permit #: fiwJ)"it 3 o 0 0 Facility ID#: J 00 © County: &,t rL�
03 -01 #T
Operator In.Charge (OIC)
Name:
First Middle Last Jr, Sr, etc.
Cert Type/#:
Signature:
Work Phone: ( )
Date:
"I certify that I agree to my designation as the Operator in Charge for the facility noted. I understand and will abide by the rules and
regulations pertaining to the responsibilities set forth in 15A NCAC 08F .0203 and failing to do so can result in Disciplinary Actions by the Water
Pollution Control System Operators Certification Commission."
Back-up Operator In Charge (Back-up OTC) (Optional)
Name: rt.. b 1 `ate
First
aL ylri , YZ y1
e�
, Sr, etc.
Cert Type/#: 7 Work Phone: (A6 2)
Signature: Date: U
"I certify that 1 agree to my designationghe Operator in Charge for the facility noted. I understand and will abide by the rules and
regulations pertaining to the responsibilities set forth in 1SA NCAC 08F .0203 and falling to do so can result in Disciplinary Actions by the Water
Pollution Control System Operators Certification Commission."
�-` Iole -% se remove, -me, Proms bailyp OTC.
Phone #: ( ) Email:
Signature:
Date:
(Owner or Representative)
Mail or fax the original to:
WPCSOCC, 1618 Mail Service Center, Raleigh, NC 27699-1618 Fax: [phone]
Asheville
2090 US Hwy 70
Swannanoa 28778
Fax: [phone]
Phone: [phone]
Washington
943 Washington Sg Mali
Washington 27889
Fax: [phone]
Phone: [phone]
Mail or fax a copy to the appropriate Regional Office:
Fayetteville
225 Green St, Suite 714
Fayetteville 28301-5043
Fax: [phone]
Phone: [phone]
Wilmington
127 Cardinal Dr
Wilmington 28405-2845
Fax: [phone]
Phone: [phone]
Mooresville
610 E Center Ave; Suite 301
Mooresville 28115
Fax: [phone]
Phone: [phone]
Winston-Salem
585 Waughtown St
Winston-Salem 27107
Fax: [phone]
Phone: [phone]
Raleigh
3800 Barrett Dr
Raleigh 27609
Fax: [phone]
Phone:[phone]
Revised 12C1012 (Retain a copy of this form for your records)

Type of Visit: fO Com ' nce Inspection O Operation Review Q Structure Evaluation Q Technical Assistance
Reason for Visit: Routine 0 Complaint O Follow-up O Referral O Emergency O Other O Denied Access
Date of Visit: / / Arrival Time: Departure Time: County:
Farm Name; .�►� L9 F= (,J �� �' Owner Email:
Owner Name: Phone:
Mailing Address:
Physical Address:
Facility Contact:
Title:
Phone:
Region:
Onsite Representative: Al C n s he Integrator:
- -v
Certified Operator: Certification Number:
Back-up Operator: Certification Number: '
Location of Farm:
Latitude:
Longitude:
Design C►urgent
Design
Current
Design Current
Swine Capacity Pop.
Wet Poultry
Capacity
Pop.
C►attle Capacity Pop.
Wean to Finish
La er
Layer
Dairy Cow
Dairy Calf
Wean to Feeder
Feeder to Finish
Dairy Heifer
Farrow to Wean
Design
Current
Dry Cow
arrow to Feeder
D , P.nult ,
C►,a aci
Pin
Non -Dairy
Farrow to Finish
Layers
Non -Layers
Pullets
Turkeys
Beef Stocker
Beef Feeder
Beef Brood Cow
Gilts
Boars
Other
Turkey Poults
Other
Other
Discharees and Stream Impacts
1. Is any discharge observed from any part of the operation? ❑ Yes No ❑ NA ❑ NE
Discharge originated at: ❑ Structure ❑ Application Field ❑ Other:
a. Was the conveyance man-made? ❑ Yes o [] NA ❑ NE
b. Did the discharge reach waters of the State? (If yes, notify DWQ) ❑ Yesn;No ❑ NA ❑ NE
c. What is the estimated volume that reached waters of the State (gallons)?
d. Does the discharge bypass the waste management system? (If yes, notify DWQ) [:]Yes ON'q ❑ NA ❑ NE
2. Is there evidence of a past discharge from any part of the operation? ❑ Yes N NA ❑ NE
3. Were there any observable adverse impacts or potential adverse impacts to the waters ❑ Yes No ❑ NA ❑ NE
of the State other than from a discharge?
Page I of 3 21412011 Continued

Facili Number: jDate of Inspection: l
Waste Collection & Treatment
4. Is storage capacity (structural plus storm storage plus heavy rainfall) less than adequate? ❑ Yes Z <NoD 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?
(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 No NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes No ❑ NA ❑ NE
If any of questions 4-6 were answered yes, and the situation poses an immediate public health or environmental th eat, notify DWQ
7. Do any of the structures need maintenance or improvement? ❑ Yes To ❑ NA ❑ NE
8. Do any of the structures lack adequate markers as required by the permit? ❑ Yes 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 No ❑ NA ❑ NE
maintenance or improvement?
Waste Application
M. Are there any required buffers, setbacks, or compliance alternatives that need ❑ Yes VNoo
NA ❑ NE
maintenance or improvement?
11. Is there evidence of incorrect land application? If yes, check the appropriate box below. ❑ Yes NA ❑ NE
❑ Excessive Ponding ❑ Hydraulic Overload ❑ Frozen Ground ❑ Heavy Metals (Cu, Zn, etc.)
❑ PAN ❑ PAN > 10% or 10 lbs. ❑ Total Phosphorus ❑ Failure to Incorporate Manure/Sludge into Bare Soil
❑ Outside of Acceptable Crop Window ❑ Evidence of Wind Drift ❑ Application Outside of Approved Area
12. Crop Type(s): CCU .
13. Soil Type(s):
14. Do the receiving crops differ from those designated in the CAWMP?
❑ Yes ZNo ❑ NA
❑ NE
15. Does the receiving crop and/or land application site need improvement?
❑ Yes
NA
❑ NE
16. Did the facility fail to secure and/or operate per the irrigation design or wettable
❑ Yes
No ❑ NA
❑ NE
acres determination?
17. Does the facility lack adequate acreage for land application?
❑ Yes
01,40 NA
❑ NE
18. Is there a lack of properly operating waste application equipment?
❑ Yes
o ❑ NA
❑ NE
Required Records & Documents
19. Did the facility fail to have the Certificate of Coverage & Permit readily available?
❑ Yes
0 <No❑ NA
❑ NE
20. Does the facility fail to have all components of the CAWMP readily available? If yes, check
❑ Yes
No ❑ NA
❑ NE
the appropriate box.
❑ WUP ❑Checklists [:]Design ❑ Maps ❑ Lease Agreements ❑Other:
21. Does record keeping need improvement? If yes, check the appropriate box below. ❑ Yes o ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Waste Application ❑ Weekly Freeboard ❑ Waste Analysis ❑ Soil Analysis ❑ Waste Transfers Weather Code
❑ Rainfall ❑Stocking ❑ Crop Yield ❑ 120 Minute Inspections ❑ Monthly and I" Rainfall Inspections Sludge Survey
22. Did the facility fail to install and maintain a rain gauge? ❑ Yes o ❑ NA ❑ NE
23. If selected, did the facility fail to install and maintain rainbreakers on irrigation equipment? ❑ Yes No ❑ NA ❑ NE
Page 2 of 3 21412011 Continued

]Facility Number: - Q 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 ❑ YesY3-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? 0 Yes Zoo
_NA ❑ NE
27. Did the facility fail to secure a phosphorus loss assessments (PLAT) certification? ❑ Yes NA ❑ NE
Other Issues
28. Did the facility fail to properly dispose of dead animals with 24 hours and/or document
❑ Yes
❑ No
❑ NA
❑ NE
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?
❑ Yes
❑ No
❑ NA
❑ NE
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
❑ Yes
❑ No
❑ NA
❑ NE
permit? (i.e., discharge, freeboard problems, over -application)
31. Do subsurface the drains exist at the facility? If yes, check the appropriate box below.
❑ Yes
❑ No
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Application Field ❑ Lagoon/Storage Pond ❑ Other:
32. Were any additional problems noted which cause non-compliance of the permit or CAWMP?
❑ Yes
❑ No
❑ NA
❑ NE
33. Did the Reviewer/Inspector fail to discuss review/inspection with an on -site representative?
❑ Yes
❑ No
❑ NA
❑ NE
34. Does the facility require a follow-up visit by the same agency?
❑ Yes
❑ No
❑ NA
0 NE
Comments (refer to question #): 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).
lfc sit ✓a' i2/ 3 it - Z- P {
Reviewer/Inspector Name:
Reviewer/Inspector Signature:
Page 3 of 3
Phone: ' / I'
Date: 5- ✓ f ] (�--.,
21412011

August 18, 2017
Mr. Jerry Purvis
N G Purvis Farms, Inc.
2504 Spies Road
Robbins, North Carolina 27325
Subject: Notice of Deficiency
NOD-2017-PC-0222
Permit No. AWS930001
Green Acres Farm
Warren County
Mr. Purvis:
ROY COOPER
Governor
MIC14AEL S. REGAN
S. JAY ZIMMERMAN
Di ream -
On August 2, 2017, Buster Towell of the Raleigh Regional Office, Division of Water Resources
conducted an annual compliance inspection at the Green Acres Farm. Mr. Tony Moore was on site and
assisted with the inspection.
The inspection determined that the facility was well maintained and showed no signs of any
environmental concerns. The paperwork and records appeared to be in order and were up to date with
the exception of the following:
DEFICIENCY:
The inspection revealed a technical exceedance of one of the conditions of COC AWS930001 pertaining
to the numbers and types of animals permitted for the Green Acres Farrn. The records indicated that the
Green Acres Farm was being operated as a Farrow to Wean operation with a current population of 3224
sows.
Certificate of Coverage No. AWS930001 in accordance with General Permit AWG100000 states that
the Green Acres Farm is permitted for 1000 sows Farrow to Finish with a Steady State Live Weight
(SSLW) of 1,417,000 pounds.
Permit Condition I. PERFORMANCE STANDARDS "4. Any proposed increase or modification to the
annual average design capacity from that authorized by the COC will require a modification to the
CAWMP and COC prior to modification to the facility."
CORRECTIVE ACTION:
Please respond to this Notice in writing within 30 days of your receipt explaining how you intend to
comply with the conditions of the existing COC, or if you intend to submit modifications to both the
COC and CAWMP that more accurately reflect the animal types and numbers to be housed at this
facility.
State of North Carolina ( Environmental Quality I Waler Resources I Raleigh Regional Office
1628 Mail service Centcr I Raleigh, North Carolina 27699.1628
919 791-4200

r
Mr. Jerry Purvis
N G Purvis Farms, Inc.
NOD-PC-2017-0222
Page 2
Please note that violations of your Certificate of Coverage and Certified Animal Waste Plan may be
subject to civil penalties of up to S 25,000.00 per day.
if you have any questions regarding this matter, you may contact Buster Towell at [phone].
Sinc - Volich,
l
Rick. Assistant Regional Supervisor
Division of Water Resources, Water Quality
Regional Operations Section
Cc: Warren County Health Department
Warren Soil & Water Conservation District
DWR AFO Central Files
RRO-WQROS

NC Dept of Environmental Quality
AUG 2 8 2017
Raleigh Regional Officc
MR. Rick Bolick:
Concerning the August 18, 2017 Notice of Deficiency for Permit No. AWS930001 NG Purvis Farms, Green Acres
site. We are in the process of finsishing the certification forms to allow JR Joshi to review and change the permit.
William Byrum NRCS of Louisburg modified the CAWMP August 8, 2016. 1 am sorry for the delay of getting the
Certification sheets signed off by a technical specialist but there has been some confusion and William is getting
clarification through email with Mr. Joshi. William informed me he is meeting with his supervisor the week of
August 28, 2017 hopefully it will be worked out then. We wish to submit the proper paper work to run Green Acres
Farm at the 3224 Sow Farrow to Wean as this would be less SSLW than the 1000 Sow Farrow to Finish it is
currently permitted.
Thank you,
v
Anthony Moore

Environmental
Quality
NC Dept of Environmental Quality ROY COOPER
Governor
�I
11.. MICHAEL S. REGAN
130 2011 Secretary
S. JAY ZIMMERMAN
Raleigh Regional Office Director
September 15, 2017
N G Purvis Farms, Inc.
Green Acres Farm
2504 Spies Road
Robbins, NC 27325
Subject: Certificate of Coverage No. AWS930001
Green Acres Farm
Swine Waste Collection, Treatment,
Storage and Application System
Warren County
Dear N G Purvis Farms, Inc.:
In accordance with your September 11, 2017 request to change operation type without exceeding the
permitted steady state live weight, we are hereby forwarding to you this Certificate of Coverage (COC)
issued to N G Purvis Farms, Inc., authorizing the operation of the subject animal waste management system
in accordance with General Permit AWG100000.
This approval shall consist -of the operation of this system including, but not limited to, the management
and land application of animal waste as specified in the facility's Certified Animal Waste Management Plan
(CAWMP) for Green Acres Farm, located in Warren County, with a swine animal capacity of no greater
than the following annual averages:
Wean to Finish: Feeder to Finish: Boar/Stud:
Wean to Feeder: Farrow to Wean: 3,272 Gilts:
Farrow to Finish: Farrow to Feeder: Other:
If this is a Farrow to Wean or Farrow to Feeder operation, there may be one boar for each 15 sows. Where
boars are unnecessary, they may be replaced by an equivalent number of sows. Any of the sows may be
replaced by gilts at a rate of 4 gilts for every 3 sows.
This COC shall be effective from the date of issuance until September 30, 2019, and shall hereby void
Certificate of Coverage Number AWS930001 dated February 20, 2015. Pursuant to this COC, you are
authorized and required to operate the system in conformity with the conditions and limitations as specified
in the General Permit, the facility's CAWMP, and this COC. An adequate system for collecting and
maintaining the required monitoring data and operational information must be established for this facility.
Any increase in waste production greater than the certified design capacity or increase in number of animals
authorized by this COC (as provided above) will require a modification to the CAWMP and this COC and
must be completed prior to actual increase in either wastewater flow or number of animals.
Please read this COC and the enclosed State General Permit carefully. Please pay careful attention to the
record keeping and monitoring conditions in this permit. Record keeping forms are unchanged with this
General Permit. Please continue to use the same record keeping forms.
State of North Carolina 1 Environmental Quality I Division of Water Resources
Water Quality Regional Operations Section
1636 Mail Service Center I Raleigh, North Carolina 27699-1636
919-707-9129

If your Waste Utilization Plan '(WUP) has been developed based on site -specific information, careful
evaluation of future samples is necessary. Should your records show that the current WUP is inaccurate
you will need to�have a new WUP developed.1.
The issuance of this COC does not excuse the Permittee from the obligation to comply with all applicable
laws, rules, standards, and ordinances (local, state, and federal), nor does issuance of a COC to operate
under this permit convey any property rights in either real or personal property.
Per NRCS standards a 100-foot separation shall be maintained between water supply wells and any lagoon,
storage pond, or any wetted area of a spray field.
Please be advised that any violation of the terms and conditions specified in this COC, the General Permit
or the CAWNW may result in the revocation of this COC, or penalties in accordance with NCGS 143-
215.6A through 143-215.6C including civil penalties, criminal penalties, and injunctive relief.
If any parts, requirements, or limitations contained in this COC are unacceptable, you have the right to
apply for an individual permit by contacting the Animal Feeding Operations Program for information on
this process. Unless such a request is made within 30 days, this COC shall be final and binding.
In accordance with Condition 11.22 of the General Permit, waste application shall cease within four (4)
hours of the time that the National Weather Service issues a Hurricane Wanting, Tropical Storm Warning,
or a Flood Watch associated with a tropical system for the county in which the facility is located. You may
find detailed watch/warning information for your county by calling the Raleigh, NC National Weather
Service office at [phone], or by visiting their website at: http://www.weather.gov/rah/
This facility is located in a county covered by our Raleigh Regional Office. The Regional Office staff may
be reached at 919-7914200. If you need additional information concerning this COC or the General Permit,
please contact the Animal Feeding Operations Program staff at [phone].
Sincerely,
•or S. Jay Zimmerman, P.G.
Director, Division of Water Resources
cc: (Certificate of Coverage only for all ccs)
Raleigh Regional Office, Water Quality Regional Operations Section
Warren County Health Department
Warren County Soil and Water Conservation District
WQROS Central Files (Permit No. AWS930001)

o�o� W A r�94G
`J
Martin Engel
North Carolina Farm of Wise, LLC
973 Kerr Lake Cole Bridge Rd
Norlina NC 27563
Dear Martin Engel:
Michael F. Easley, Governor
William G. Ross Jr., Secretary
North Carolina Department of Environment and Natural Resources
Alan W. Klimek, P,E:-Direclory\
Division of•Hddtei;Quality,y t
'�� G 1
December 10, 2004
Subject: Certificate of Coverage No. NCA293001
North Carolina Farm of Wise, LLC
Swine Waste Collection, Treatment,
Storage and Application System
Warren County
In accordance with your application received on November 29, 2004, we are hereby forwarding to you
this Certificate of Coverage (COC) issued to Martin Engel, authorizing the operation of the subject animal
waste collection, treatment, storage and land application system in accordance with NPDES General
Permit NCA200000. We also received the change of ownership form and the new information has been
entered.
This approval shall consist of the operation of this system including, but not limited to, the management
of animal waste from the North Carolina Farm of Wise, LLC, located in Warren County, with an animal
capacity of no greater than an annual average of 1000 Farrow to Finish swine and the application to land
as specified in the facility's Certified Animal Waste Management Plan (CAWMP). If this is a Farrow to
Wean or Farrow to Feeder operation, there may also be one boar for each 15 sows. Where boars are
unneccessary, they may be replaced by an equivalent number of sows. Any of the sows may be replaced
by gilts at a rate of 4 gilts for every 3 sows
The COC shall be effective from the date of issuance until July 1, 2007, and shall hereby void Certificate
of Coverage Number AWS930001 dated May I, 2003, and shall be subject to the conditions and
limitations as specified therein. Pursuant to this COC, you are authorized and required to operate the
system in conformity with the conditions and limitations as specified in the General Permit, the facility's
CAWMP, and this COC. An adequate system for collecting and maintaining the required monitoring data
and operational information must be established for this facility. Any increase in wastc production
greater than the certified design capacity or increase in number of animals authorized by this COC (as
provided above) will require a modification to the CAWMP and this COC and must be completed prior to
actual increase in either wastewater flow or number of animals.
Please carefully read this COC and the enclosed General Permit. Since this is a new joint State and
Federal general permit it contains many new requirements in addition to most of the conditions contained
in the current State general permit. Enclosed for your convenience is a package containing the new and
revised forms used for record keeping and reporting. Please pay careful_ attention to the record keepin
and lnonitorinQ conditions in this nertnit. The Devices to Automatically Stot) Irrieation Events Form
must be returned to the Division of Water Quality no later than 120 days following receipt of the
Certificate of Coverage. The Animal Facili!y Annual Certification Form must be completed and returned
to the Division of Water Quality by no later than March lst of each year.
Nor hCarolina
a
Aquifer Protection Section 1636 Mail Service Center Raleigh, NC 27699-1636 Phone [phone] Customer Service c� ►'atmrally
Internet: http://h2o.enr.state.nc.us 2728 Capital Boulevard Raleigh, NC 27604 Fax [phone].623-6748
Fax [phone]
An Equal OpportunitylAHirmatNe Action Employer — 50% Recycled110% Post Consumer Paper

If your Waste Utilization Plan has been developed based on site specific information, careful evaluation
of fixture samples is necessary. Should your records show that the current Waste Utilization Plan is
inaccurate you will need to have a new Waste Utilization Plan developed.
The issuance of this COC does not excuse the Permittee from the obligation to comply with all applicable
laws, rules, standards, and ordinances (local, state, and federal), nor does issuance of a COC to operate
under this permit convey any property rights in either real or personal property.
Upon abandonment or depopulation for a period of four years or more, the Permittee must submit
documentation to the Division demonstrating that all current NRCS standards are met prior to restocking
of the. facility.
Per 15A NCAC 2H .0225(c) a compliance boundary is provided for the facility and no new water supply
wells shall be constructed within the compliance boundary. Per NRCS standards a 100 foot separation
shall be maintained between water supply wells and any lagoon or any wetted area of a spray field.
Please be advised that any violation of the terms and conditions specified in this COC, the General Permit
or the CAWMP may result in the revocation of this COC, or penalties in accordance with NCGS 143-
215.6A through 143-215.6C, the Clean Water Act and 40 CFR 122.41 including civil penalties, criminal
penalties, and injunctive relief.
If you wish to continue the activity permitted under the General Permit after the expiration date of the
General Permit, an application for renewal must be filed at least 180 days prior to expiration.
This COC is not automatically transferable. A name/ownership change application must be submitted to
the Division prior to a name change or change in ownership.
If any parts, requirements, or limitations contained in this COC are unacceptable, you have the right to
apply for an individual NPDES Permit by contacting the staff mernber listed below for information on
this process. Unless such a request is made within 30 days, this COC shall be final and binding.
This facility is located in a county covered by our Raleigh Regional Office. The Regional Office Aquifer
Protection Staff may be reached at [phone]. If you need additional information concerning this
COC or the General Permit, please contact Steve Lewis at [phone].
Sincerely,
for Alan W. Klimek, P.E.
Enclosures (General Permit NCA200000, Record Keeping and Reporting Package)
cc: (Certificate of Coverage only for all cc's)
Warren County Health Department
Raleigh Regional Office, Aquifer Protection Section
Warren County Soil and Water Conservation District
Permit FileNCA293001
APS Files

Awe; 9�30e
9
.r
10
Nutrient Management Plan For Animal Waste Utilization �pR 14 -. - -,i
:l
This plan has been prepared for:
Wise Farm LLC
Martin Engel
973 Kerr Lake Cole Bridge
Norlina, NC 27536
252-456-2437
12-21.-2006
i
This plan has been developed by:
Carl Dunn
DSWC
943 Washington Sq Mall
Washington, NC 27889
252-948-3900
Developer Signature
Type of Plan: Nitrogen Only with Manure Only
Owner/Manager/Producer Agreement
I (we) understand and agree to the specifications and the operation and maintenance
procedures established in this nutrient management plan which includes an animal
waste utilization plan for the farm named above. I have read and understand the
Required Specifications concerning animal waste management that are included with
this plan.
-� IZ-
Signa Date
r�
Signature (manager o roducer) Date
This plan meets the minimum standards and specifications of the U.S. Department of
Agriculture - Natural Resources Conservation Service or the standard of practices
adopted by the Soil and Water Conservation Commission.
Plan Approved By -
Technical Specialist Signature Date
..........................................................................................................
182009 Database Version 3,1 Date Printed: 12-22-2006 Cover Page 1
RECEIVED 1 DENR 1 DWQ
Aquifer Prntpction Sertiorl
APR 0 2 2009

12/10/2006 20:19
252-456-3948
MARTIN ENGEL
PAGE 04
0
0
Narrative
The total number of beef animals on this farm will need to be addressed. There should not be over 71
head on the 143 acres of fescue pasture. The NRCS highly recommend the beef animals would need to
be rotated in such a manner that existing vegetation would be adequate to consume The amount of
nitrogen contained in the swine waste being applied. It is the responsibility of the landowner and/or
producer to assure the adequate number of beef animals are being managed on the existing fescue
pastures.
'This plan used the "User Defined Source" for the North Carolina of Wise LLC farm and it was derived as
follows:
Mr. Engel stated that the farm has a capacity of 1,000 sows Farrow to Feeder. Mr. Engel stated that he
only has capacity to finish 4,500 feeder pigs at this facility. The. remMinrier of the feeder rigs are sent to
another facility. Vernon Cox estimated the annual volume produced by feeder pigs being finished at this
site. 14e then added the volume per sow, as shown below.
The NRCS standard states thata. Farrow to Feeder operation produces 3,961 gals/per year.
(3,861 gals/sow) x (1,000) a 3,961,000 gals/year for the Farrow -Feeder operation.
The MRCS standard states that a Feeder to F'irush operation produces 976 gals/head per year.
(967 head) x (4,500 gal/head) — 4,1.71,500 gals/year for theFecder-Finish operation.
3,961,000 + 4,171,500 = 8,032,500 gals/year for the entire operation.
(8,032,500 91ls/year)/(1,000) = 8,032.5 gallsow/year.
This number cntored into Nutrient Management Software as a user defined source for a swine Farrow to
Finish operation, with an annual volume of 8,032.5 gallsow per year. The nutrient concentration of 13 6
lbs. of total'N/acre-inch is taken from the NRCS standard..
"'This plan contains a high N value granted to Fescue Hay and fescue Pasture than the default values,
based on the Seventh Guidance Memo from SB i 217: A value for nitrogen uptake by crup bas bccil
selected for each soil t},pe in North Carolina, This value must not be exceeded in situations where new
fields are being added to existing waste utilization pkins or included in ,Plane unleac justified by a N'CbA
& CS Regional Agronomist (other qualified professionals may be identified later) based on plant tissue
analysis. 'Where existing plans are being revised or amended (i.e. no new fields being added) using the
assigned program values is encouraged but not mandated. N coefficients by crops and soil types are
included in the new nutrient management software and are available at the web address:
http://www.soil.ncsu.edu/amp/ or contact your local CBS office.
This plan has been modified to be established on irrigation pulls primarily. Fields 1-21 correspond to the
irrigation pulls as defined by the wettable acres determination. Fields 22-25 in this plan correspond to
the Farm Service Agency (FSA) ariel map defined fields 1, 7, 3 and 5 respectively, which are designated
for honey -wagon application.
............:............................................................................................................................................I.......
Preview Database Version 3.1 Date Printad: 05-25-2005 Narrative Page Page I of 1

•
•
•
Nutrients applied in accordance with this plan will be supplied from the
following source(s):
Commercial Fertilizer is not included in this plan.
U3
Wise Farm waste generated 8,032,500 gals/year by a 1,000 animal Swine
Farrow -Finish Lagoon Liquid operation. This production facility has waste storage
capacities of approximately 180 days.
Estimated Pounds of Plant Available Nitrogen Generated per Year
Broadcast
18501
Incorporated
31773
Injected
34990
Irrigated
20109
Max. Avail.
PAN (lbs) *
Actual PAN
Applied (lbs)
PAN Surplus/
Deficit (lbs)
Actual Volume
Applied (Gallons)
Volume Surplus/
Deficit (Gallons)
Year 1
20,109
28249
-8,140
11,419,351
-3,386,851
Year 2
20,109
29333
-9,224
11,852,305
-3,819,805
This plan includes a User Defined Source to determine the total pounds of PAN in lieu
ofNRCS Standard values. Refer to North Carolina Cooperative Extension Service publication AG-43942
entitled "Soil Facts: Use of On -Farm Records for Modifying a Certified Animal Waste Management Plan" for
guidance on using on -farm records to develop a User Defined Source.
Nate: In source ID, S means standard source, U means user defined source.
" Max. Available PAN is calculated on the basis of the actual application method(s) identified in the plan for this source.
182009 Database Version 3.1 Date Printed: 12-22-2006 Source Page 1 of 1

•
The table shown below provides a summary of the crops or rotations included in this plan for each field. Realistic
Yield estimates are also provided for each crop in the plan. In addition, the Leaching Index for each field is shown,
where available,
Planned Crops Summary
Tract
Field
Total
Acres
Useable
Acres
Leaching
Index (LI)
Soil Series
Crop Sequence
RYE
1480
I
6.70
6.70
NIA
Pacolet
Fescue Pasture
4.5 Tons
1480
10
5.821
5.31
NIA
Pacolet
Fescue Pasture
4.5 Tons
1480
11
6.95
6.34
NIA
Pacolet
Fescue Pasture
4.5 Tons
1480
12
4.66
4.25
NIA
Pacolet
Fescue Pasture
4.5 Tons
1480
13
7.81
7.12
NIA
Pacolet
Fescue Pasture
4.5 Tons
1480
14
2.37
2.16
NIA
Pacolet
Fescue Pasture
4.5 Tons
1480
15
7,81
7.12
NIA
Pacolet
Fescue Pasture
4.5 Tons
1480
15A
5.77
5.26
NIA
Pacolet
Fescue Pasture
4.5 Tons
1480
16
8.24
5.95
NIA
Saw
Fescue Pasture
3.5 Tons
1480
17
8.82
6.37
N/A
Saw
Fescue Pasture
3.5 Tons
1480
18
41441
3.96
NIA
Pacolet
Fescue Pasture
4,5 Tons
1480
19
5.51
4,92
NIA
Pacolet
Fescue Pasture
4.5 Tons
1480
2
767.00
6.85
N/A
Pacolet
Fescue Pasture
4,5 Tons
1480
20
4.67
3.80
NIA
Pacolet
Fescue Pasture
4.5 Tons
1480
21
5.021
4.09
NIA
Pacolet
Fescue Pasture
4,5 Tons
1480
22
3.00
3.00
NIA
Vance
Fescue Kay
4.5 Tons
1480
23
8,00
8.00
NIA
Vance
Fescue Hay
4.5 Tons
1480
24
3.60
3.60
NIA
Pacolet
Fescue Hay
4.5 Tons
1480
25
4.20
4.20
NIA
Pacolet
Fescue Pasture
4.5 Tons
1480
3
11.30
6.70
NIA
Saw
Fescue Pasture
3.5 Tons
1480
4
10.03
7.24
NIA
Saw
Fescue Pasture
3.5 Tons
1480
5
2.89
2.09
NIA
Saw
Fescue Pasture
3.5 Tons
1480
6
8.23
7.50
NIA
Pacolet
Fescue Pasture
4,5 Tons
1480
1 7
6.64
6,05
NIA
Pacolet
Fescue Pasture
4.5 Tons
1480
8
5.68
5,19
NIA
Pacolet
Fescue Pasture
4.5 Tons
1480
9
6.01
5A8
NIA
Pacolet
Fescue Pasture
4.5 Tons
3726
26
6.171
4.41
NIA
Pacolet
Corn, Grain
110 bu.
Wheat, Grain
50 bu.
Soybeans, Manured, Double Crop
34 bu.
3726
27
6.17
3.53
NIA
Pacolet
Com, Grain
110 bu.
182009 Database Version 3,1 Date Printed 12/22/2006
PCs Page 1 of 2
NOTE: Symbol * means user entered data.

• . r
•
•
•
Planned Crops Summary
Tract
Field
Total
Acres
Useable
Acres
Leaching
Index (L,I)
Soil Series
Crop Sequence
RYE
Wheat, Grain
50 bu.
Soybeans, Matured, Double Crop
34 bu,
3726
28
6.17
4.41
NIA
Pacolet
Corn, Grain
110 bu.
Wheat, Grain
50 bu.
Soybeans, Manured, Double Crop
34 bu.
3726
29
12.401
5.84
NIA
Pacolet
Corn, Grain
110 bu.
Wheat, Grain
50 bu.
Soybeans, Manured, Double Crop
34 bu.
3726
30
9.10
7.63
NIA
Pacolet
Corn, Grain
110 bu.
Wheat, Grain
50 bu.
Soybeans, Manured, Double Crap
34 bu.
3726
1 31
9.10
6.44
NIA
Pacolet
Corn, Grain
110 bu.
Wheat, Grain
50 bu.
Soybeans, Manured, Double Crop
34 bu.
3726
32
9, l0
7.63
NIA
Pacolet
Corn, Grain
110 bu.
Wheat, Grain
50 bu.
Soybeans. Manured, Double Crop
34 bu.
3726
33
9.10
3.87
NIA
Pacolet
Corn, Grain
110 bu.
Wheat, Grain
50 bu.
Soybeans, Manured, Double Crop
34 bu.
PLAN TOTALS: 988.48 183.00
LI
Potential Leachl'hg
Technical Guidance
< 2
Low potential to contribute to soluble
None
nutrient leaching below the root zone.
>= 2 &
Moderate potential to contribute to
Nutrient Management (590) should be planned.
<_ 10
soluble nutrient leaching below the root
zone.
High potential to contribute to soluble
Nutrient Management (590) should be planned. Other conservation practices that improve
nutrient leaching below the root zone.
the soils available water holding capacity and improve nutrient use efficiency should be
> 10
considered. Examples are Cover Crops (340) to scavenge nutrients, Sod -Based Rotations
(328), Long -Term No -Till (778), and edge -of -field practices such as Filter Strips (393) and
Riparian Forest Buffers (391),
182009 1]atabase Version 3.1 Date Printed 12122I2006
PCs Page 2 of 2
NOTE: Symbol * means user entered data.

The Waste Utilization table shown below summarizes the waste utilization plan for this operation. This plan provides an estimate of the number of acres of
cropland needed to use the nutrients being produced. The plan requires consideration of the realistic yields of the crops to be grown, their nutrient requirementg,
and proper timing of applications to maximize nutrient uptake.
This table provides an estimate of the amount of nitrogen required by the crop being grown and an estimate of the nitrogen amount being supplied by manure or
other by-products, commercial fertilizer and residual from previous crops. An estimate of the quantityof solid and liquid waste thatwill be applied on each held in
order to supply the indicated quantity of nitrogen from each source is also included. A balance of the total manure produced and the total manure applied is
included in the table to ensure that the plan adequately provides for the utilization of the manure generated by the operation.
Waste Utilization Table
Year I
Tract
Field
Source
117
Sail Series
Tatal
Acres
Use.
Acres
Crop
RYE
AppGc.
Period
Nitrogen
PA
Nutrient
Req'd
Obs1A)
Comm
Fert
Nutrient
Applied
OWN
Res_
(Ibs/A)
Applic.
Method
Manure
PA
Nutrient
Applied
(lbs1A)
Liquid
MBRUMA
pplied
(acne)
Solid
Manure
Applied
(acre)
Liquid
Manure
Applied
(Firid)
Solid
Manure
Applied
(Field)
N
N
N
N
low
gaYA
Tons
1000 gals
tons
1480
1
U13
1pacolet
6.70
6.70
Fescue Pasture
4.5 Tons
811-7131
*165
0
0
brig_
165
65.91
0.0
441.58
0.00
1480
10
U3
Pacolcl
5.82
5.31
Fescue Pasture
4.5 Tons
811-7131
*165
0
0
brig.
1651
65.91
0.00
349.97
0.0
1480
11
U3
Pacolet
6.95
6.34
Fescue Pasture
4.5 Tons
911-7131
*165
0
0
Irrig_
165
65.91
O-OC
417.86
0.00
1480
12
U3
Pacolet
4.66
4,25
Fescue Pasture
4STons
8/1-7/31
*165
0
1 0 1
brig_
165
65.91
O.ff
280.11
0.0
1480
13
U3
Pacolet
7.81
7.12
Fescue Pasture
4.5 Tons
8/1-7/31
*165
0
0
brig.
165
65.91
0. ()C
469.26
0.00
1480
14
U3
Pacolct
2.37
2.16
Fescue Pasture
4.5 Tons
811-7131
*165
0
0
Irrig-
165
65.91
0,00
142.36
0.00
1480
15
U3
Pacnlct
7.811
7.12
Fescue Pasture
4.5Tons
8/1-7/31
1 *165
0
0
Inig.
165
65-911
0.00
469.26
0.00
1480
15A
U3
Pacolet
5.77
5.26
Fescue Pasture
4.5 Tons
8/1-7131
*165
0
0
Inig.
165
65.91
0.00
346.68
0.00
1480
16
U3
Saw
8.24
5.95
Fescue Pasture
3.5 Tons
9/1-713I
*I29
0
0
Irrig.
l2
51.53
0.00
306.59
0,00
1480
17
U3
Saw
8.82
6.37
Fescue Pasture
3.5 Tons
811-7I31
*129
0
0
Irrig.
129
51.53
0.00
328.23
0.00
1480
I8
U3
Pacolet
4.44
3.96
Fescue Pasture
4.5 Tons
811-7/31
*165
0
0
Irrig.
165
65.91
0.00
261.00
0.00
1480
19
U3
Pacolet
5.51
4.92
Fescue Pasture
4.5 Tons
8/1-7131
*165
0
0
brig.
165
65.91
0.00
324.27
0.00
1480
2
U3
Pacolet
767,00
6.85
Fescue Pasture
4.5 Tons
81I-7131
* 165
0
1 0
brig.
165
65.91
O.oc
451.47
0.00
1480
20
U3
Pacolet
4.671
3.80
Fescue Pasture
4.5 Tons
8/1-7131
*165
0
D
brig_
165
65.911
0.00
250A5
0.00
1480
21
U3
Pacolet
4.09
Fescue Pasture
4.5 Tons
8/1-1/31
*165
0
0
brig.
I65
65.91
0.
269.56
0.00
1480
22
U3
Vance
dIOI
7
3.00
Fescue Hay
4.5 Tons
811-7/31
*220
0
4
Broad.
22
95.52
OAO
286.5b
0 00
182009 Database Version 3.1 Date Printed: 12/22/2006 WUT Page 1 of 6

Waste Utomzation Table
0 Year t le
Tract
Field
Source
11)
Soil Series
Total
Acres
Use.
Arles
Crop
RYE
Applic.
Period
Nitrogen
PA
Nutrient
Rqd
pbs/A)
Comm
Fert.
Nutrient
Applied
Qbs/A)
Res.
(lbs/A)
Applir.
Method
Manure
PA
Nutrient
Applied
(1bs/A)
Liquid
ManureA
pplied
(acre)
Solid
Manure
Applied
(acre)
Liquid
Manure
Applied
(Field)
Solid
Manure
Applied
(Field)
N
N
N
N
1000
gal/A
Tons
1000 gals
tons
1480
23
U3
Vance
8.00
8.00
Fescue Hay
4.5 Tons
911-7131
*220
0
0
Broad.
220
95.52
0.00
764.15
0.00
1480
24
U3
Pacolet
3.60
3.60
Fescue Hay
4.5 Tons
8/1-7/31
*220
0
0
Broad.
220
95.52
0,00
343,87
0.00
1480
25
U3
Pacolet
4,201
4.20
Fescue Pasture
4.5 Tons
8/1-7/31
* 165
0
0
Broad_
165
71.64
0 .01
300.88
0.00
1480
3
U3
Saw
11.30
6.70
Fescue Pasture
3.5 Tons
811-7/31
*129
0
0
Irrig_
129
51.53
0.0
345,24
0.00
1480
4
U3
Saw
10.03
7.24
Fescue Pasture
3.5 Tons
8/1-7/31
•129
0
0
Irrig
.129
51.53
0.00
373.06
0.00
1480
5
U3
Saw
2.89
2.09
Fescue Pasture
3.5 Tons
811-7/31
*129
0
0
Irrig.
129
51-53
0.00
107.69
0.00
1480
6
U3
Pacolet
8.23
7.50
Fescue Pasture
4.5 Tons
811-7/31
* 165
0
0
Irrig.
165
65,91
0.00
494.31
0.00
1480
7
U3
Pacolet
6.64
6.05
Fescue Pasture
4.5 Tons
8/1-7/31
* 165
0
0
Irrig_
165
65.91
0,00
398.74
0.00
1480
8
U3
Pacolet
5.68
5.18
Fescue Pasture
4.5 Tans
8/1-7/31
* 165
0
0
Irrig_
I65
65.91
0,00
341.40
0.00
1480
9
U3
Pacolet
6.01
5.48
Fescue Pasture
4.5 Tons
8/1-7131
*165
0 1
0
Irrig
I65
6S,911
0.00
361.181
0.00
3726
26
U3
Pacolet
6.17
4.41
Com, Grain
110 bu.
2115-6/30
122
0
20
Irrig,
102
40-74
0.00
119.68
0.00
3726
26
U3
Pacolet
6.17
4.41
Wheat, Grain
50 bu.
9/1-4BO
100
0
0
Irrig.
50
19.97
0.00
88.08
0.00
3726
27
U3
Pacolet
6.17
3.53
Com, Grain
110 bu.
2/15-6/30
122
0
20
Irrig.
102
40.74
0.00
143.82
0.0
3726
27
U3
Pacolet
6.17
3.53
Wheat, Grain
50 bu.
9/1-4/30
t00
0
0
Irrig.
50
19.97
0.001
70.50
0.00
3726
28
U3
Pacolet
6.17
4.41
Com, Grain
110 bu.
2115-6/30
122
0
20
Inig
102
40.74
0.00
179,68
0.00
3726
28
U3
Pacolet
6.17
4,41
Wheat, Grain
50 bu_
911-4/30
100
0
0
Irrig.
50
19.97
0.00
88,08
0.00
3726
29
U3
Pacolet
12.40
5.84
Com, Grain
110 bu.
2115-6130
122
0
20
Irrig,
102
40.74
0.00
237.94
0.00
3726
29
U3
Pacolet
12.40
5.84
Wheat, Grain
50 bu.
9/14130
t00
0
0
Irrig.
50
19.97
0.00
116.64
0.00
3726
30
U3
Pacolet
%10
7.63
Com, Grain
110 bu.
2/15-6/30
122
0
20
Irrig.
0
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
3726
30
U3
Pacolet
9.10
7.63
Wheat, Grain
50 bu.
9/1-4130
100
0
0
Irrig.
0
0.001
o.oq
0,00
0.00
3726
31
U3
Pacolet
9.10
6.44
Com, Grain
110 bu.
2/15-6/30
122
0
20
Irrig
102
40.74
0.00
26239
0.001
3726
31
U3
Pacolet
9.10
6.44
Wheat, Grain
50 bu.
9/1-4/30
100
0
0
Irrig.
50
19.97
0.00
128.62
0,
182009 Database Version 3.1 Date Printed: 12/22/2006 WUT Page 2 of 6

.0
Waste Utilization Table
Year I
Tract
Field
Source
U)
Soil Series
'royal
Acres
Use.
Acres
Crop
RYE
Agplia
Period
Nitrogen
PA
Nutrient
Rogd
(IbslA)
Comm
Fed.
Nutrient
Applied
(lbslA)
ties.
(ibs/A)
Applie.
Method
Manure
PA
Nutrient
Applied
(16s/A)
Liquid
ManureA
pplied
(acre)
Solid
Manure
Applied
(a=)
Liquid
Manure
Applied
(Field)
Solid
Maduz
Applied
(Field)
N
N
N
N
IOOD
WA
Tons
I000 gals
tons
3726
32
U3
Pacolet
9.10
7.63
Corn, Grain
110 bu.
2I15-6r30
122
0
20
irrig.
102
40.74
0.0
310.87
0.00
3726
32
U3
Pacolet
9.10
7.63
Wheat, Grain
50 bu.
911-0130
100
0
0
brig.
50
19.97
0,00
I5239
0.0
3726
33
U3
Pacolet
9A 0
3.87
Corn, Grain
110 bu.
2115-6/30
122
0
20
Irrig.
102
40.7
O.00
157.68
0.00
3726
33
U3
Pacolet
9.10
3.87
Whew Grain
50 bu.
911 4C30
100
0
0
Irrig.
50
19.97
0.
77.29
0.00
Total Applied, 1000 gallons
11,419.35
M—M '%-�"
Total Produced, 1000 gallons
8.032.5
A '" "
Balance, 1000 gallons
-3,386.85
). ='
Total Applied, tons
F'=
0.00
Total Produced, tans
Balance, tans
0.0
Notes: 1. In the tract column, symbol means leased, otherwise, owned. 2. Symbo[ * means user entered data.
182009 Database Version 3.1 Date Printed: 12/22/2006 WTI' Page 3 of 6

0
Waste Utilization Table
I
Year 2
Tract
Field
Source
ID
Soil Series
Total
Acres
Use.
Acres
Crop
RYE
Applic.
Period
Nitrogen
PA
Nutrient
Regd
0WA)
Comm
Fert.
Nutrient
Applied
(1bs1A)
Res.
Qbs/A)
Applic,
Method
Manure
PA
Nutrient
Applied
(lbs/A)
Liquid
ManumA
pplied
(acre)
Solid
Manure
Applied
(acre)
Liquid
Manure
Applied
(Field)
Solid
Manus
Applied
(Field)
N
N
N
N
1000
gallA
Tons
1000 gals
tons
1480
1
U3
Pacolet
6.70
6.70
Fescue Pasture
4.5 Tons
8/1-7131
*165
0
0
Irrig.
165
65.911
0.00
441.58
0.00
1480
10
U3
Pacolet
5.82
5.31
Fescue Pasture
4.5 Tons
8/1-7/31
*165
0
0
Brig_
165
65.91
0.00
349.97
0.0
1480
11
U3
Pacolet
6.95
6.34
Fescue Pasture
4.5 Tons
8/1-7131
*165
0
0
Irrig.
165
65.91
0,00
417.86
0.00
1480
12
U3
Pacolet
4.66
4.25
Fescue Pasture
4.5 Tons
811-7131
* 165
0
0
twig_
165
65.91
0.00
280.11
0.00
1480
13
U3
Pacolet
7.81
7.12
Fescue Pasture
4.5 Tons
811-7/31
*165
0
0
Irrig.
165
65.91
0.00
469.26
0.00
1480
14
U3
Pacolet
2.37
2.16
Fescue Pasture
4.5 Tons
8/1-7131
*165
0
0
brig.
165
65.91
0.00
142,36
0.00
1480
15
U3
Pacolet
7.81
7.12
Fescue Pasture
4.5 Tons
8/1-7/31
*165
0
0
Irrig.
165
65.91
0.00
469.26
0.00
1480
15A
U3
Pacolet
5.77
5.26
Fescue Pasture
4.5 Tons
811-7131
4165
0
0
Irrig.
165
65.91
0.00
346.68
0.00
1480
16
U3
Saw
8.24
5.95
Fescue Pasture
3.5 Tons
811-7/31
*129
0
0
Irrig.
129
51.53
0,00
306.59
4 00
1480
17
U3
Saw
8.82
6.37
Fescue Pasture
3.5 Tons
8/1-7/31
•129
0
0
Irrig.
129
51.53
0.00
328.23
0.00
1480
18
U3
Pacolet
4.44
3.96
Fescue Pasture
4.5 Tons
811-7131
*165
0
0
twig.
165
65.91
0.00
261.00
0.00
1480
19
U3
Pacolet
5.51
4.92
Fescue Pasture
4.5 Tons
8/1-7/31
*165
0
0
brig_
165
65.91
0.00
324.27
0.00
1480
2
U3
Pacolet
767.00
6.85
Fescue Pasture
4.5 Tons
811-7131
*165
0
0
Irrig,
165
65.91
0.00
451.47
0.00
1480
20
U3
Pacolet
4.67
3.80
Fescue Pasture
4.5 Tons
8/1-7/31
*165
0
0
Irrig,
165
65.91
0.00
250.45
0.00
1480
21
03
Pacolet
5.0211
4.09
Fescue Pasture
4.5 Tons
8/1-7/31
*165
0
0
Irrig.
165
65.91
O.M
269J6
0.0
1480
22
U3
Vance
3.00
3.00
Fescue Flay
4.5 Tons
8/1-7/31
*220
0
0
Broad.
22
95.52
0.00
286.56
0.00
1480
23
U3
Vance
mol
8.00
Fescue Hay
4.5 Tons
9/1-7131
*220
0
0
Broad,
220
95.52
0.00
764.15
0.00
1480
24
U3
Pacolet
3.60
3.60
Fescue Flay
4.5 Tons
8/1-7/31,
*220
0
0
Broad.
220
95.52
0.00
343.8
0.00
1480
25
U3
Pacolet
4.20
4.20
Fescue Pasture
4.5 Tons
811-7/31
0165
0
0
Broad,
165
71.64
0.00
300.88
0.00
1480
3
U3
Saw
11.30
6.70
Fescue Pasture
3.5 Tons
811-7131
*129
0
0
Irrig,
129
51.53
0.00
345.24
0.00
1480
4
U3
Saw
10.03
7.24
Fescue Pasture
3.5 Tons
811-7/31
*129
0
0
Irrig.
129
51.53
0.00
373.06
0.00
1480
5
U3
saw
2.89
2.09
Fescue Pasture
3.5 Tons
8/1-7/31
*129
0
0
Irrig_
12951.53
UO
107.69
0.00
182009 Database Version 3.1 Date Printed, 12/22/2006 WUT Page 4 of 6

'i
Waste Utilization Table
0
Year 2
•
Tract
Field
Source
lD
Soil Series
Total
Acres
Use.
Acres
Crop
RYE
APptic
Period
Nitrogen
PA
Nutrient
Req'd
(Ibs/A}
Canm
Fert.
Nutrient
Applied
(Ibs/A)
Res.
(lbs/A)
Applic.
Method
Manure
PA
Nutrient
Applied
Obs/A)
Liquid
Manurr-A
pplied
(acre)
Solid
Manure
Applied
(acre)
Liquid
Manure
Applied
(Field)
Solid
Manurc
Applied
(Field)
N
N
N
N
1000
gal/A
Tons
1000 gals
tons
1480
6
U3
Pacolet
8.23
7.50
Fescue Pasture
4.5 Tons
8/1-7/31
* 165
0
4
Irrig.
165
65.91
0,0
494.31
0.00
1480
7
U3
Pacolet
6.64
6.05
Fescue Pasture
4.5 Tons
811-7/31
* 165
0
0
brig.
165
65.91
0.00
398.74
0.00
1480
8
U3
Pacolet
5.68
5.18
Fescue Pasture
4.5 Tons
8/1-7/31
*165
0
0
Irrig,
165
65.91
0.00
341.401
D.00
1480
9
U3
Pacolet
6.01
5.48
Fescue Pasture
4.5 Tons
811-7/31
* 165
0
0
Irrig.
165
65.9I
0.00
361.18
0.00
3726
26
U3
Pacolet
6.17
4.41
Wheat, Grain
50 bu.
9/1-4/30
100
0
0
Irrig,
50
19.97
0,00
88.08
0.00
3726
26
U3
Pacolet
6,17
4.41
Soybeans, Manured, Double Crop
34 hu.
4/1-9115
132
0
0
Irrig.
132
52.73
O-Oq
232.52
0.00
3726
27
U3
Pacolet
6.17
3.53
Wheat, Grain
50 bu.
9/1-4130
100
0
D
Irrig_
50
19,97
0.00
70,50
0.00
3726
27
U3
Pacolet
6.17
3.53
Soybeans, Manured, Double Crop
34 bu.
411-9/15
132
0
0
brig.
132
52.73
0.00
196.12
0.00
3726
28
U3
Pacolet
6.17
441
Wheat, Grain
50 bu.
9/14130
100
0
0
Irrig.
50
19.97
0.00
88.D8
0,00
3726
28
U3
Pacolet
6.17
4.41
Soybeans, Manured, Double Crop
34 bu.
411-9/15
132
0
0
Irrig.
132
52.73
0.00
232.52
0.00
3726
29
U3
Pacolet
12.40
5.84
Wheat, Grain
50 bu,
9/1-4/30
100
0
0
Irrig.
50
19,97
0.00
116.64
0.00
3726
29
U3
Pacolet
12.40
5.84
Soybeans, Manured, Double Crop
34 bu.
4/1-9115
132
D
0
brig.
132
52.73
0.00
307.921
0.00
3726
30
U3
Pacolet
9.10
7.63
Wheat, Grain
50 bu.
911-4130
100
0
0
Irrig.
0
0,001
0.00
0.00
0.00
3726
30
U3
Pacolet
9.10
7.63
Soybeans, Manured, Double Crop
34 bu.
411-9/15
132
0
0
brig.
a
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
3726
31
U3
Pacolet
9.10
6.44
Wheat, Grain
50 bu.
9/l-4/30
100
0
0
Irrig,
5
19.97
0-00
128.62
0.00
3726
31
U3
Pacolet
9.10
6.44
Soybeans, Manured, Double Crop
34 bu.
4/1-9/l5
132
0
0
brig.
132
52.73
0.00
339.56
0.00
3726
32
U3
Pacolet
9.10
7,63
Wheat, Grain
50 bu.
9/14/30
100
0
0
Irrig.
50
19.97
0.00
152.39
0.00
3726
32
U3
Pacolet
9.10
7.63
Soybeans, Manured, Double Crop
34 bu.
411-9115
132
0
0
Irrig.
132
52.73
0'-00
402,30
0,0
3726
33
U3
Pacolet
9.10
3,87
Wheat, Grain
50 hu.
9/14/30
100
0
0
Irrig.
50
19.97
0.00
77.29
0.00
3726
33
U3
Pacolet
9. 0
3.87
Soybeans, Manured, Double Crop
34 bu.
411 9/15
132
0
0
brig
13
52.73
0.0
204.05
0.00
192009 Database Version 3.1 Date Printed: 12/22/2006 WTJT Page 5 of 6

Waste Utilization Table Year 2
Nitrogen
Comm
Res.
Manure
Liquid
Solid
Liquid
Solid
PA
Fert.
OWA)
PA
ManureA
Manure
Manure
Manure
Nutrient
Nutrient
Nutrient
pplied
Applied
Applied
Applied
Req'd
Applied
Applied
(acre)
(acre)
(Field)
(Field)
(lbs/A)
(ibs/A)
(Ibs/A)
1000
Source
Total
Use.
Applic,
AppHr-
Tract
Field
ID
Soil Series
Acres
Acres
Crop
RYE
Period
N
N
N
Method
N
gal/A
Tons
1000 gals
tons
Total Applied, 1000 gallons
11,852.31
=`*-v,-g
Total Produced, 1000 gallons
Balance, 1000 gallons
-3,819.91
C b_
Total Applied, tons
t"
0.00
Total Produced, tons
< '
0.00
Balance, tons
: ' a:-� , -;
0.00
Notes. l . In the tract column, -- symbol means leased, otherwise, owned_ 2. Symbol * means user entered data.
182009 Database Version 3.1 Date Printed: 12/22/2006 WUT Page 6 of 6

The Irrigation Application Factors for each field in this plan are shown in the following table. infiltration rate varies
with soils. If applying waste nutrients through an irrigation system, you trust apply at a rate that will not result in
is runoff. This table provides the maximum application rate per hour that may be applied to each field selected to
receive wastewater. It also lists the maximum application amount that each field may receive in any one application
event.
•
is
Irrigation Application Factors
Tract
Field
Soil Series
Application Rate
(inches/hour)
Application Amount
(inches)
1480
1
Pacolet
0.40
1.0
1480
10
Pacolet
0.40
1.0
1480
11
Pacolet
0.40
1.0
1480
12
Pacolet
0.40
1.0
1480
13
Pacolet
0.40
1.0
1480
14
Pacolet
0.40
1.0
1480
15
Pacolet
0.40
1.0
1480
15A
Pacolet
0.40
1.0
1480
16
Saw
0.35
1.0
1480
17
Saw
0.35
1.0
1480
18
Pacolet
0.40
1.0
1480
19
Pacolet
0.40
1.0
1480
2
Pacolet
0.40
1.0
1480
20
Pacolet
0.40
1.0
1480
21
Pacolet
0.40
1.0
1480
3
Saw
0.35
1.0
1480
4
Saw
0.35
1.0
1480
5
Saw
0.35
1.0
1480
6
Pacolet
0.40
1.0
1480
7
Pacolet
0.40
1.0
1480
8
Pacolet
0.40
1.0
1480
9
Pacolet
0.40
1.0
3726
26
Pacolet
0.40
1.0
3726
27
Pacolet
0.40
1.0
3726
28
Pacolet
0.40
1.0
3726
29
Pacolet
0.40
1.0
3726
30
Pacolet
0.40
1.0
3726
31
Pacolet
0.40
1.0
3726
32
Pacolet
0.40
1.0
3726
33
Pacolet
0.40
1,0
182009 Database Version 3.1 Date Printed 12/22/2006 1AF Page 1 of 1
NOTE; Symbol * means user entered data.

•
The Available Waste Storage Capacity table provides an estimate of the number of days of storage
capacity available at the end of each month of the plan. Available storage capacity is calculated as the
design storage capacity in days minus the number of days of net storage volume accumulated. The start
date is a value entered by the user and is defined as the date prior to applying nutrients to the first crop in
the plan at which storage volume in the lagoon or holding pond is equal to zero.
Available storage capacity should be greater than or equal to zero and less than or equal to the design
storage capacity of the facility. If the available storage capacity is greater than the design storage
capacity, this indicates that the plan calls for the application of nutrients that have not yet accumulated.
If available storage capacity is negative, the estimated volume of accumulated waste exceeds the design
storage volume of the structure. Either of these situations indicates that the planned application interval
in the waste utilization plan is inconsistent with the structure's temporary storage capacity.
Available Waste Stnraae Canacitv
Source Name
lWiseFann
Design Storage Capacity (Days)
Start Date
9/1
180
Plan Year
Month
Available Storage Capacity (Days)
1
1
149
1
2
163
1
3
180
1
4
180
1
5
180
1
6
180
1
7
180
1
8
180
1
9
180
1
10
180
1
11
180
1
12
149
2
1
118
2
2
148
2
3
175
2
4
180
2
5
180
2
6
180
2
7
180
2
8
180
2
9
180
2
10
180
2
11
180
2
12
149
* Available Storage Capacity is calculated as of the end of each month.
...............................................................................................................................................
182009 Database Version 3.1 Date Printed: 12-22-2006 Capacity Page 1 of 1

0
•
0
Required Specifications For Animal Waste Management
1. Animal waste shall not reach surface waters of the state by runoff, drift,
manmade conveyances, direct application, or direct discharge during
operation or land application. Any discharge of waste that reaches surface
water is prohibited.
2. There must be documentation in the design folder that the producer
either owns or has an agreement for use of adequate land on which to
properly apply the waste. If the producer does not own adequate land to
properly dispose of the waste, he/she shall provide evidence of an
agreement with a landowner, who is within a reasonable proximity,
allowing him/her the use of the land for waste application. It is the
responsibility of the owner of the waste production facility to secure an
update of the Nutrient Management Plan when there is a change in the
operation, increase in the number of animals, method of application,
receiving crop type, or available land.
3. Animal waste shall be applied to meet, but not exceed, the nitrogen needs
for realistic crop yields based upon soil type, available moisture, historical
data, climatic conditions, and level of management, unless there are
regulations that restrict the rate of applications for other nutrients.
4. Animal waste shall be applied to land eroding less than 5 tons per acre
per year. Waste may be applied to land eroding at more than 5 tons per
acre per year but less than 10 tons per acre per year provided grass filter
strips are installed where runoff leaves the field (see USDA, NRCS Field
Office Technical Guide Standard 393 - Filter Strips).
5. Odors can be reduced by injecting the waste or by disking after waste
application. Waste should not be applied when there is danger of drift
from the land application field.
6. When animal waste is to be applied on acres subject to flooding, waste
will be soil incorporated on conventionally tilled cropland. When waste is
applied to conservation tilled crops or grassland, the waste may be
broadcast provided the application does not occur during a season prone
to flooding (see "Weather and Climate in North Carolina" for guidance).
.................................................----.....-........----...................--...............- ------
182009 Database Version 3.1 Date Printed: 12/22/2006 Specification Page 1

7. Liquid waste shall be applied at rates not to exceed the soil infiltration
i rate such that runoff does not occur offsite or to surface waters and in a
s method which does not cause drift from the site during application. No
ponding should occur in order to control odor and flies.
•
S. Animal waste shall not be applied to saturated soils, during rainfall
events, or when the soil surface is frozen.
9. Animal waste shall be applied on actively growing crops in such a manner
that the crop is not covered with waste to a depth that would inhibit
growth. The potential for salt damage from animal waste should also be
considered.
10. Nutrients from waste shall not be applied in fall or winter for spring
planted crops on soils with a high potential for leaching. Waste/nutrient
loading rates on these soils should be held to a minimum and a suitable
winter cover crop planted to take up released nutrients. Waste shall not
be applied more than 30 days prior to planting of the crop or forages
breaking dormancy.
11. Any new swine facility sited on or after October 1, 1995 shall comply with
the following: The outer perimeter of the Iand area onto which waste is
applied from a lagoon that is a component of a swine farm shall be at least
50 feet from any residential property boundary and canal. Animal waste,
other than swine waste from facilities sited on or after October 1,1995,
shall not be applied closer that 25 feet to perennial waters.
12. Animal waste shall not be applied closer than 100 feet to wells.
13. Animal waste shall not be applied closer than 200 feet of dwellings other
than those owned by the landowner.
14. Waste shall be applied in a manner not to reach other property and
public right-of-ways.
........................... ........................................................ .
182009 Database Version 3.1 Date Printed: 12/22/2006 Specification Page 2

15. Animal waste shall not be discharged into surface waters, drainageways,
or wetlands by a discharge or by over -spraying. Animal waste may be
applied to prior converted cropland provided the fields have been
approved as a land application site by a "technical specialist". Animal
waste shall not be applied on grassed waterways that discharge directly
into water courses, and on other grassed waterways, waste shall be
applied at agronomic rates in a manner that causes no runoff or drift
from the site.
16. Domestic and industrial waste from washdown facilities, showers, toilets,
sinks, etc., shall not be discharged into the animal waste management
system.
17. A protective cover of appropriate vegetation will be established on all
disturbed areas (lagoon embankments, berms, pipe runs, etc.). Areas
shall be fenced, as necessary, to protect the vegetation. Vegetation such as
trees, shrubs, and other woody species, etc., are limited to areas where
considered appropriate. Lagoon areas should be kept mowed and
accessible. Berms and structures should be inspected regularly for
evidence of erosion, leakage, or discharge.
18. If animal production at the facility is to be suspended or terminated, the
owner is responsible for obtaining and implementing a "closure plan"
which will eliminate the possibility of an illegal discharge, pollution, and
erosion.
19. Waste handling structures, piping, pumps, reels, etc., should be inspected
on a regular basis to prevent breakdowns, leaks, and spills. A regular
maintenance checklist should be kept on site.
20. Animal waste can be used in a rotation that includes vegetables and other
crops for direct human consumption. However, if animal waste is used on
crops for direct human consumption, it should only be applied pre -plant
with no further applications of animal waste during the crop season.
21. Highly visible markers shall be installed to mark the top and bottom
elevations of the temporary storage (pumping volume) of all waste
treatment lagoons. Pumping shall be managed to maintain the liquid level
between the markers. A marker will be required to mark the maximum
storage volume for waste storage ponds.
........................--
182009 Database Version 3.1 Date Printed: 12/22/2006 Specification Page 3

22. Waste shall be tested within 60 days of utilization and soil shall be tested
at least annually at crop sites where waste products are applied. Nitrogen
shall be the rate -determining nutrient, unless other restrictions require
waste to be applied based on other nutrients, resulting in a lower
application rate than a nitrogen based rate. Zinc and copper levels in the
soils shall be monitored and alternative crop sites shall be used when
these metals approach excessive levels. pH shall be adjusted and
maintained for optimum crop production. Soil and waste analysis
records shall be kept for a minimum of five years. Poultry dry waste
application records shall be maintained for a minimum of three years.
Waste application records for all other waste shall be maintained for five
(5) years.
23. Dead animals will be disposed of in a manner that meets North Carolina
regulations.
•
40 ...... 1820Q9 Database Version 3.1 Date Printed: 12/2212006 Specifscation Pa„e 4

Crop Notes
• The following crop note applies to field(s): 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33
Corn Piedmont
In the Piedmont, corn is normally planted when soil temperatures reach 52 to 55 degrees fahrenheit.
Review the Official Variety "green book" and information from private companies to select a.high
yielding variety with the characteristics needed for your area and conditions. Plant 1-2" deep. Plant
populations should be detennined by the hybrid being planted. Increase the seeding rate by 10% when
planting no -till. Phosphorus and potassium recommended by a soil test can be broadcast or banded at
planting. When planting early in cool, wet soil, banded phosphorus will be more available to the young
plants. An accepted practice is to apply 20-301bs/acre N and 20-30 lbs/acre phosphorus banded as a
starter and the remaining N behind the planter. The total amount of N is dependent on soil type. When
including a starter in the fertilizer program, the recommended potassium and any additional phosphorus
is normally broadcast at planting. Plant samples can be analyzed during the growing season to monitor
the overall nutrient status of the corn. Timely management of weeds and insects are essential for corn
production.
The following crop note applies to field(s): 1, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 15A, 18, 19, 2, 20, 21, 25, 6, 7, 8, 9
Fescue: Piedmont
Adaptation: Well -adapted.
In the Piedmont, tall fescue can be planted Aug. 20 to Oct. 10 (best) and Feb. 15 to Mar. 20. For
pure -stand broadcast seedings use 20 to 30 lblac., for drilled use 15 to 20 lblac. seed. Use certified seed
to avoid introducing weeds or annual ryegrass, Plant seed 0.25" to 0.5" deep for pure stands, 0.25" in
mixture with clovers. Soil test for preplant and maintenance lime, phosphorus, and potassium
recommendations. Apply 40 to 60 lblac nitrogen at planting for pure stands only. Do not apply N for
mixtures with clovers but use proper legume inoculation techniques. Apply 150 to 200 lblac. N to
pure -stand fescue for hay production; reduce N rates by 25% for grazing. Apply N Feb. 1 to Mar. 20 and
Aug. 20 to Sept. 30, with equal amounts in each window. Refer to NCSU Technical Bulletin 305
Production and Utilization of Pastures and Forages in North Carolina for additional information or
consult your regional agronomist or extension agent for assistance.
•- ----- --- ------------ ---• ......._.....
182009 Database Version 3.1 Date Printed: 12-22-2006 Crop Note Page 1 of 3

The following crop note applies to field(s): 16, 17, 3, 4, 5
0 Fescue: Piedmont
Adaptation: Well -adapted.
In the Piedmont, tall fescue can be planted Aug. 20 to Oct. 10 (best) and Feb. 15 to Mar. 20. For
pure -stand broadcast seedings use 20 to 30 lb/ac., for drilled use 15 to 201b/ac. seed. Use certified seed
to avoid introducing weeds or annual ryegrass. Plant seed 0.25" to 0.5" deep for pure stands, 0.25" in
mixture with clovers. Soil test for preplant and maintenance lime, phosphorus, and potassium
recommendations. Apply 40 to 60 lb/ac nitrogen at planting for pure stands only. Do not apply N for
mixtures with clovers but use proper Iegume inoculation techniques. Apply 150 to 200 lb/ac. N to
pure -stand fescue for hay production; reduce N rates by 25% for grazing. Apply N Feb. 1 to Mar. 20 and
Aug. 20 to Sept. 30, with equal amounts in each window, Refer to NCSU Technical Bulletin 305
Production and Utilization of Pastures and Forages in North Carolina for additional information or
consult your regional agronomist or extension agent for assistance.
The following crop note applies to field(s): 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33
Wheat: Piedmont
In the Piedmont, wheat should be planted from October 10-November 3. Plant 22 seed/drill row foot at
1-1 1/2" deep and increase the seeding rate by 5% for each week seeding is delayed beyond the optimum
time. See the seeding rates table for applicable seeding rate modifications in the current NCSU "Small
Grain Production Guide". Also, increase the initial seeding rate by at least 10% when planting no -till.
Adequate depth control when planting the wheat is essential. Review the NCSU Official Variety "green
book" and information from private companies to select a high yielding variety with the characteristics
needed for your area and conditions. Apply no more than 30 lbs/acre N at planting. Increase the N at
planting to 40 lbs/acre in no -till wheat. Apply phosphorus and potash according to soil test
recommendations at this time. The retraining N should be applied during the months of February -March.
The total N is dependent on the soil type. Plant samples can be analyzed during the growing season to
monitor the nutrient status of the wheat. Timely management of diseases, insects and weeds are essential
for profitable wheat production.
The following crop note applies to field(s): 22, 23, 24
Fescue: Piedmont
Adaptation: Well -adapted.
In the Piedmont, tali fescue can be planted Aug. 20 to Oct. 10 (best) and Feb. 15 to Mar. 20. For
pure -stand broadcast seedings use 20 to 30 lb/ac., for drilled use 15 to 20 lb/ac. seed. Use certified seed
to avoid introducing weeds or annual ryegrass. Plant seed 0.25" to 0.5" deep for pure stands, 0.25" in
mixture with clovers. Soil test for preplant and maintenance lime, phosphorus, and potassium
recommendations. Apply 40 to 60 lb/ac nitrogen at planting for pure stands only. Do not apply N for
mixtures with clovers but use proper legume inoculation techniques. Apply 150 to 2001b/ac. N to
pure -stand fescue for hay production; reduce N rates by 25% to 50% for grazing. Apply N Feb. 1 to Mar.
20 and Aug. 20 to Sept. 30, with equal amounts in each window, Refer to NCSU Technical Bulletin 305
Production and Utilization of Pastures and Forages in North Carolina for additional information or
consult your regional agronomist or extension agent for assistance.
------ ----- --- ------ --- ----------------- ----- - - --- ... P ....
1BZflo9 Database Version 3.1 Date Printed: 12-22-Z006 Cro Note Pa e 2 of 3

0
The following crop note applies to field(s), 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33
Double -Crop Soybeans, Piedmont
Double -crop soybeans should be planted as early in June as possible with planting completed by July 4th.
When no -tilling soybeans in small grain straw, it is essential to manage the straw to achieve adequate
plant populations. Review the NCSU Official Variety "green book" and information from private
companies to select a high yielding variety with the characteristics needed for your area and conditions.
Plant 4-6 seed/row foot for 7-8" drills and 6-8 seed/row foot for 15" rows. Seeding depth should be 1-1
1/2" and adequate depth control is essential. Phosphorus and potash recommended for the soybeans can
be applied to the wheat in the Fall. Soybeans produce their own nitrogen and are normally grown without
additions of nitrogen. However, applications of 20-30 lbs/acre N are sometimes made at planting to
promote early growth and vigor. Tissue samples can be analyzed during the growing season to monitor
the overall nutrient status of the soybeans. Timely management of weeds and insects is essential for
profitable double crop soybean production.
-- ---- --•------
------------- -....------------
....--- ---.......
182009 Database Version 3.1 Date Printed: 12-22-2006 Crop Note Page 3 of 3

4aa.1"{� ►30 . `t -S— i
91ZO ( � S
Nutrient Management Plan For Animal Waste Utilization iY-,CD
CV
C:)
12-2 1 -2006 ie e�
This plan has been prepared for:
Wise Farm LLC
Martin Engel
973 Kerr Lake Cole Bridge
Norlina, NC 27536
252-456-2437
This plan has been developed by: Z t
e �
Carl Dunn
DSWC
943 Washington Sq fLlall
Washington, NC.' 27889
252-948-3900
J
Developer Signature
Type of Plan: Nitrogen Only with Manure Only
Owner/Manager/Producer Agreement
I (we) understand and agree to the specifications and the operation and maintenance
procedures established in this nutrient management plan which includes an animal
waste utilization plan for the farm named above. I have read and understand the
Required Specifications concerning animal waste management that are included with
this,.plan.
Signature (manager or pro cer)
?Z -' I- oo6
Date
Date
This plan meets the minimum standards and specifications of the U.S. Department of
Agriculture - Natural Resources Conservation Service or the standard of practices
adopted by the Soil and Water Conservation Commission.
Plan Approved By:
Technical Specialist Signature
Date
------------------------------------------------------------------- - ----------------- -...............
182009 Database Version 3.1 mate Printed: 12-22-2006 Cover Page l

12/10/2006 20:19
252-456--3948
MAR I iN ENULL
rAuL U4
Narrative
The total number of beef animals on this farin will need to be addressed. There should not be over 71
head on the 143 acres of fescue pasture. The MRCS highly recommend the beef animals would need to
be rotated in such a manner that existing vegetation would be adequate to consume the amount of
nitrogen contained in the swine waste being applied. It is the responsibility of the landowner and/or
producer to assure the adequate number of beef animals are being managed on the existing fescue
pastures.
This plan used the "User Defined Source" for the North Carolina of Wise LLC farm and it was derived as
follows;
Mr. Engel stated that the farm has a capacity of 1,000 sows Farrow to Feeder. Mr. Engel stated that he
only has capacity to finish 4,500 fee lex pigs at this fg61ity. The: rema indem of the feeder Pigs are Sant to
another facility. Vernon Cox estimated the annual volume produced by feeder pigs being finished at this
site, He then added the volume per sow, as shown below,
The MRCS standard states that a Farrow to Feeder operation produces 3,861 gals/per year.
(3,361 gals/sow) x (1,000) = 3,861,000 galslyear for the Farrow -Feeder operation,
The NRC 1; standard states that a 1Feederto Finish operation produces 976 gals/head per year.
(967 head) x (4,500 gat/head) - 4,I11,500 gals/year for the Feeder -Finish operation.
-` 3,961,000 k 4,171,500 = 8,032,500 galslyear for the entire operation.
(8,032,500 galslyear)1(1,000) = 8,032.5 gallsow/year.
This number ontered into Nutrient Management Software as a user defined source for a swine Farrow to
Finish operation, with an annual *volume of 8,032.5 gallsow per year. The nutrient concentration of 13 6
lbs. of total Nlacre-inch is taken from the NRCS standard.
**This plan contains a high N value granted to Fescue Hay and Fescue pasture than the default values,
based on the Seventh Guidance Metro from $5 1217: A value for nitrogen upLakc by crop hat} bcert
selected for each soil type in North Carolina. This value must not be exceeded in situations where new
fields are being added to existing waste utilization plans or inchi.ded in,planc unleca juGtified by a NCbA
& CS Regional Agronomist (other qualified professionals may be identified later) based on plant tissue
analysis. Where existing plans are being revised or amended (i.e. no new fields being added) using the
assigned program values is encouraged but not mandated. N coefficients by crops and soil types are
included in the new nutrient management software and are available at the web address:
http://www.soil,ncsu.edu/nmp/ or contact your local CES office.
This plan has been modified to be established on irrigation pulls primarily. Fields 1-21 correspond to the
irrigation pulls as defined by the wettable acres determination. Fields 22-25 in this plan correspond to
the Farm Service Agency (FSA) ariel map defined fields 1, 2, 3 and 5 respectively, which are designated
for honey -wagon application.
PrZViow Database Version 3.1 Date Printed: 05-25-2005 Narrative Pzge Page 1 of 1

Nutrients applied in accordance with this plan will be supplied from the
following source(s):
Commercial Fertilizer is not included in this plan.
U3
Wise Farm waste generated 8,032,500 gals/year by it 1,000 animal Swine
Farrow -Finish Lagoon I..iyuid operation. This production fiacility has waste storage
capacities of approximately 180 days.
Estimated Pounds of Plant Available Nitrogen Generated per Year
Broadcast
18501
Incorporated
31773
Injected
34990
Irrigated
20109
Max. Avail.
PAN (lbs) *
Actual PAN
Appl ied (lbs)
PAN Surplus/
Deficit (lbs)
Actual Volume
Applied (Gallons)
Volume Surplus/
Deficit (Gallons)
Year 1
20,109
28249
-8,140
11,419,351
-3,386,851
Year 2
20,109
29333
-9,224
11,852,305
-3,819,905
This plan includes a User Defined Source to detenidne the total pounds of PAN in lieu
of NRCS Standard values. Refer to North Carolina Cooperative Extension Service publication AG-439-42
entitled "Soil Facts: Use of On -Farm Records for Modifying a Certified Animal Waste Management Plan" for
guidance on using on -farm records to develop a User Defined Source.
------------------------------------ --- -------------------------------------------......
Note: In source lD, S means standard source, U means user defined source.
* Max. Available PAN is calculated on the basis of the actual application niethod(s) identified in the- plan for this source.
182009 Database Version 3.1 Date Printed: 12-72-2006 Source Page I of l

The table shown below provides a summaryof the crops or rotations included in this plan for each field. Realistic
Yield estimates area I so provided for each crop in the plan. In addition, the Leaching Indcx for each field is shown,
where available.
Planned Crops Summary
Tract
Field
Total
Acres
Useable
Acres
Leaching
Index (LI)
Soil Series
Crop Sequence
RYE,
1480
1
6.70
6.70
NiA
Pacolet
Fcscue Pasture
4.5 Tens
1480
10
5.82
5.31
NIA
Pacolet
Fescue Pasture
1.5'rons
1480
11
6.95
6.34
NIA
Pacolet
Fescue Pasture
4.5 Tons
1480
12
4.661
4.25
NIX
Pacolet
Fescue Pasture
4.5 Tans
1480
13
7.81
7.12
N/A
Paculet
Fescue Pasture
4.5 "Pons
t480
14
2,37
2,16
NIA
Pacolet
Fescue Pasturc
4.51'nus
1480
15
7.81
7.12
NIA
Pacolet
Fescue Pasture
4.5 Tuns
1480
15A
5.771
5.26
NIA
Pacolet
Fescue Pasture
4.5 "Pons
1480
16
8.24
5.95
NIA
Saw
Fescue Pasturc
3.5 "funs
1490
17
8.82
6.37
NIA
Saw
Fescue Pasture
3.5 Mons
1480
18
4.44
3.96
NIA
Paculet
Fescue Pasture
4.5 Tons
1480
19
5.51
4.92
NIA
Pacolet
Fescue Pasture
4.5 "Pons
1480
2
767.00
6.85
N/A
Pacolet
Fescue Pasture
4,5 Tuns
1480
20
4.67
3.80
NIA
Pacolet
Fescue Pasture
4.5 'tons
1480
21
5.02
4.09
NIA
Pacolct
Fescue Pasture
4.5 Tons
1480
22
3.00
3.00
N/A
Vance
Fescue Hay
4.5'fnm
1480
23
8.001
8.00
NIA
Vance
Fescue Ilay
4.5 Tuns
1480
24
3.60
3.60
NIA
Pacolet
Fescue Hay
4.5 "fuels
1480
25
4.20
4.20
NIA
Pacolet
Fescue Pasture
4.5 'Pons
1480
3
11.30
6.70
NIA
saw
Fescue Pastetre
3.5 Tons
1480
4
10,031
7.24
N/A
Saw
Fescue Pastore
3.5 Tons
1480
5
2.89
2.09
NIA
Saw
Fescue Pasture
3.3 Tons
1480
6
8.23
7.50
NIA
Pacolet
Fescue Pasture
4.5 Tl Ali
1480
7
6.64
6,05
NIA
Pacolet
Fescue P;r,ture
4.5 Tams
1480
8
5,681
5.18
N/A
Pacolct
Fescue Pasture
4.5 Tons
1480
9
6,01
5.48 1
N/A
Pacolet
Fescue Pasture
4.5'fons
3726
26
6.17
4.41
NIA
Pacolet
C:om, Grain
1 14) hu.
Wheat, Grain
50 bu.
Soyheam, 1\lnnured, 1lmhle Crop
14 hu.
3726
27
6.17
3.53
NIA IPacolct..
Corn, Grain
I ltl bw
182009 Database Version 3.1 Date Printed 12/22/2006
PCS Page 1 of 2
NOTE: Symbol * means user entered data.

Planned Crops Summary
Tract
Field
'Total
Acres
Useable
Acres
Leaching
Index (LI)
Soil Series
Crop Sequence
RYE
Wheat, Grain
50 hu,
Soyheans, Nlanurcd, Double Crop
34 bu.
3726
28
6.17
4.41
NIA
Pacolet
Corn, Grain
l 10 bu.
Wheat, Grain
St) bu.
Soybeans, Manured, Dnuhte Crop
34 bu.
3726
29
12,40
5,84
N/A
Pacolct
Corn, Grain
110 bu.
Wheat, (wain
50 bu.
Soybeans, Manured, Double Crop
34 bu,
3726
30
9.10
7.63
NIA
Pacolet
Corn, Grain
110 bu.
Wheat, Grain
50 hu.
Soybeans, Manurcd, Double Crop
34 bu.
3726
31
9.10
6.44
NIA
Pacolet
Corn, Grain
110 bu.
Wheat, Grain
5U bu.
Soybeans, Manured, Double Cron
34 hu.
3726
32
9.101
7,63
NIA
Pacolet
Corn, Grain
110 bay.
Wheat, Grain
50 hu.
•
Soybeans, \tanured, Double Crop
34 hu.
3726
33
9.10
3.87
NIA
Pacolet
Conn, Grain
110 bu.
Wheat, Grain
50 bu.
Soybeans, Oitnured, Double Crop
34 bu.
PLAN TO'TAL3: 968.48 183.00
;7t1'al L'eacirlri 'r
`� Techni' al Guidance
Low potential to contribute to soluble
tone
< 2
nutrient leaching below the root zone.
> J 2 &
Moderate potential to contribute to
Nutrient ,4tanageinent (590) should be planned.
<= E0
soluble nutrient leaching below the root
zone.
High potential to contribute to soluble
Nutrient ,Managarnent (590) shouid be planned. Other conservation practices that 'tntprove
nutrient leaching below the root zone.
the soils available water holding capacity and intprove nutrient use efficiency should be
> 10
considered. Examples are Cover Crops (340) to scavenge nutrients, Sod-B3sed Rotations
(328), Lone -Tenn NoJill (778), and edge-of=tield practices such as kilter Strips (393) and
Riparian Forest Buffers (391).
182009 Database Version 3.1 Date Prinlcd 12i22/2006
PCs Page 2 of 2
NOTE: Symbol w means user entered data.

The Waste Utilization table shown below summarizes the waste utilization plan for this operation. This plan provides an estimate of the number of acres of
cropland needed to use the nutrients being produced. The plan requires consideration of the realistic yields of the crops to be grown, their nutrient requirements,.
and proper timing of applications to maximize nutrient uptake.
This table~ provides an estimate of the amount of nitrogen required by the crop being grown and an estimate of the nitrogen amount being supplied by manure or
other by-products, commercial fertilizer and residual from previous crops. An estimate of the quantity of solid and liquid waste that will be applied on each field in
order to supply the indicated quantity of nitrogen from each source is also included. A balance of the total manure produced and the total manure applied is
included in the table to ensure that the plan adequately provides for the utilization of the manure generated by the operation.
Waste Utilisation Table
Year I
Tract
Field
5ouci
ID
Soil Series
Total
Acres
Use.
Acres
Crop
RYE
Applic.
Petiod
Nitrogen
PA
Nutrient
Req'd
(IbsA)
Ccrrttn
Fert.
Nutrient
Applied
(IbsIA)
Res.
(lbsrA)
Applic,
Meth)d
Manure
PA
Nutrient
Applied
(IWA1
Liquid
ManweA
pplied
(acre)
Solid
Manure
Applied
(acre)
Liquid
Manure
Applied
(Field)
solid
Manure
Applied
(FKId)
N
N
N
\
10(1t7
gdf/A
'tons
1000 gals
tuns
1480
1
U3
Pacolet
6,70
6.70
Fescue Pasture
4.5 Tans
8/1-7/31
* 165
0
0
brig.
165
65.91
0.00
441.58
0.00
1480
10
U3
Pacolet
5.82
5.31
Fescue Pasturc
4.S Toms
S/1-7/3 [
* 165
0
0
hTig.
165
659 t
0.00
349-97
0.0
1480
11
U3
E'acolet
6.95
6.34
Fescue Pasture
4S Tons
8/1-7/31
* 165
0
0
brig.
165
65.91
0.00
417.86
000
1490
12
U3
Pacolet
4.66
4.25
Fescue Pasture
4,5 Tons
8/1-7r)
* 165
0
0
Irria.
165
65.91
0.00
280-111
OCj
1480
13
U3
Pacolct
7.81
7.12
Fescue Pasture
4.5 Tons
811-7131
* l65
0
0
Irrig.
165
65.91
0.00
469 26
U.00
1480
14
U3
Pacolet
2.37
2-16
Fescue Pasture
45 Tons
8/1-7/31
*165
0
0
brig.
165
65.91
0.00
142.36
0.00
1480
15
U3
Pacolct
7.81
7.12
Fescue Pasture
4.5 Tons
8I1-7/31
*iti5
0
0
brig.
165
65.9E
0.0
469?6
0.00
1490
15A
E13
Pacolet
5. i7
5.26
Feseuc Pasture
4.5 Tons
SA-7/31
1165
0
0
Irrig.
165
65.91
0.00
346,68
0.0t
1490
16
U3
Saw
8.24
5.95
Fcscuc Pasture
IS Tons
R/I-7/31
*129
0
(1
lyric.
129
5I.53
0.0[
30(01)
0.0t0
1480
17
U3
Sacti
8.92
6.37
Fescue Pasture
3.5 Torts
811.7131
' 129
0
(1
brig.
129
51.53
0.00
325.23
0.00
1490
19
U3
Pacolct
4.44
3.96
Fescue Pasture
4.5 Tons
811-7/31
* 165
0
0
lrriz .
165
65.9E
0.00
261.00
0.00
1480
19
113
Pacolct
3.51
4.92
Fescue Pasture
4.5 Tons
8/1-7131
*165
0
0
brig.
165
65.91
0.0
32427
QUO
1480
2
U3
Pacolct
767.00
6.85
Fescue Pasture
4.5 Tons
8/1-7/31
*165
0
0
Irrig.
165
65.91
O.OU
451.47
0.00
1480
20
U3
Pacolct
4.67
3.80
Fescue Pasture
4.5 rota
8/1-7/31
* l65
0
0
lrrig.
165
65.91
0.001
250.45
0.00
1480
21
U3
Pacolct
5.02
4.09
Fescue Pasture
4.5 Tons
8/1-7/3 1
* 165
0
0
Irrib.
165
65.91
0.0
269.56
0.00
14x0
22
U3
Vance
3.00
3.00
Fescue Hay
f47f..,
811-7/31
*220
0
0
Broad.
22
95.52
0.00
286.56
U.00
182009 Databasv Version 3.€ Date Printed: 12/22,2006 WUT P:tie € of 6

Waste Utilization Table
Year I
Tract
Field
Sot,n;c
fA
soil Series
Tonal
Acres I
Use.
Acres
Crop
RYE
Applic.
Period
Nitrogen
PA
Nutrient
Rc#
(lbslA)
Comm
Fen.
Nutrient
Applied
(1bs1A)
Res.
(1bslA)
APplie.
Method
Manure
PA
Nutrient
APpW
(Ibs/A)
liquid
ManureA
pplied
(aae)
Solid
Manua
Applied
(arse)
Liquid
Manurc
Applied
(Hell!)
Solid
Manure
Applied
(Field}
-
N
N
IN
N
1000
gaUA
Tons
1000 gals
tons
1490
23
li3
Vancc
8.00
8.00
Fescue IIay
4.5 Tans
8/1-7131
*220
0
0
Broad.
220
95,52
0.00
764-15
Ofl
1480
24
0
Paooiet
3.60
3.60
Fescue Hap
4.5 Tons
M-7131
*220
0
0 1
Broad.
220
95.52
0.00
343.87
000
1480
25
0
Pacnlct
4.20
4.20
Fescue Pastuue
4.5 Tons
811-7/31
*165
0
0
Broad.
165
71.64
0,
300.88
0.00
1480
3
113
Saw
11.30
6.70
Fescue Pasture
3.5 Tons
8/1-7131
* 129
0
0
Irrig.
129
51.53
0.00
345.24
0.0
1480
4
li3
Saw
10.03
7.24
Fescue Pasture
35 Tons
8/1.7/31
*ID
0
0
Irrig.
129
51.53
0.0
373.06
0.00
1480
5
0
Saw
2.89
2.U9
Fescue Pasture
3.5 bons
8/1-7/31
*129
0
U
Irric.
129
5 1 .531
0.00
107.69
0.00
1480
6
li3
Pacolet
8.23
7.50
Fescue Pasture
4.5 Tons
8/1-7/31
*165
0
0
Imo.
165
65.91
0.00
494.31
0.00
1480
7
1;3
Pacolet
6.64
6.05
Fescue Pasture
4.5 Tons
911-7/31
*165
0
0
Irrig.
165
65.91
O.W
398,74
().0
1480
8
U3,
Pacolet
5.68
5.18
Fescue Pasture
4.5 Tons
8/1-7/31
* 165
0
0
hTig.
165
65.91
0.0
341.40
0.00
1480
9
l.'3
Pacolet
6,01
5.48
Fcscuc Pasture
4.5 Tons
8il-7/31
*165
U
0
Irrig.
165
65.91
0.001361.18
0_00
3726
26
1:3
Pacolet
6.17
4.41
Corn, Grain
110 bu.
2115-6130
122
0
20
IrriL,.
102
40.74
O.Di
179-68
0.00
3726
26
li3
Pacolet
6.17
4.41
Wheat, Grain
50 bu.
911-4/30
100
0
0
brig.
50
19.97
0.00
88.08
0.00
3726
27
l:3
Pacolet
6.17
3.53
Corn, Grain
110 bu,
2/15-6130
122
0
20
Irrig.
102
40,74
O.oc
143.82
0.00
-1726
27
1.3
Pacolet
6.17
3.53
Wheat, Grain
50 bu.
91t-4/30
100
0
0
Irrig.
5 C
19.97
0.00
70.50
000
3726
28
l:3
Pacolct
6.17
4.41
Corn. Grain
110 bu.
V15-6/30
122
0
20
Irrig.
102
40.74
0.00
179.61
0.00
3726
28
U3
Pacolet
6.17
4.4E
Wheat, Grain
50 bu.
9.114/30
100
0
0
Irr i
50
19.97
0.00
88.08
0.00
3726
29
0
Pacolet
12,40
5.84
Corn, Grain
110 bu.
2/15-6/30
122
0
20
Irrig,
102
40.74
0.00
237.94
0.00
3726
29
U
Pacolet
12.40
5.84
Wheat, Grain
50 bu.
9/1-4/30
100
0
0
Irrig.
50
19.97
0.01
116.64
U.00
3726
30
13
Pacolet
9.10
7.63
Corn, Grain
110 bu.
2/15-6/30
122
0
20
lrria.
0
().001
0.00
0.00
0.00
3726
30
l3
Pacolet
9.10
7.63
Wheat, Grain
50 bu.
9/1-4/30
100
0
0
Irrig.
0.00
0.00
0,00
0.00
3726
31
E3
Pacolet
9.10
6.44
Cum, Grain
110 bu.
2/l5-6130
E22
U
2U
brio.
102
40.74
0.
262.3
0.00
E31
0
Pacolct
9.10
6.44
Wheat, Grain
50 bu.
911-4/30
t00
0
U
Irrig.
5
19.97
0.0
128,62
u.Otl
182000 Database Vcrsion A Date Printed: 12/22/2006 WUT Page 2 of 6

Waste Utilization Table
Year I
Nitregen
Ctmm
Res.
Manure
Liquid
Solid
Liquid
Solid
PA
Fert,
(Ibs/A)
PA
hMantueA
Manure
Manure
Nlanurc
Nutrient
Nutrient
Nutrient
pphed
Applied
Applied
Applied
KCld
Applied
AppGld
(acre)
(aye)
(Fii!1si)
(Fi<ld;
(Ibs/A)
(IbVA)
Obs1A)
Ilow
Snurce
Total
Use.
AppGc.
Apphc.
Tract
Field
1D
Soil Series
Acres
I Acres
Crop
RYE
Period
I N
N
N
Method
N
gaUA
I Tons
1000 gals
tans
3726
32
113
Pacolet
9,10
7.63
Com, Grain
110 bu.
2/15-6130
122
0
20
irrig.
102
40.74
0.00
310.87
0,00
3726
32
U3
Pacolet
9.10
7.63
Wheal, Grain
50 bu.
911450
100
0
0
brig.
�
19.9
0.
1�2.39
0.1x
3726
33
U3
Pacolet
9.10
3.87
Cum, Grain
110 bu.
2/15-6/30
122
0
20
brig.
102
40.74
0_U
157.68
0.00
3726
33
U3
Paculet
9.16
3.87
Whrai, Grain
50 hu.
9/1 4f3D
]UD
0
D
brig.
5
19.97
0.00
77.29
0,00
Total Applied. 1000 gallons
11,419.35
Total Produced. 1000 gallons
8,032.5
' _
Bulanu, 1000 gallons
-3,386.85
Total Applied, tons:,,
9`=-
0.00
"fatal Produced, tons
;.L,.
:::,::,
0,0
Balance, tuns
i -
0.00
Notes: 1. In the tract column, — symbot means leased, otherwise, owned. 2. Symbol * means user entered data.
18?009 Datah;t:ic Vtrsirnt 3' 1 Date Printed: 1WUT Pa,;L 3 of 6

Waste Utilization Table
Year 2
Tract
Field
Some
IL) I
Soil Series
Total
Acres
Use.
Aria I
Crop
RYE
APplic.
Period
Nitrogen
PA
Nutrient
Rod
Qbs1A)
Cantu
Fen.
Nuttient
Applied
(lbsiA)
Res.
(1bs1A)
Applic.
Metlnd
Manure
PA
Nutrient
Apphed
(IWA)
Liquid
ManureA
pplicd
(am)
Solid
Manure
Applied
(acre)
Liquid
Manure
Applied
(Help)
Solid
Manure
Applied
(Fi`u)
N
N
N
1000
gaUA
Torts
1000 gals
tons
1490
1
U3
Pacolet
6.70
6.70
Fescue Pasture
4.5 Tons
&1-7/31
*165
0
0
brig.
165
65.91
U.0
441.58
0.00
1480
10
03
Pacolet
5.82
5.31
17cscue Pasture
4.5 Tons
81I-7/31
* 165
0
0
brig.
165
65,91
0.00;349.97
O.GOI
1480
11
i.13
Pacolct
6,95
6.34
Fescue Pasture
4.5 Tons
8/1-7,,'31
* 165
0
0
Irrig.
165
65.91
0.00
417.86
0.00
1480
12
W
Pacolct
4.66
4.25
Fescue Pasture
4.5 Tons
811-7/31
* 165
0
0
Irrig. 1
165
65.91
0,00
280.1 I
0.00
1480
13
U3
Pacolct
7,81
7.12
Fescue Pasture
4.5 Tons
811-7n I
* 165
0
0
[;rig.
165
65.91
0.00
469.26
0 f)G
1480
14
U3
Pacolet
2.37
2.16
FeScue Pasture
4.5'Fons
8,11-7131
*165
0
0
Irrig.
165
65.91
OU
142.36
0.00
1480
Is
U3
Pacolct
7.81
7.12
Fescue Pasture
4.5 Tons
811-7131
*165
0
0
Irriz
165
65.91
000
469-20
0,00
1480
15A
U3
Pacolet
5.77
5.26
Fescue Pasture
4.5 Tons
811-7131
*165
0
0
brig.
161
65.91
0.00
346.68
0.00
1480
16
L3
Satin
8.24
595
Fescue Pasture
3.5 Tons
811-7/31
* 129
0
0
brie.
12
S 1,53
000
-106.59
0.00
1480
17
i3
San
8.82
6.37
Fescue Pasture
3.5 Tons
911-7/31
*129
0
0
krill.
129
5 1. 53
0.00
328.23
0.00
14W
18
U3
Pacolct
4.44
3.96
Fescue Pasture
4.51ons
8/1-7131
*165
0
0
lrri6.
165
65.91
0.00
261.00
0.00
1480
19
U3
Pacolet
5.5!
4-92
Fescue Pasture
4.5 Tons
811-W31
*165
0
0
Irrig.
165
65.91
0.0
324.27
0.0
1480
2
t3
Pacolct
707.00
6.85
Fescue Pasture
4-5 Tons
8/1-7131
•165
0
0
Irrig
165
65.91
0.0
451.47
0.00
1480
20
U
Pacolct
4.67
3.80
Fescue Past=
4-5 Tons
8/1-7131
*165
0
0
Irriv.
165
65.91
0.0
25t1.45
0.00
1480
21
u3
Pacolct
5.02
4.09
Fescue Pasture
4.5 Torts
811-7C31
* 165
0
0
ItriL.
165
6 .91
0,0
269.56
000
1480
22
U3
Vance
3.00
3.00
Fescue Hay
4.5 Torts
8/1-7/31
*220
0
0
Broad,
i2o
95.32
0. DO
286,56
0.0
1480
23
U3
Vance
8.00
8.00
Fescue Hay
4.5 Tuns
8/1-7/31
*220
0
0
Broad.
220
95.52
0.00
764. I ?
{) 00
1480
24
13
Pacolet
3,60
3.60
Fescue Hay
4.5 Tons
8/1.7/31
*220
0
0
Broad.
220
95.5E
0_0
343.87
O.ol)
1480
25
Ii3
Pacolet
-1.20
4.20
Fescue Pasture
4.5 Tons
811-7111
+165
0
D
Broad.
165
71.64
0.00
300.88
U_U
1480
3
L3
Saw
11.30
6.70
Fescue Pasture
3.5 Tons
8I1-7/3 !
' 129
0
0
!trio.
129
51.53
0.00
345.24
U.0
1480
4
W
Sate
10.031
7.24
Fescue Pasture
3.5 Tons
8/1-7131
*129
0
0
brig.
129
51.53
0.00
373.06
0.00
1480
5
1:3
Sax'
2.84
2.09
Fescue Pasture
3.5 Tons
811.7i31
+129
0
0
Irrig.
12
51,53
U.0
107.69
u.W
182009 Dalahase Ve:-sion 3. 1 Date Printed: 12L)2.12006 W [)T Pa, -ye 4 of 6

Waste Utilization Table
Year 2
Tract
Field
Source
ID
Soil Series
Total
Acres
Use
Acres
Crop
RYE
Appfic.
Period
Nitre en
PA
Nutrient
Rc d
(lbs/A)
Ccmrn
Fen.
Nutrient
Applied
(lbs/A)
Res-
(lbs/A)
Applie.
Method
Manure
PA
Nutrient
ApptiW
pbsfA)
Liquid
ManureA
pplied
(acre)
Solid
Manure
Applied
(acre)
liquid
Manure
Applied
(Field)
Solid
Manure
Applied
(Field)
N
N
N
N
1000
gaVA
Tons
IOW gals
tons
1480
6
l[3
Pacolet
8.23
7.50
fescue Pasture
4.5 Tons
8/1-7/31
#165
0
0
Irrig.
165
65.91
0.00
494.31
0.00
1480
7
U3
Pacolet
6.64
6.05
Fescue Pasture
4.5 Torts
8/1-7131
*165
0
0
Irrig.
165
65.91
OA0
398,74
0.00
1480
8
U3
Pacoict
5.68
5.18
Fescue Pasture
4.5 Toni
8/1-78f
1165
0
0
Irrig.
165
65.91
0.00
341.40
0.00
1480
9 1
U3
Pacolet
6.01
5.48
Fescue Pasture
4.5 Tons
8i I-7131
•165
0
0
Irrig.
165
65.91
0.00
361.18
0.0
3726
26
U3
Pacolct
6.17
4.41
Wheat, Grain
50 bu.
911-4130
100
0
0
Irrig.
50
19.97
OM
88.08
0.0
3726
26
U3�
Pacolet
6.17
4.41
Soybeans, Manured, Double Crop
34 bu.
4/1-9/0
132
0
0
]trip.
132
52.73
0,00
2 32.52
0.00
3726
27
U3
Pacolet
6.17
3.53
Wheat, Grain
50 bu.
9/1-4/30
100
0
0
Irrig.
50
19.97
0-00
70.5
0.00
3726
27
U3
Pacolet
6.17
3.53
Soybeans, Manured, Double Crop
34 bu.
4/1-9/15
132
0
0
Irrig.
132
52.73
0.00
186.12
0-
3726
28
[j3
Pacolet
6,17
4.41
Wheat, Grain
50 bu.
9/1-460
100
0
0
Irrig.
30
1997
0.00
88.08
0.0
3726
28
1G
Pacolet
6.17
4.41
Soybeans, Manured, Double Crop
34 bu.
411-9/15
132
0
0
Wig.
1321
52.73
0.
232.52
0-0
3726
29
U3
!'acolct
12,40
5.84
Wheat, Grain
50 hu.
9/1-3/30
100
0
0
[frig.
5t
1997,0.0
1 16.64
0.00
3726
29
U3
Pacolet
12.40
5.84
Soybeans. Manured, Double Crop
34 bu.
4/1-9,'15
132
0
0
Irrig.
132
52.73
0.00
307.92
0.0
3726
30
U3
Pacolet
9.10
7.63
Wheat, Grain
50 bu.
9/1480
100
0
0
]Trig
0
0.00
0.0
0,00
O.00
3726
30
U3
Pacolet
9.10
1.63
Soybeans. Manured, Double Crop
34 bu.
4/1.9115
132
0
0
Irrig.
U
000
0.00
0.00
G.00
3726
31
[i?
Pactrlet
4.ID
6.44
Wheat, Grain
50 bur
9/14/30
100
0
0
Irrig.
5
14.47
0.U()
128.62
0.00
3726
31
t13
Pacolet
9.10
6.44
Soybeans, Manured, Double Crop
34 bu.
4/1-9/15
132
0
0
[Frig.
132
52.73
0.00
339.56
0.001
3726
32
U3
Pacolct
9.10
7.63
Wheat, Grain
50 bu.
9/14/30
100
0
0
Irrig.
50
19.97
0.00
152.39
0,0
3726
32
W
Pacolet
9.10
T63
Soybeans- Aianured, Double Crop
34 bu.
4/1-9/15
132
0
0
Irrig.
132
51731
0.00
402.30
0 0
3726
33
U3
Pacolet
9.10
3.87
Wheat, Grain
50 bu.
911-4/30
100
0
0
Irrig.
so
1997,
o.00
77.29
0.00
3726
33
U3
Pacolct
9.10
3.87
Soybeans, Manured, Double Crop
34 bu.
4/1-9/15
132
0
D
Irrig.
132
52.73
0.00
204.05
0.00
182009 Database Version 3.1 Date Printed: 12/22/2006 1VUT Page i of 6

Waste Utilization Table
Year 2
Nitrogen
Comm
Res.
Manure
Liquid
Solid
liquid
solid
PA
Fen.
(Ibs/A)
PA
ManurcA
Manure
Manure
Manure
Nutrient
Nutrient
Nutrient
pphrd
Applied
Applied
Applied
Rogd
Applied
Applied
(acre)
(acre)
(f0d)
(Fwld)
(ibsiA)
(1bsA)
(lbs/A)
l000
Source
Total
Use.
Applic.
Appk.
Tract
Field
Soil series
Acres
Acres
Crop
RYE
Period
N
N
N
Method
N
gal1A
Tons
1000 gals
tons
Total Applied, 1000 gallons
11,852.31W1,7,
Total Produced, 1000 gallons
8,032,5
_w
Balance, 1000 gallons
-3,819.81
-a
�0.00
Total Applied, tons
" j ua:
Total Produced, Ions
t'''
0.0
Balance, ums
`:; :�:?e
= .w:
0.00
Notes: I. In the tract column. — symbol means leased, otherwise, owned. 2. Symbol * means user entered data.
182009 Database Version :.l Date Printed: 121,'2--),?006 WUT Paoe 6 art 6

The Irrigation Application Factors for each Yield in this plan are shown in the following table. Infiltration rate varies
with soils. If applying waste nutrients through an irrigation system, you trust apply at a rate that will not result in
runoff. This table provides the maximum application rate per hour that may be applied to each field selected to
receive wastewater. it also lists the maximum application amount that each field may receive in any one application
event.
frrigwion Application Factors
Tract
Field
Soil Series
Application Rate
(inches/hour)
Application Amount
(inches)
1480
1
Pacolet
0.40
1.0
1480
10
Pacolet
0.40
1.0
1480
11
Pacolet , '
0.40
1.0
1480
12
Pacolet
0.40
1.0
1480
13
Pacolet
0.40
1.0
1480
14
Pacolet
0.40
1.0
1480
15
Pacolet
0,40
1.0
1480
15A
Pacolet
0.40
1.0
1480
16
Saw
0.35
1.0
1480
17
Saw
0.35
1.0
1480
18
Pacolet
0.40
1.0
1480
19
Pacolet
0.40
1.0
1480
2
Pacolet
0.40
1.0
1480
20
Pacolet
0.40
1.0
1480
21
Pacolet
0.40
1.0
1480
3
Saw
0.35
1.0
1480
4
Saw
0.35
1.0
1480
5
Saw
0.35
1.0
1480
6
Pacolet
OAO
1.0
1480
7
Pacolet
0.40
1.0
1480
8
Pacolet
0.40
1.0
1480
9
Pacolet
0.40
1.0
3726
26
Pacolet
0.40
1.0
3726
27
Pacolet
0.40
1.0
3726
28
Pacolet
0.40
1.0
3726
29
Pacolet
0.40
1.0
3726
30
Pacolet
0.40
1.0
3726
31
Pacolet
0,40
1.0
3726
32
Pacolet
0.40
1.0
3726
33
Pacolet
0.40,
_ _ _.1.0.
182009 Database Version 3.1 Date Printed 12/22/2006 IAF Page 1 of I

The Available Waste Storage Capacity table provides an estimate of the nurnber of days of storage
capacity available at the end of each month of the plan. Available storage capacity is calculated as the
design storage capacity in days minus the number of days of net storage vofume accumulated. The start
date is a value entered by the userand is defined as the date prior to applying nutrients to the first crop in
the plan at which storage volume in the lagoon or holding pond is equal to zero.
Available storage capacity should be greater than or equal to zero and less than or equal to the design
storage capacity of the facility. If the available storage capacity is greater than the design storage
capacity, this indicates that the plan calls for the application of nutrients that have not yet accumulated.
If available storage capacity is negative, the estimated volume ofaccunurlated waste exceeds the design
storage volume of the structure. Either of these situations indicates that the planned application interval
in the waste utilization plan is inconsistent with the structure's ternporary storage capacity.
Available a cit
Source Name Wise Farm
Design Storage Ca acit (Days)
Start Date 9/1
180
Plan Year
Month
Available Storage Capacity (Days)
I
1
149
1
2
163
1
3
180
1
4
180
1
5
180
1
6
180
1
7
180
1
8
180
I
9
180
I
10
180
1
11
180
1
12
149
2
1
118
2
2
148
2
3
175
2
4
180
2
5
180
2
6
180
2
7
180
2
8
180
2
9
180
2
10
180
2
11
180
2
12
149
* Available Storage Capacity is calculated as of the end of each month.
--------- ----------- . --.--
182009 Database Version 3.1 Date Printed; 12-22-2006 CapacityPa ge t of' I

Required Specifications For Animal Waste .Manauement
I. Animal waste shall not reach surface waters of the state by runoff, drift,
manmade conveyances, direct application, or direct discharge during
operation or land application. Any discharge of waste that reaches surface
water is prohibited.
2. There must be documentation in the design folder that the producer
either owns or has an agreement for use of adequate land on which to
properly apply the waste. If the producer does not own adequate land to
properly dispose of the waste, he/she shall provide evidence of an
agreement with a landowner, who is within a reasonable proximity,
allowing him/her the use of the land for waste application. It is the
responsibility of the owner of the waste production facility to secure an
update of the Nutrient Management Plan when there is a change in the
operation, increase in the number of animals, method of application,
receiving crop type, or available land.
3. Animal waste shall be applied to meet, but not exceed, the nitrogen needs
for realistic crop yields based upon soil type, available moisture, historical
data, climatic conditions, and level of management, unless there are
regulations that restrict the rate of applications for other nutrients.
4. Animal waste shall be applied to land eroding less than 5 tons per acre
per year. Waste may be applied to land eroding at more than 5 tons per
acre per year but less than 10 tons per acre per year provided grass filter
strips are installed where runoff leaves the field (see USDA, NRCS Field
Office Technical Guide Standard 393 - Filter Strips).
5. Odors can be reduced by injecting the waste or by disking after waste
application. Waste should not be applied when there is danger of drift
from the land application field.
6. When animal waste is to be applied on acres subject to flooding, waste
will be soil incorporated on conventionally tilled cropland. When waste is
applied to conservation tilled crops or grassland, the waste may be
broadcast provided the application does not occur during a season prone
to flooding (see "Weather and Climate in North Carolina" for guidance).
-- ------ -------------- ------ ------ --- . --- ..... ------
182009 Database Version 3.1 Date Printed: 12/22/2006 Specification Pape 1

7. Liquid waste shall be applied at rates not to exceed the soil infiltration
rate such that runoff does not occur offsite or to surface waters and in a
method which does not cause drift from the site during application. No
ponding should occur in order to control odor and flies.
S. Animal waste shall not be applied to saturated soils, during rainfall
events, or when the soil surface is frozen.
9. Animal waste shall be applied on actively growing crops in such a manner
that the crop is not covered with waste to a depth that would inhibit
growth. The potential for salt damage from animal waste should also be
considered.
10. Nutrients from waste shall not be applied in fall or winter for spring
planted crops on soils with a high potential for leaching. Waste/nutrient
loading rates on these soils should be held to a minimum and a suitable
winter cover crop planted to take up released nutrients. Waste shall not
be applied more than 30 days prior to planting of the crop or forages
breaking dormancy.
11. Any new swine facility sited on or after October 1, 1995 shall comply with
the following: The outer perimeter of the land area onto which waste is
applied from a lagoon that is a component of a swine farm shall be at least
50 feet from any residential property boundary and canal. Animal waste,
other than swine waste from facilities sited on or after October 1, 1995,
shall not be applied closer that 25 feet to perennial waters.
12. Animal waste shall not be applied closer than 100 feet to wells.
13. Animal waste shall not be applied closer than 200 feet of dwellings other
than those owned by the landowner.
14. Waste shall be applied in a manner not to reach other property and
public right-of-ways.
............. ...... - .................... _.----- --------- -- ........ .---- —1- - --
182009 Database Version 3.1 Date Printed: 12/22/2006 Specification Page 2

15. Animal waste shall rwt be discharged into surface waters, drainageways,
or wetlands by a discharge or by over -spraying. Animal waste may be
applied to prior converted cropland provided the fields have been
approved as a land application site by a "technical specialist'. Animal
waste shall not be applied on grassed waterways that discharge directly
into water courses, and on other grassed waterways, waste shall be
applied at agronomic rates in a manner that causes no runoff or drift
from the site.
lb. Domestic and industrial waste from washdown facilities, showers, toilets,
sinks, etc., shall not be discharged into the animal waste management
system,
17. A protective cover of appropriate vegetation will be established on all
disturbed areas (lagoon embankments, berms, pipe runs, etc.). Areas
shall be fenced, as necessary, to protect the vegetation. Vegetation such as
trees, shrubs, and other woody species, etc., are limited to areas where
considered appropriate. Lagoon areas should be kept mowed and
accessible. Berms and structures should be inspected regularly for
evidence of erosion, leakage, or discharge.
18. If animal production at the facility is to be suspended or terminated, the
owner is responsible for obtaining and implementing a "closure plan"
which will eliminate the possibility of an illegal discharge, pollution, and
erosion.
19. Waste handling structures, piping, pumps, reels, etc., should be inspected
on a regular basis to prevent breakdowns, leaks, and spills. A regular
maintenance checklist should be kept on site.
20. Animal waste can be used in a rotation that includes vegetables and other
crops for direct human consumption. However, if animal waste is used on
crops for direct human consumption, it should only be applied pre -plant
with no further applications of animal waste during the crop season.
21. Highly visible markers shall be installed to mark the top and bottom
elevations of the temporary storage (pumping -volume) of all -waste
treatment lagoons. Pumping shall be managed to maintain the liquid level
between the markers. A marker will be required to mark the maximum
storage volume for waste storage ponds.
-------------- ---.--.-.-....-....---.... .- . ---- ...-........ - ......... .
182009 Database Version 3.1 Date Printed: 12/22/2006 Specification Paize 3

22. Waste shall be tested within 60 days of utilization and soil shall be tested
at least annually at crop sites where waste products are applied. Nitrogen
shall be the rate -determining nutrient, unless other restrictions require
waste to be applied based on other nutrients, resulting in a lower
application rate than a nitrogen based rate. Zinc and copper levels in the
soils shall be monitored and alternative crop sites shall be used when
these metals approach excessive levels. pH shall be adjusted and
maintained for optimum crop production. Soil and waste analysis
records shall be kept for a minimum of five years. Poultry dry waste
application records shall be maintained for a minimum of three years.
Waste application records for all other waste shall be maintained for five
(5) years.
23. Dead animals will be disposed of in a manner that meets North Carolina
regulations.
---------- --------------------------------- ........- -..........--... .........
182009 Database Version 3.1 Date Printed: 12/22/2006 Specification Page 4

Crop Notes
The following crop note applies to lieid(s): 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33
Corn Piedmont
In the Piedmont, corn is normally planted when soil temperatures reach 52 to 55 degrees fahrenheit.
Review the Official Variety "green book" and information from private companies to select a high
yielding variety with the characteristics needed for your area and conditions. Plant 1-2" deep. Plant
populations should be determined by the hybrid being planted. Increase the seeding rate by 10% when
planting no -till. Phosphorus and potassium recommended by a soil test can be broadcast or banded at
planting. When planting early in cool, wet soil, banded phosphorus will be more available to the young
plants. An accepted practice is to apply 20-30 Ibs/acre N and 20-30 lbs/acre phosphorus banded as a
starter and the remaining N behind the planter. The total amount of N is dependent on soil type. When
including a starter in the fertilizer program, the recommended potassium and any additional phosphorus
is normally broadcast at planting. Plant samples can be analyzed during the growing season to monitor
the overall nutrient status of the corn. Timely management of weeds and insects are essential for corn
production.
The following crop note applies to field(s): 1, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 15A, 18, 19, 2, 20, 21, 25, 6, 7, 8, 9
Fescue: Piedmont
Adaptation: Well -adapted.
In the Piedmont, tall fescue can be planted Aug. 20 to Oct. 10 (best) and Feb. 15 to Mar. 20. For
pure -stand broadcast seedings use 20 to 30 lblae., for drilled use 15 to 20 lblac. seed. Use certified seed
to avoid introducing weeds or annual ryegrass. Plant seed 0.25" to 0.5" deep for pure stands, 0.25" in
inixture with clovers. Soil test for preplant and maintenance lime, phosphorus, and potassium
recommendations. Apply 40 to 60 lblac nitrogen at planting for pure stands only. Do not apply N for
mixtures with clovers but use proper legume inoculation techniques. Apply 150 to 200 lb/ac. N to
pure -stand fescue for hay production; reduce N rates by 25% for grazing. Apply N Feb. I to Mar. 20 and
Aug. 20 to Sept. 30, with equal amounts in each window. Refer to NCSU Technical Bulletin 305
Production and Utilization of Pastures and Forages in North Carolina for additional information or
consult your regional agronomist or extension agent for assistance.
-•-----------•-------•----------------------------------- ------ ----- ---- ---�--- - .. - . - - -...... -----
182009 Database Version 3.I Date Printed: 122-2006 Crop
. Note Page 1 of 3

The following crop note applies to field(s): 16, 17, 3, 4, 5
Fescue: Piedmont
Adaptation: Well -adapted.
in the Piedmont, tall fescue can be planted Aug. 20 to Oct. 10 (best) and Feb. 15 to Mar. 20. For
pure -stand broadcast seedings use 20 to 30 lb/ac., for drilled use 15 to 20 lb/ac. seed. Use certified seed
to avoid introducing weeds or annual ryegrass. Plant seed 0.25" to 0.5" deep for pure stands, 0.25" in
in ixture with clovers. Soil test for preplant and maintenance lime, phosphorus, and potassium
recommendations. Apply 40 to 60 lb/ac nitrogen at planting for pure stands only. Do not apply N for
mixtures with clovers but use proper legume inoculation techniques. Apply 150 to 200 lb/ac. N to
pure -stand fescue for hay production; reduce N rates by 25% for grazing. Apply N Feb. I to Mar. 20 and
Aug. 20 to Sept. 30, with equal amounts in each window. Refer to NCSU Technical Bulletin 305
Production and Utilization of Pastures and Forages in North Carolina for additional information or
consult your regional agronomist or extension agent for assistance.
The following crop note applies to field(s): 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33
Wheat: Piedmont
In the Piedmont, wheat should be planted from October 10-November 3. Plant 22 seed/drill row foot at
1-1 1/2" deep and increase the seeding rate by 5% for each week seeding is delayed beyond the optimum
time. See the seeding rates table for applicable seeding rate modifications in the current NCSU "Small
Grain Production Guide". Also, increase the initial seeding rate by at least 10% when planting no -till.
Adequate depth control when planting the wheat is essential. Review the NCSU Official Variety "green
book" and information from private companies to select a high yielding variety with the characteristics
needed for your area and conditions. Apply no more than 30 lbs/acre N at planting. Increase the N at
planting to 40 lbs/acre in no -till wheat. Apply phosphorus and potash according to soil test
recommendations at this time. The remaining N should be applied during the months of February -March.
The total N is dependent on the soil type. Plant samples can be analyzed during the growing season to
monitor the nutrient status of the wheat. Timely management of diseases, insects and weeds are essential
for profitable wheat production.
The following crop note applies to field(s): 22, 23, 24
Fescue: Piedmont
Adaptation: Well -adapted.
In the Piedmont, tall fescue can be planted Aug. 20 to Oct. 10 (best) and Feb. 15 to Mar. 20. For
pure -stand broadcast seedings use 20 to 30 lb/ac., for drilled use 15 to 20 lb/ac. seed. Use certified seed
to avoid introducing weeds or anmial ryegrass. Plant seed 0.25" to 0.5" deep for pure stands, 0.25" in
mixture with clovers. Soil test for �preplant and maintenance lime, phosphorus, and potassium
recommendations. Apply 40 to 60 lb/ac nitrogen at planting for pure stands only. Do not apply N for
mixtures with clovers but use proper legume inoculation techniques. Apply 150 to 200 lb/ac. N to
pure -stand fescue for hay production; reduce N rates by 25% to 50% for grazing. Apply N Feb. I to Mar.
20 and Aug. 20 to Sept. 30, with equal amounts in each window. Refer to NCSU Technical Bulletin 305
Production and Utilization of Pastures and Forages in North Carolina for additional information or
consult your regional agronomist or extension agent for assistance.
.-...--------------------.-----------------------------..-...--------------- ...... .... ..... ........ . .... --- . ------
1s2oo9 Database Version 3.1 Date Printed: 12-22-2006 Crop Note Page 2 of 3

The following crop note applies to field(s): 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33
Double -Crop Soybeans, Piedmont
Double -crop soybeans should be planted as early in June as possible with planting completed by July 4th.
When no -tilling soybeans in small grain straw, it is essential to manage the straw to achieve adequate
plant populations. Review the NCSU Official Variety "green book" and information from private
companies to select a high yielding variety with the characteristics needed for your area and conditions.
Plant 4-6 seed/row foot for 7-8" drills and 6-8 seed/row foot for 15" rows. Seeding depth should be 1- I
1/2" and adequate depth control is essential. Phosphorus and potash reconimunded for the soybeans can
be applied to the wheat in the Fall. Soybeans produce their own nitrogen and are normally grown without
additions of nitrogen. However, applications of 20-30 lbslacre N are sometimes made at planting to
promote early growth and vigor, Tissue samples can be analyzed during the growing season to monitor
the overall nutrient status of the soybeans. Timely management of weeds and insects is essential for
profitable double crop soybean production.
------------------------------------------- ........ -•-.-------- ---- - - - ................ ----------------
182009 Database Version 3.1 Date Printed: 12-72-2006 Crop Note Page 3 of 3

State of North Carolina
Department of Environment
and Natural Resources
Division of Water Quality
James B. Hunt, Jr., Governor
Wayne McDevitt, Secretary
A. Preston Howard, Jr., P.E., Director
June 26, 1998
Dieter Engel
NC Farce Partnership
Rt 1 Box 105
Norlina NC 27563
A1464101,
•
Adommodono
NCDENR
NORTH CAROLINA DEPARTMENT OF
ENVIRONMENT AND NATURAL RESOURCES
Subject: Reissuance of Certificate of Coverage
No.AWS930001
NC Farm Partnership
Swine Waste Collection, Treatment, Storage and
Application System
Warren County
Dear Dieter Engel:
The Division of Water Quality modified the Swine Waste Operation General Permit originally issued to
this facility on June 25, 1997. In accordance with the issuance of the revised General Permit, we are
forwarding this Certificate of Coverage (COC) to Dieter Engel, authorizing the operation of the subject
animal waste collection, treatment, storage and land application system in accordance with General
Permit AWG100000. This approval shall consist of the operation of this system including, but not
limited to, the management of animal waste from the NC Farm Partnership, located in Warren County,
with an animal capacity of no greater than 1000 Farrow to Finish and the application to land as specified
in the Certified Animal Waste Management Plan (CAWMP).
The COC shall be effective from the date of issuance until April 30, 2003, and shall hereby void
COC No AWS930001 dated June 25, 1997. The COC shall hereby incorporate by reference any specific
conditions of the previous COC issued to this facility. The purpose of this COC is to allow coverage
under the revised General Permit. Please review the revised General Permit (enclosed) and pay
particular attention to Condition II.10 regarding tree removal from lagoon embankments, Condition III.1
regarding inspection frequency of the waste treatment, storage and collection system and Condition III.6
regarding notification requirements for system failures, spills and emergencies. Pursuant to this COC,
you are authorized and required to operate the system in conformity with the conditions and limitations
as specified in the General Permit, the facility's CAWMP, and this COC, with no discharge of wastes to
surface waters. An adequate system for collecting and maintaining the required monitoring data and
operational information must be established for this farm. Any increase in waste production greater than
the certified design capacity or increase in number of stocked animals above the number authorized by
this COC will require a modification to the CAWMP and this COC and shall be completed prior to
actual increase in either wastewater flow or number of animals.
Please be advised that any violation of the terms and conditions specified in this COC, the
General Permit or the CAWMP may result in the revocation of this COC, or penalties in accordance
with NCGS 143-215.6A through 143-215.6C including civil penalties, criminal penalties, and injunctive
relief.
P.O. Sox 29535, Raleigh, North Carolina 27626-0535 Telephone [phone] FAX [phone]
An Equal Opportunity Affirmative Action Employer 50% recycled/ 10% post -consumer paper

Certificate of Coverage AWS930001
NC Farm Partnership
Page 2
Upon notification by the Division of this COC's expiration, you shall apply for its renewal. This
request shall be made within 30 days of notification by the Division.
This COC is not automatically transferable. A name/ownership change application must be
submitted to the DWQ prior to a name change or change in ownership.
If any parts, requirements, or limitations contained in this COC are unacceptable, you have the
right to apply for an individual non -discharge permit by contacting the engineer listed below for
information on this process. Unless such a request is made within 30 days, this COC shall be final and
binding.
The subject farm is located in the Raleigh Regional Office. The Regional Office Water Quality
Staff may be reached at [phone]. If you need additional information concerning this COC or the
General Permit, please contact Katharine Keaton at [phone] ext. 533.
Sincerely,
for A. Preston Howard, Jr., P.E.
cc: (Certificate of Coverage only for all cc's)
Warren County Health Department
Raleigh Regional Office, Water Quality Section
Warren County Soil and Water Conservation District
Permit File

State of North Carolina IT
Department of Environment, LTWMA,
Health and Natural Resources • •
Division of Water Quality
James B. Hunt, Jr., Governor
Jonathan B. Howes, Secretary
A. Preston Howard, Jr., P.E., Director
June 25, 1997
Engel Martin
NC Farm Partnership
Rt 1 Box 105 -
Norlina NC 27563
Subject: Certificate of Coverage No. AWS930001
NC Farm Partnership
Swine Waste Collection, Treatment, Storage
and Application System
Warren County
Dear Mr. Engel Martin:
In accordance with your application received on June 13, 1997, we are forwarding this Certificate
of Coverage (COC) to Farm No. 93-1, authorizing the operation of an animal waste collection, treatment,
storage and land application system in accordance with the State's General Permit (attached). This
approval shall consist of the operation of this system including, but not limited to, the management of
animal waste from the NC Farm Partnership Farm, located in Warren County, with an animal capacity of
no greater than 1000 Farrow to Finish and the application to a minimum. of 122.0 acres of land as
specified in the Certified Animal Waste Management Plan (CAWMP).
The COC shall be effective from the date of issuance until December 31, 2001. Pursuant to this
COC, you are authorized and required to operate the system in conformity with the conditions and
limitations as specified in the General Permit, the facility's CAWMP, and this COC, with no discharge of
wastes to surface waters. An adequate system for collecting and maintaining the required monitoring data
and operational information must be established for this farm. Any increase in waste production greater
than the certified design capacity or increase in number of stocked animals above the number authorized by
this COC will require a modification to the CAWMP and this COC and shall be completed prior to actual
increase in either wastewater flow or number of animals.
In accordance with General Statue 143-215.10C, Animal Waste Management Plans shall include
the following components:
- A checklist of odor sources and best management practices to minimize these sources.
- A checklist of insect sources and best management practices to minimize these sources.
- Provisions set forth for acceptable methods of disposing of mortalities.
- Provisions regarding emergency action plans.
Your existing Certified Animal Waste Management Plan must include the above elements, by
December 31, 1998. Documentation of the certification must be available to inspectors onsite. Submittal
of the amended certification statement shall be required upon renewal of your permit coverage in 2001.
P.O. Box 29535, Raleigh, North Carolina 27626-0535 Telephone [phone] FAX [phone]
An Equal Opportunity Affirmative Action Employer 50% recycled/ 10% post -consumer paper

Please be advised that any violation of the terms and conditions specified in this COC, the General
Permit or the CAWMP may result in the revocation of this COC.
Upon notification -by the Division of this COC's expiration, you shall apply for its renewal. This
request shall be made within 30 days of notification by the Division.
This COC is not automatically transferable. A name/ownership change application must be
submitted to the DWQ prior to a name change or change in ownership.
If any parts, 'requirements, or limitations contained in this COC are unacceptable, you have the
right to apply for an individual non -discharge permit by contacting the engineer listed below for
information on this process. Unless such a request is made within 30 days, this COC shall be final and
binding.
The subject farm is located in the Raleigh Regional Office. The Regional Office Water Quality
Staff may be reached at [phone]. If you need additional information concerning this COC or the
General Permit, please contact J. K. Jallah at [phone] ext. 364.
JUN 3,D1997, Sincerely,
DE HNR R F4
REGOfVI
4O NAL OFFICE
_,ViLA. Preston Howard, Jr., P.E.
cc: (Certificate of Coverage only for all cc's)
Warren County Health Department
`Raleigh-RegionalOffice Water -Quality -Sections
Warren County Soil and Water Conservation District
Permit Files

State of North Carolina
Department of Environment,
Health and Natural Resources
Division of Water Quality
James B. Hunt, Jr., Governor
Jonathan B. Howes, Secretary
A. Preston Howard, Jr., P.E., Director
CERTIFIED MAIL
RETURN RECEIPT REQUESTED
Dieter Engel
NC Farm Partnership
Rt 1 Box 105
Norlina NC 27563
Farm Number: 93-1
Dear Dieter Engel:
A74
7F�
r r°
May 14, 1997 MAY 14 b f
K R RAlt.irw
You are hereby notified that NC Farm Partnership, in accordance with G.S. 143-215.1OC, 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 th6 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 Charles Alvarez with the Raleigh Regional Office at [phone].
5v,/- A. Preston Howard, Jr., P.E.
cc: Permit File (w/o encl.)
Raleigh Regional Office (w/o encl.)
P.O. Sox 29535, Raleigh, North Carolina 27626-0535 Telephone [phone] FAX [phone]
An Equal Opportunity Affirmative Action Employer 50% recycled/ 10% post -consumer paper

State of North Carolina
Department of Environment,
Health and Natural Resources
James B. Hunt, Jr., Governor
Jonathan B, Howes, Secretary
November 13, 1996
Dieter Engel
NC Farm Partnership
Rt 1 Box 105
Norlina NC 27563
SUBJECT: Operator In Charge Designation
Facility: NC Farm Partnership
Facility ID#: 93-1
Warren County
Dear Mr. Engel:
r�
s.
s
[DaHN
Senate Bill 1217, An Act to implement Recommendations of the Blue Ribbon Study
Commission on Agricultural Waste, enacted by the 1996 North Carolina General Assembly,
requires a certified operator for each animal waste management system that serves 250 or more
swine by January 1, 1997. The owner of each animal waste management system must submit a
designation form to the Technical Assistance and Certification Group which designates an
Operator in Charge and is countersigned by the certified operator. The enclosed form must be
submitted by January 1, 1997 for all facilities in operation as of that date. Failure to designate a
certified operator for your animal waste management system is a violation of 15A NCAC 2H
.0224 and may result in the assessment of a civil penalty.
If you have questions concerning operator training or examinations for certification, please
contact your local North Carolina Cooperative Extension Service agent or our office.
Examinations have been offered on an on -going basis in many counties throughout the state for
the past several months and will continue to be offered through December 31, 1996..
Thank you for your cooperation. If you have any questions concerning this requirement please
call Beth Buffington or Barry Huneycutt of our staff at 91gn33-0026.
Sincerely,
72/_1__
A. Preston Howard, Jr., P.E., Director
Division of Water Quality
Enclosure
cc: Raleigh Regional Office
Water Quality Files
P.O. Box 27687, N*f
%
%lo
Raleigh, North Carolina 27611-7687 C An Equal Opportunity/Affirmative Action Employer
Voice 919-715-4100 50% recycled/10°/, post -consumer paper
J

State of North Carolina
Department of Environment
and Natural Resources
Division of Water Quality
James B. Hunt, Jr., Governor
Wayne McDevitt, Secretary
A. Preston Howard, Jr., P.E., Director
September 24, 1998
Martin Engle
NC Farm Partnership
RT 1, Box 105
Noriina NC 27563
A14
0 •
NCDENR
NORTH CAROLINA DEPARTMENT OF
ENVIRONMENT ANo NATURAL RESOURCES
Subject: Certificate of Coverage No. AWS930001
NC Farm Partnership
Swine Waste Collection, Treatment,
Storage and Application System
Warren County
Dear Mr. Engel:
In response to your Proposed Corrective Action Plan received on January 5, 1998, we are forwarding
this Certificate of Coverage (COC) issued to Martin Engel, authorizing the operation of the subject
animal waste collection, treatment, storage and land application system in accordance with General
Permit A WG 100000. This approval shall consist of the operation of this - system including, but not
limited to, the management of animal waste from the NC Farm Partnership, located in Warren County,
with an animal capacity of no greater than 1000 Farrow to Finish and the application to land as specified
in the Certified Animal Waste Management Plan (CAWMP).
The COC shall be effective from the date of issuance until April 30, 2003, and shall hereby void
Certificate of Coverage AWS930001 dated June 26, 1998. The purpose of this COC is to include
implementing the Proposed Corrective Action Plan as a permit condition. Pursuant to this COC, you are
authorized and required to operate the system in conformity with the conditions and limitations as
specified in the General Permit, the facility's CAWMP, and this COC, with no discharge of wastes to
surface waters. An adequate system for collecting and maintaining the required monitoring data and
operational information must be established for this farm. Any increase in waste production greater than
the certified design capacity or increase in number of stocked animals above the number authorized by
this COC will require a modification to the CAWMP and this COC and shall be completed prior to
actual increase in either wastewater flow or number of animals.
Construction of improvements included as part of the Proposed Corrective Action Plan dated January 5,
1998 shall be in accordance with any permits or conditions required by the Division of Land Resources.
Please contact the Land Quality Section at 919-733-4574. Construction shall begin as soon as practical
after receiving any necessary permits from the Division of Land Resources.
Please be advised that any violation of the terms and conditions specified in this COC, the General Permit
or the CAWMP may result in the revocation of this COC, or penalties in accordance with NCGS 143-
215.6A through 143-215.6C including civil penalties, criminal penalties, and injunctive relief.
Upon notification by the Division of this COC's expiration, you shall apply for its renewal. This request
shall be made within 30 days of notification by the Division.
P.O. Box 29535, Raleigh, North Carolina 27626-0535 Telephone [phone] FAX [phone]
An Equal Opportunity Affirmative Action Employer 50% recycled/ 10% post -consumer paper

Certificate of Coverage AWS930001
NC Farm Partnership
Page 2
This COC is not automatically transferable. A name/ownership change application must be submitted to
the DWQ prior to a name change or change in ownership.
If any parts, requirements, or limitations contained in this COC are unacceptable, you have the right to
apply for an individual non -discharge permit by contacting the engineer listed below for information on
this process. Unless such a request is made within 30 days, this COC shall be final and binding.
The subject farm is located in the Raleigh Regional Office. The Regional Office Water Quality Staff
may be reached at 919-571-4700. If you need additional information concerning this COC or the
General Permit, please contact Sue Homewood at [phone] ext. 502.
Sincer
.r-
a A. Preston Howard, Jr., P.E.
cc: (Certificate of Coverage only for all cc's)
Warren County Health Department
Raleigh Regional Office, Water Quality Section
Warren County Soil and Water Conservation District
Permit File
[SEP 2 8 1998

State of North Carolina
Department of Environment
and Natural Resources
Division of Water Quality
James B. Hunt, Jr., Governor
Bill Holman, Secretary
Kerr T. Stevens, Director
Dieter Engel
NC Farm Partnership
Rt 1 Box 105
Norlina NC 27563
Dear Dieter Engel:
4IV • 2
NCDENR
NORTH CAROLINA DEPARTMENT OF
ENVIRONMENT AND NATURAL RESOURCES
December 30, 1999
Subject: Fertilizer Application Recordkeepi6g; t!
Animal Waste Management System
Facility Number3'-`lam-
WarTen,County
This letter is being sent to clarify the recordkeeping requirement for Plant Available Nitrogen (PAN)
application on fields that are part of your Certified Animal Waste Management Plan.
In order to show that the agronomic loading rates for the crops being grown are not being exceeded, you
must keep records of all sources of nitrogen that are being added to these sites. This would include nitrogen
from all types of animal waste as well as municipal and industrial sludges/residuals, and commercial fertilizers.
Beginning January 1, 2000, all nitrogen sources applied to land receiving animal waste are required to
be kept on the appropriate recordkeeping forms (i.e. IRR1, 1RR2, DRY1, DRY2, DRY3, SLUR1, SLUR2,
SLD1, and SLD2) and maintained in the facility records for review. The Division of Water Quality (DWQ)
compliance inspectors and Division of Soil and Water operation reviewers will review all recordkeeping during
routine inspections. Facilities not documenting all sources of nitrogen application will be subject to an
appropriate enforcement action.
Please be advised that nothing in this letter should be taken as removing from you the responsibility or
liability for failure to comply with any State Rule, State Statute, Local County Ordinance, or permitting
requirement.
If you have any questions regarding this letter, please do not hesitate to contact Ms. Sonya Avant of the
DWQ staff at [phone] ext. 571.
Sincerel
� }f
Kerr. T. Stevens, Director
Division of Water Quality
cc: Raleigh Regional Office
Warren County Soil and Water Conservation District
Facility File
1617 Mail Service Center, Raleigh, North Carolina 27699-1617 'Telephone [phone] Fax [phone]
An Equal Opportunity Affirmative Action Employer 50%n recycled110% post -consumer paper

�Al
91
1, v
1— .. " -- — IN! J-�
I-Pvj-
4tT•1;
7 ;r a J-41

5y t � �� � .�, r � ' {+{. 6,��r�ny'rl(, yr :, .y7 y!ti� 1. '`7 rl if �7� e - rr rr�','' - r A{I�[r�'LB�r�1,• �+P� + �I� ry..
�/, � f� Ji�� ► `� �1�'! ` ;e� � 1 1 h , r66PP - Si - .. .. A k '. .R�lf.ls� r *. � .
Of)
''�'�vb'.�yi1 iJ -•: , E '-' '--: ,.wry -�J lu � t I--• _o
bil
�I •riT�. ih, r y O Q T
Ti k .'! ,1 , ID O U) ' •4J r cY G •Ri Ql
ca
4. m71
U, 'UID
t
1 '* �,� H S -i 1 r"A't T } ' f_i 1! 1 5iI r�1 .CJ O, •-�
W.U CJ r- J tii r�
•-C1 G In ,r.�-li U 1!} f� I -)
" Imo.,
T{rr r cd
YDf'iti- ifV '' { c, U i'•1 iIJ C) ;� N
�h.ty'';.
CD
VI ;=1 .� ✓ � +-' (D � .-.. Q C/l (•�I f �� 1� *:
v) �1 Cd -1
0.i N
�./ r•'h �' K '1'r'M, : �f� Nx'`l �vY1 } i I�-1 ld w cL .� cc1 O
0�J� _ � N CO Q O r
t l fa.r
- ,✓+:# I'- I i_l" t' } <',s aJ .L: N Q• N Y i'-_'' / �``' I.i . r,�.'}'
��T r l?j• ILJ
;?''ki cry a a) a n) a a� k ,' r �,►
�� p 0 J
LJ
01) c'� O N � � «-, (r) (U 1
q
1 of >, - ♦ 7 ~ f-s� r C'I [d 'U '� r• ! O-' ci]-
1
►Q ��� rw pp L7 W (D (D
(r}
L,
_ i "QAr k `{ r�,..t I c� 1•j rl ) r' 01) f�-I O —Z cU
ru
' �"rf, " r � , ' F.; r I i—' +-, o � '✓ R] rya �1 ,� �
R
. _"""`._"�__-`�..�,�-:_. .\ �-..1.. � 1'�i � �. r �i` n.. ,'f:S�f. '�,{ _ _ _ Vi" � t �. .�ti� y1 �1� t , �' r>•,, �r I - r',',, �;
�� 1.�� � l 6' .S'r"1! r� + ai' �w �,1 ��# !r -}_ r:•r,♦ �M+y��r'1} �,1-.1�. r�r'�7J� �1�:7'r�,k �'eS " p ', 1, i
' 7�jR��j .� :�!:i: `� %�[L[, i. .:y ^.$ �aP+-.. r i h�ii'';Y,f�r�., ,l� P� k\, ', �y�� 1•r�,,.`,t�r_� l :/
V'�`4 _-�_+�r+:- — .I F ..f1:Jk•.}_r,,.r �l 4.R a t i! �.1
.� � l y�'a � • ''K' � Vic. •L .. J I "!J
-�TI' -,✓ t%,r }T'-`ST r S,r�7'��" },�+- !�l 'i' •. �:
//� 5 - � •+ 1�Lye.�t Ses'�~�r -ric .�'I'�`'t� 1��+5•'�' '!i4 �� iJt�}�5ra- Tr^!'F .�"tl,���
•''):. �i, r w� . '- I T` A �i�►.[Q _ �. 51� , Y"I-` '� �•/4��' 4- �_:iks*�.`� 4+f�.i� �� j µ:1 F, 4�+*N7r' �,
_ y, / � S �.. '-� it _ s {.• r a
..��. L�,`�:� - -i aM ..•,o '' �*T, --3�"':'� .- r ~tl :N,�?$! :i�" !��:'ey, �S ti• t..r[ w�4 _ .HM�y t ,1i
%- i�. y]y� !a• ds C^ � 'I 4 � lr! .S. • :A: i'tr -. _ 1 1r' .l.
� uy j•t`y: V. ;�,u"j' � yl ��_. .,,5 _b -,r� -. � ;.�; '1t' r �.�'`fti����r-.Ll F :., _ N•T`'�.R~ '.
S;t51 ii' �k .•� .� I: _ 1.� :'� e .� '�• �1 'r` ^..'.t 5'• d��.: til .1. r 1 � 'If i;.
+. � .1 ��•ti,+ { - S-, +' , - •�.� ��1 � �+ 1':; �,,-tiii..• iF. ,Ic y i7�
�! ,f' 'sa. - 1 ��':'}r'+ .-aG ' � r _ t 3>y r J;hy�j�f'. + -4 M1 st.�. .s 4-Z.,+•,'a � :,�r _.� 'i:• i �44 �,:
r� rbi " r� ',''}' '�T� _ •i:l 1 � �� - -c� �.^1` �r': .� fi V. 1 T. • P, '�_ .yC 'S+�.li � 4t�_ •i j L •+�,y 1
tl ,7r F�N� aye;, ={=
11 1 a rf Tay t •� ' � 1
- r : • 4g r '•n. �„ a )- -1 r}J � � � -.� at R'r G �� k�,.'4 . ��:,Frl :ti , fi �'rr ...r � �;:'
W-41
I.s.'_. a.'Y'°
'. 'rrl, - y''' �-ra•p"'.r• ,' C" 1''�+�1+. 'h„1
rl k ` t �,. `n '1�:. 'i.�- ��. 2� k,, y � f '.r' ';T',;tl fY• � R,V lr.J _i�J� M .. _ ` ,�.
r v ��. �) r� t; -, ' R1•� ` `�.r .f•t. ] I1°'� :�H �_� � �-�+{,� ,S11. IlY 1�� I
� ' _ . , � _�� J �+�. � 4 t-.• r` .,�.'."Jr.r, - �^f 'y'--.- -t ' � t 1 � t r L�� r^ I IL-��A-'ri l � yIR1 i . -
r :.1 � :x: ? - .'�'Ctii� I1 i'r � r 1 s,l.l : '. .� %iF`1 ,•1)e: � ,. �:4i7i,]i��r.�. ry,,r.?t'. ••�'l,1 t
- .'+}i'•. ^.i;'t,•,.I -�kJr"�` _ _ a .`.1!! JI`1 ar4 �, �. ..r: '„ . ,c�y�1;[ r )�# 7.. �:};:
- ,` s^.il''.1RS (5 r ,�iE t.,.,:1 •' _ `ram' - .+- s��',.•k•''.�' '' ,�I a1::
��F�}l'y ri! �,y„r ! , '�..� �._ j *• Jf�ir�n�)� i� ^F�r'-
4
;� ' �'- S'.+' r,� !ram r'f' �`"'?��, h� �f�� a r� }� r+'x5'�� ,4,� I�'••
'h��� �nr�Jr7-`'' � .,,r � -�, y .1 «'°�, �[ .r f •� yl� ji°sgy 'a 1ti a
h �� �.,-'• c,l ` ii t - .+ .. _ 4 �'„I<.{,7 L+''r�',1'�� 'S :it.•�,�tl ,i{ {f ,
- r- _ �• �Y .' � i 1t, �, �;ti�nJ {' ^•n S..II � /np 11, �%� R 1 ^I
k,c�
/ .', .. A . 4 ,-�y�• I 'a''�yr pr,'•-:s=_ :.',�}r+ �p.r :�'�!� 'r .�- F,� 'LI '� y���a� .'i�; L,��f �;'� 4I,"c '�s;} 14 a�`t�, f ,:
�1 � il:. , "T�-� In � r +�. r �, !. F,.�,, ; � l :.��ff, w� , ,:.4'i; ,•t>yrk� h -1�, •-1}�'h. .rwi., r' �,x
r Imo.,�i
.: �p2�
.K.
� • ' �,. I , _,�{' 1•ktl�..., '.9i ,r4 w I'S' J-..•' +� .ky.; { l„�i,- 1 5 •r' �
rrT t "1
Oki
6 =.� Fes!+ �,. �� •� �-,y�l', �. : a „ ' � ;.>ri`SSk'_'t=
8. F.': r r :ak
_ � ' �Ci� 1 ,rJ c� � Mr• 21 k� ' �f I")' FW yl� �' .'
.�tl �' -- � -'.:.a ��,:t�, `�S� .i i'? -���1-''Titc'W r� �kI--'•1
��. ✓ �, �T_ �'� 1 h, ,,r��vr'ti6�'-Y � �'iJ5' it ' M �' ,iklt�;",1'->75x �� r � r flV�
rP�'r - "� :� � Fir � ,�� �^,' �i iI „ . - �Fr .,y'i4 yr r _ ' r` �6.'' + [i^�y,. ."•tiy.•
! + .: • �I f, 1 'r'YI4a�� ��! ; r .i ��. t R - } W.
c r 4,?r h' r;fryc t y, i �y1i 14!`'rR
��. �y,, r?i it d, �Vi1 aZ I ^,41 {► ti
��� >i-�iMlmm
�'
��f% i.
Ill�-:.+..•}.,_;,U�'�fY':e�.:-.�?fe;��7r
f- �4.. '`r-�. - Q i}�1 - )f. �Sf; 'R` .:�+;,+1.. Ir J;., .•r`,• a•1 Lya 'T,_,
ti• _ r r
.,'.fir r :',•5�y�,�`i. '- :�, y...r �� r � ,- � 1 - ..
y , Yafi.

AP
Q -
.4 711.
rQIp
-rN
AV On . 4 'Mum" sms,;-,
if, IN
m _vll;.,
—0 MAX
-;Ax y7 q
. W.rm,r
o A. -0
114W.', 3 F-- fr i
PAS'! M41 XP
1w
A,i
&Too -
IN 1101111019 w �� 191 11 V'1�,
I7T7" . - a , r %1" �1/ .' i.17
L S4,
*S1
AM M
t r
Lou; 4
At
"Is
cM
t � t F
ky
44
Taw iNsM MR
I
us
irt..

Type of Visit: (0 ?Routine
lance Inspection U Operation Review Q Structure Evaluation p Technical Assistance
Reason for Visit: 0 Complaint O Follow-up O Referral Q Emergency Q Other O Denied Access
Date of Visit:111 Arrival Time: Departure Time: ® County:
Farm Name: 3-a'." GrQ3' 2r� Owner Email:
Owner Name:
Mailing Address:
Physical Address:
Facility Contact:
Title:
Phone:
Onsite Representative: '�N?eIntegrator:
Certified Operator:
Back-up Operator:
Location of Farm:
Latitude:
Phone:
Certification Number:
Certification Number:
Longitude:
Wean to Finish
I ILayer
I
Dairy Cow
Wean to Feeder
Non -La er
D , Pault
Layers
I
Dairy Calf
Feeder to Finish
Design Current
Ga acit Po
Dairy Heifer
Farrow to Wean
i
Dry Cow
Farrow to Feeder
Non -Dairy
Farrow to Finish
Beef Stocker
Gilts
Non -Layers
Beef Feeder
Boars
Pullets
,
Beef Brood Cow
Poults
Other
Region:
Discharees and Stream Impacts
1. Is any discharge observed from any part of the operation? I` ❑ Yes o 0 NA ❑ NE
Discharge originated at: ❑ Structure ❑ Application Field ❑ !Other:
a. Was the conveyance man-made? ❑ Yes [] NA ❑ NE
b. Did the discharge reach waters of the State? (If yes, notify DWR) ❑ YesrN❑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 NA ❑ NE
2. Is there evidence of a past discharge from any part of the operation? ❑ YesZONA
❑ NE
3. Were there any observable adverse impacts or potential adverse impacts to the waters ❑ Yes NA ❑ NE
of the State other than from a discharge?
Page I of 3 21412015 Continued

lFacility Nuilnber: 13 3 - Date of Ins ection:
Waste Collection & Treatment
4. Is storage capacity (structural plus storm storage plus heavy rainfall) less than adequate? ❑ Yes A�oEINA
NA ❑ NE
a. If yes, is waste level into the structural freeboard? ❑ Yes ❑ NE
Structure 1 Structure 2 Structure 3 Structure 4 Structure 5 Structure 6
Identifier:
Spillway?:
Designed Freeboard (in):
Observed Freeboard (in): C/ Z
5. Are there any immediate threats to the integrity of any of the structures observed? ❑ Yes:No
No A ❑ NE
(i.e., large trees, severe erosion, seepage, etc.)
6. Are there structures on -site which are not properly addressed and/or managed through a ❑ Yes ❑ NA ❑ NE
waste management or closure plan?
If any of questions 4-6 were answered yes, and the situation poses an immediate public health or environmental rest, notify DWR
7. Do any of the structures need maintenance or improvement? ❑ Yes N ❑ NA ❑ NE
8. Do any of the structures lack adequate markers as required by the permit? ❑ Yes;No
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 ❑ NA ❑ NE
maintenance or improvement?
Waste Application
10. Are there any required buffers, setbacks, or compliance alternatives that need [] Yes No NA ❑ NE
maintenance or improvement?
11. Is there evidence of incorrect land application? If yes, check the appropriate box below. ❑ Yes No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Excessive Ponding ❑ Hydraulic Overload ❑ Frozen Ground ❑ Heavy Metals (Cu, Zn, etc.)
❑ PAN ❑ PAN > 10% or 10 lbs. ❑ Total Phosphorus ❑ Failure to Incorporate Manure/Sludge into Bare Soil
❑ Outside of Acceptable Crop Window ❑ Evidence of Wind Drift ❑ Application Outside of Approved Area
r
12, Crop Type(s):
13. Soil Type(s):
14. Do the receiving crops differ from those designated in the CAWMP? ❑ Yes No NA ❑ NE
15. Does the receiving crop and/or land application site need improvement? ❑ Yes N NA ❑ NE
16. Did the facility fail to secure and/or operate per the irrigation design or wettable ❑ Yes No NA ❑ NE
acres determination?
17. Does the facility lack adequate acreage for land application? ❑ Yes No NA ❑ NE
18. Is there a lack of properly operating waste application equipment? ❑YesPNo
NA ❑ NE
Required Records & Documents
19. Did the facility fail to have the Certificate of Coverage & Permit readily available? ❑ YesNA ❑ NE
20. Does the facility fail to have all components of the CAWMP readily available? If yes, check ❑ Yes NA ❑ NE
the appropriate box.
❑ WUP ❑Checklists ❑ Design ❑ Maps ❑ Lease Agreements ❑Other:
21. Does record keeping need improvement? If yes, check the appropriate box below. ❑ Yes ❑ No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Waste Application ❑ Weekly Freeboard ❑ Waste Analysis ❑ Soil Analysis ❑ Waste Transfers ❑ Weather Code
❑ Rainfall [] Stocking ❑ Crop Yield ❑ 120 Minute Inspections ❑ Monthly and l" Rainfall Inspections ❑ Sludge Survey
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 ❑ NA ❑ NE
Page 2 of 3 21412015 Continued

acili -Number: - Date of Inspection:
24. Did the facility fail to calibrate waste application equipment as required by the permit? ❑ Yes ❑ NA ❑ NE
25. is the facility out of compliance with permit conditions related to sludge? If yes, check [] Yesg`No ❑ NA ❑ NE
the appropriate box(cs) 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 NA ❑ NE
27. Did the facility fail to secure a phosphorus loss assessments (PLAT) certification? ❑YesgN
No ❑ NA ❑ NE
Other Issues
28. Did the facility fail to properly dispose of dead animals with 24 hours and/or document ❑ Yes ❑ No ❑ NA ❑ NE
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? ❑ Yes ❑ No ❑ NA ❑ NE .
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
❑ Yes
❑ No
❑ NA
❑ NE
permit? (i.e., discharge, freeboard problems, over -application)
31. Do subsurface tile drains exist at the facility? If yes, check the appropriate box below.
❑ Yes
❑ No
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Application Field ❑ Lagoon/Storage Pond ❑ Other:
32. Were any additional problems noted which cause non-compliance of the permit or CAWMP?
❑ Yes
❑ No
❑ NA
❑ NE
33. Did the Reviewer/inspector fail to discuss review/inspection with an on -site representative?
❑ Yes
❑ No
❑ NA
❑ NE
34. Does the facility require a follow-up visit by the same agency?
❑ Yes
❑ No
❑ NA
❑ NE
Comments reterlto: uestion'# . Ex laanan .jES,A"nswersland/or"ap adclitionallrecorrtmendations.or,at otherCnmmen
( i3r. 5. 1.11 i tg€V i y
! �!r• i c€€ t t:€_ ..;I! ,,I- M t... ti !. _ 3�'•i ,+I, i�i6 i 1 ..t!.., i} §.i€:i.€
....itl€ t, „�II,, i,.. ,i.#i :il .. t,Illl! ,.,3.a Elry. ,eia€iiiE � {6€, c 1$ E,., 1 i it"n�, i{ll,ll ,tl.Eili4.l.,<69iI �llil il.. � . ; �(1 ., II � i!� ;,1�19,� It q � .(i � t�� w.,�..
Useldr`.swings'of.f»cilrty�,toibetter,:ex lam!s�tuat�ons(use.,additionaf�pages;aspecessa jEhll;,�1�� �`lli,�llhr.l',�1;,. u'I��l;���l�,:
v$z �j l�� (L �r
V 1 U C e SS
SweC>-
Reviewer/Inspector Name:
Reviewer/Inspector Signature: (b % S4a12_ 7,f-w Q- [
Page 3 of 3
Phone: 2-O d
Date:
21412015

Appendix 1. Lagoon Sludge Survey Form . Revised August 2008
A. Farm Permit or DWQ Identification Number !` �� 3fJ'60
B. Lagoon identification
C. Person(s) Taking Measurements
D. Date of Measurement
E. Methods/Devices Used for Measurement of:
a_ Distance from the lagoon liquid §urface to the top of the sludge layer.
b. Distance from the lagoon liqui
to the bottom (soil) of the lagoon,
c. Thickness of the sludge layer if making a direct measurement with "core sampler".
F. Lagoon Surface Area (using dimensions at inside top of bank): (acres)
(Draw a sketch of the lagoon on a separate sheet, list dimensions, and calculate surface area. The.lagoon
may have been built different than designed, so measurements should be made,)
G. Estimate number of sampling paints:
a. less than 1.33 acres: Use 8 points
b. If more than 1.33 ac, acres x & _ , with maximum of 24.
(Using sketch and dimensions, develop a uniform grid that has the same number of intersections as the
estimated: number of sampling points needed. Number the intersection points on the lagoon grid so that data
recorded at each can be easily matched.)
H. Conduct sludge survey and record data on "Sludge Survey Data Sheet" (Appendix 2). Also, at the
location of the pump intake, take measurements of distance from liquid surface to top of sludge
layer and record it on the Data Sheet (last row); this must be at least 2.5 ft. when irrigating,
I. At the time of the survey, also measure the distance from the Maximum Liquid Level to the present Liquid
Level (measure -at the lagoon gauge pole):
J. Determine the distance from the top of bank to the Maximum Liquid Level
(use lagoon management plan or other lagoon records)
K. Determine the distance from the Maximum Liquid to the Minimum Liquid level:
(use lagoon management plan or other lagoon records) /
L. Calculate the distance from the present liquid surface level to the Minimum Liquid Level' r 7
ptem K Minus Item I, assuming the present liquid level is below the Maximum Liquid Level)
M. Record from the Sludge Survey Data Sheet the distance from the present liquid surface level to the
lagoon bottom (average for all the measurement points)/
N. Record from the Sludge Survey Data Sheet the distance from the present liquid surface level to the top
of the sludge layer (average for all the measurement points):
0. Record from the Sludge Survey Data Sheet the average thickness of the sludge layer,
1.��
P. Calculate the thickness of the existing Liquid Treatment Zone (Item N minus Item L):
Q. If Item O is greater than Item P, proceed to the Worksheet for Sludge Volume and Treatment Volume.
If Item O is equal to or less than Item P, you do not have to determine volumes.
Compieted by: Date:
Print ame /Si. atur

Appendix 2. Sludge Survey Data Sheet' Revised August 2008
Lagoon Identification 671 if eL7 Zt C!'j�f
Completed by: 49 14
Print Kama
Signature
Date: / [/
(A)
Grid Point
No.
. (B)
Distance from liquid surface
to top of sludge
(C)
distance from liquid surface
to lagoon bottom soil
(C)-(B)
Thickness of sludge layer
Ft. & in.
Ft. (tenths)
Ft. & in.
Ft. tenILs
Ft. & in.
Ft. (tenths)
1
2
3
4
5
6
.�
7
10
11
sr
12
021
13
•
14
15
..�
1SJr,
r
17
18
1S
20
21
22
23
24
Number of points with readings
X X
X X
Average points of
X X
x X
X X
sr
At pump
intake
0.0
X X X X X X
*All Grid Points and corresponding sludge layer thicknesses must be shown on a sketch attached to this
Sludge Survey Data Sheet.

0N -_-� 14!7 `. Ar-UZ2
(Type of Visit: ® 7Routine
' nce Inspection O Operation Review O Structure Evaluation 0 Technical Assistance
sit:
Reason for Vi0 Complaint 0 Follow-up 0 Referral 0 Emergency 0 Other 0 Denied Access
Date of Visit: �^�Arrival Time: Departure Time: County:
Farm Name: 1"rCj Pat I/ +S tj `.s e "901, Owner Email:
Owner Name: Phone:
Mailing Address:
Physical Address:
Facility Contact: Title: Phone:
Onsite Representative: /7 y h'I O-Y- Integrator:
Certified Operator:
Back-up Operator:
Location of Farm:
Latitude:
Certification Number:
Certification Number:
Longitude:
Region:
Discharges and Stream Impacts
1. is any discharge observed from any part of the operation? ❑ Yes No ❑ NA ❑ NE
Dischar a on inated at: ❑ Structure ❑ A lication Field ❑ Qther•
g S pp
a. Was the conveyance man-made?
❑ Yes
❑ 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
❑ A
❑ NE
2. Is there evidence of a past discharge from any part of the operation`?
❑ Yes
gN NA
❑ NE
3. Were there any observable adverse impacts or potential adverse impacts to the waters
❑ Yes
❑ No ❑ NA
❑ NE
of the State other than from a discharge?
Page 1 of 3 21412015 Continued

F'actlit Number: - A Date of Inspection: —
Waste Collection & Treatment
4. Is storage capacity (structural plus storm storage plus heavy rainfall) less than adequate? ❑ Yes
a. If yes, is waste level into the structural freeboard?
Structure 1 Structure 2 Structure 3 Structure 4
Identifier:
Spillway?:
Designed Freeboard (in): _
Observed Freeboard (in): ll
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
Structure 5
NogNA
NA ❑ NE
No ❑ NE
Structure 6
❑ Yes No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes E2-'Af l❑ NA ❑ NE
If any of questions 4-6 were answered yes, and the situation poses an immediate public health or environmental thr ; notify DWR
18. Is there a lack of properly operating waste application equipment? ❑ Yes o NA ❑ NE
Required Records & Documents
19. Did the facility fail to have the Certificate of Coverage & Permit readily available? ❑ Yes No ❑ NA ❑ NE
20. Does the facility fail to have all components of the CAWMP readily available? If yes, check ❑ Yes o ❑ NA ❑ NE
the appropriate box.
❑WUP ❑Checklists ❑ Design ❑ Maps ❑ Lease Agreements ❑Other:
21. Does record keeping need improvement? If yes, check the appropriate box below. ❑ Yes o ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Waste Application ❑ Weekly Freeboard ❑ Waste Analysis ❑ Soil Analysis ❑ Waste Transfers Weather Code
❑ Rainfall ❑ Stocking ❑ Crop Yield ❑ 120 Minute Inspections ❑ Monthly and I" Rainfall Inspections lodge Survey
22. Did the facility fail to install and maintain a rain gauge'? ❑ Yes N 0 NA ❑ NE
23. If selected, did the facility fail to install and maintain rainbreakers on irrigation equipment? ❑ Yes ❑ No ❑ NA ❑ NE
7. Do any of the structures need maintenance or improvement? ❑Yes
o NA
❑ NE
8. Do any of the structures lack adequate markers as required by the permit'?
❑Yes No ❑ NA
❑ NE
(not applicable to roofed pits, dry stacks, and/or wet stacks)
�OONA
9. Does any part of the waste management system other than the waste structures require
❑Yes
❑ NE
maintenance or improvement'?
Waste Application
10. Are there any required buffers, setbacks, or compliance alternatives that need
❑Yes � A
❑ NE
maintenance or improvement?
:No
11. Is there evidence of incorrect land application'? If yes, check the appropriate box below.
❑Yes ❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Excessive Ponding ❑Hydraulic Overload ❑Frozen Ground ❑Heavy Metals (Cu, Zn, etc.)
❑ PAN ❑ PAN > 10% or 10 lbs. ❑Total Phosphorus ❑Failure to Incorporate
Manure/Sludge into Bare Soil
❑ Outside of Acceptable Crop Window ❑ Evidence of Wind Drift ❑Application
Outside of Approved Area
12. Crop Type(s):.�-Mt?,►--f r7 s`
13. Soil Type(s):
14. Do the receiving crops differ from those designated in the CAWMP?
❑Yes No 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 o NA
❑ NE
acres determination?
17. Does the facility lack adequate acreage for land application?
❑Yes o NA
❑ NE
Page 2 of 3 21412015 Continued

FaeiIi .Nulmber: - Date of Inspection: — r
24. Did the facility fail to calibrate waste application equipment as required by the permit? ❑ Yes 2 " NA ❑ NE
25. Is the facility out of compliance with permit conditions related to sludge? If yes, check ❑ Yes o ❑ 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 to provide documentation of an actively certified operator in charge? ❑ Yes �roo
A ❑ NE
27. Did the facility fail to secure a phosphorus loss assessments (PLAT) certification? ❑ Yes NA ❑ NE
Other Issues
28, Did the facility fail to properly dispose of dead animals with 24 hours and/or document
❑ Yes
❑ No
❑ NA
❑ NE
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?
❑ Yes
[:]No
❑ NA
❑ NE
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
❑ Yes
❑ No
❑ NA
❑ NE
permit? (i.e., discharge, freeboard problems, over -application)
3 I. Do subsurface tile drains exist at the facility? If yes, check the appropriate box below.
❑ Yes
❑ No
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Application Field ❑ Lagoon/Storage Pond ❑ Other;
32. Were any additional problems noted which cause non-compliance of the permit or CAWMP?
❑ Yes
❑ No
❑ NA
❑ NE
33. Did the Reviewer/Inspector fail to discuss review/inspection with an on -site representative?
❑ Yes
❑ No
❑ NA
❑ NE
34. Does the facility require a follow-up visit by the same agency?
❑ Yes
❑ No
❑ NA
❑ NE
Comments (refer to question #): 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).
3.3
a
6V'�,�r4�-4� p�, s: z Z -( 7
iv .te4-o 46
D n r117 eA C_.
Reviewer/Inspector Name:
Reviewer/Inspector Signature:
Page 3 of 3
Phone: 771 ' yZs)
Date: ;?Z / -7
21412014

(Type of Visit: UCom ce Inspection V Operation Review O Structure Evaluation O Technical Assistance I
Reason for Visit: outline O Complaint O Follow-up O Referral O Emergency O Other O Denied Access
Date of Visit: Arrival Time: Departure Time: County:
Farm Name: Pu r V i Owner Email:
Owner Name: Phone:
Mailing Address:
Physical Address:
Facility Contact:
Title:
Onsite Representative:
Certified Operator: PA Q
Back-up Operator:
Location of Farm:
Latitude:
Phone:
Integrator:
Certification Number:
Certification Number:
Longitude:
Region:
Design Current Design
Current
Design Current
Swine Capacity Pop. Wet Poultry Capa -it
Pop.
Cattle Capacity Pop.
Wean to Finish La er
DairyCow
Wean to Feeder Non -La er
DairyCalf
Feeder to Finish
DairyHeifer
Farrow to Wean Qesign
Current
Dr Cow
Farrow to Feeder Drr P.trultr, Ca acit
Y�o
Non -Dairy
Farrow to Finish
Layers
Beef Stocker
Gilts
Non -Layers
Beef Feeder
Boars
Pullets
Beef Brood Cow
Turks s
Other
TurkeyPoults
Other
Other
Discharees and Stream Impacts
1. Is any discharge observed from any part of the operation?
❑ Yes No ❑ NA ❑ NE
Discharge originated at: ❑ Structure ❑ Application Field ❑ Other:
a. Was the conveyance man-made? ❑ Yes rNoo
NA ❑ NEb. Did the discharge reach waters of the State? (If yes, notify DWR) ❑ Yes 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 NA ❑ NE
2. Is there evidence of a past discharge from any part of the operation? ❑ Yesr/No[:]
NA ❑ NE
3. Were there any observable adverse impacts or potential adverse impacts to the waters ❑ Yes NA ❑ NE
of the State other than from a discharge?
Page 1 of 3 21412015 Continued

Facili Number: - 12 1 1 Date of Inspection:
Waste Collection & Treatment
4. Is storage capacity (structural plus storm storage plus heavy rainfall) less than adequate? ❑ Yes
a. If yes, is waste level into the structural freeboard? ❑ Yes
Structure I Structure 2 Structure 3 Structure 4 Structure 5
Identifier:
Spillway?:
Designed Freeboard (in):
Observed Freeboard (in): S()/r
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?
No ❑ NA ❑ NE
Flo ❑ NA ❑ NE
Structure 6
[:]Yes j:�No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes No ❑ NA ❑ NE
If any of questions 4-6 were answered yes, and the situation poses an immediate public health or environm;�N
reat, 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 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 No ❑ NA ❑ NE
maintenance or improvement?
Waste Application
10. Are there any required buffers, setbacks, or compliance alternatives that need
❑ Yes
Z rNo ❑ NA
❑ NE
maintenance or improvement?
11. Is there evidence of incorrect land application? If yes, check the appropriate box below.
❑ Yes
No ❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Excessive Ponding ❑ Hydraulic Overload ❑ Frozen Ground ❑ Heavy Metals (Cu, Zn, etc.)
❑ PAN ❑ PAN > 10% or l0 lbs. ❑ Total Phosphorus ❑ Failure to Incorporate Manure/Sludge into Bare Soil
❑ Outside of Acceptable Crop Window ❑ Evidence of Wind Drift! ❑ Application
Outside of Approved
Area
12. Crop Type(s): r0 sew_ , CtY.17 , ( a}n� ,
13. Soil Type(s):
14. Do the receiving crops differ from those designated in the CAWMP?
❑ Yes
el ❑ NA
❑ NE
15. Does the receiving crop and/or land application site need improvement?
❑ YesVD
❑ NA
❑ NE
16. Did the facility fail to secure and/or operate per the irrigation design or wettable
❑ Yes
NA
❑ NE
acres determination?
17. Does the facility lack adequate acreage for land application?
❑ Yes
N ❑ NA
❑ NE
18. Is there a lack of properly operating waste application equipment?
❑ Yes
No ❑ NA
❑ NE
Required Records & Documents
19. Did the facility fail to have the Certificate of Coverage & Permit readily available?
❑ Yes
❑ NA
❑ NE
20. Does the facility fail to have all components of the CAWMP readily available? If yes, check
❑ YesVNo
❑ NA
❑ NE
the appropriate box.
❑WUP ❑Checklists ❑ Design [] Maps ❑ Lease Agreements
❑Other:
21. Does record keeping need improvement? If yes, check the appropriate box below. ❑ Yes No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Waste Application ❑Weekly Freeboard ❑ Waste Analysis ❑ Soil Analysis ❑ Waste Transfers Weather Code
❑ Rainfall ❑ Stocking ❑ Crop Yield ❑ 120 Minute Inspections ❑ Monthly and i " Rainfall Inspections Sludge Survey
22. Did the facility fail to install and maintain a rain gauge? ❑ Yes o ❑ NA ❑ NE
23. If selected, did the facility fail to install and maintain rainbreakers on irrigation equipment? ❑ Yes No ❑ NA ❑ NE
Page 2 of 3 21412015 Continued

Facility Number: 19- 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 ❑ Yes 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 ;Noo
NA ❑ NE
27. Did the facility fail to secure a phosphorus loss assessments (PLAT) certification? ❑ Yes ❑ 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:
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 an on -site representative?
34. Does the facility require a follow-up visit by the same agency?
❑ Yes ❑ No [] NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes ❑ No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes ❑ No 0 NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes ❑ No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes 0 No
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ NA ❑ NE
Comments (refer to question #): 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).
d5(? '56, g O
j�2ark -�-� 0 C +✓ i2-
Reviewer/Inspector Name:
Reviewer/]nspector Signature:
Page 3 of 3
Phone:
Date:
21412015

of Visit: oO Com nce Inspection O Operation Review p Structure Evaluation p Technical Assistance
onfor Visit: JORoutine O Complaint 0 Follow-up Q Referral Q Emergency O Other O Denied Access
Date of Visit: z5' j Arrival Time: ® Departure Time: j County:
Farm Name: �ur ✓:s — A/C_ bV ele__ Owner Email:
Owner Name:
Mailing Address:
Physical Address:
Facility Contact:
Onsite Representative:
Certified Operator.fo!t
Back-up Operator:
Location of Farm:
Title:
Latitude:
Phone:
Phone:
Integrator:
Certification Number:
Certification Number:
Longitude:
Region:
Design Current
Swine Capacity Pap.
Wean to Finish
Design Current
Wet Poultry Capacity Pop.
Layer
Design Current
Cattle Capacity Pop.
Dairy Cow
Wean to Feeder
I
lNon-Layer
Dairy Calf
Feeder to Finish
Farrow to Wean
Farrow to Feeder
Farrow to Finish
Design Current
De. P,ouIt�. Ca aci P,o ,
Lavers
Dairy Heifer
D Cow
Non -Dairy
Beef Stocker
Gilts
Non -La ers
Beef Feeder
Boars
Pullets
Beef Brood Cow
Other
Turke s
Turkey Poults
Other
Other
Discharges and Stream Imuacts
�Noo
1. is any discharge observed from any part of the operation?
❑ Yes
12 NA
❑ NE
Discharge originated at: ❑ Structure ❑ Application Field ❑ Other:
a. Was the conveyance man-made?
❑Yes
0 ❑ 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
❑ 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
❑ No ❑ NA
❑'NE
I'
of the State other than from a discharge?
Page I of
21412014 Continued ,

Facility Pllumber: --to 7 1 1 Date of Inspection: — 2-.-5" y{
Waste Collection & Treatment
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 o ❑ 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 NA No ❑ NE
(i.e., large trees, severe erosion, seepage, etc.)
6. Are there structures on -site which are not properly addressed and/or managed through a ❑ Yes No ❑ NA ❑ NE
waste management or closure plan?
If any of questions 4-6 were answered yes, and the situation poses an immediate public health or environmental t eat, 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;.�N`o[] 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 o ❑ NA ❑ NE
maintenance or improvement?
Waste Application
10. Are there any required buffers, setbacks, or compliance alternatives that need ❑ Yes No NA ❑ N)
maintenance or improvement?
11. Is there evidence of incorrect land application? If yes, check the appropriate box below. ❑ Yes No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Excessive Ponding ❑ Hydraulic Overload ❑ Frozen Ground ❑ Heavy Metals (Cu, Zn, etc.)
❑ PAN ❑ PAN > 10% or 10 lbs. ❑ Total Phosphorus ❑ Failure to Incorporate Manure/Sludge into Bare Soil
❑ Outside of Acceptable Crop Window ❑ Evidence of Wind Drift ❑ Application Outside of Approved Area
12. Crop Type(s): j--q
13. Soil Type(s):
14. Do the receiving crops differ from those designated in the CAWMP? ❑ Yes Nc ❑ NA ❑ NE
15. Does the receiving crop and/or land application site need improvement? ❑ Yes Vj`No ❑ NA ❑ NE
16. Did the facility fail to secure and/or operate per the irrigation design or wettable ❑, Yes Z No ❑ 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?
Reauired 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 ❑'No
[:]Yes <o
❑ Yes
❑ Yes VNo
❑Other:
❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ NA ❑ NE
[DNA ❑NE
❑NA ❑NE
21. Does record keeping need improvement? If yes, check the appropriate box below. ❑ Yes a ❑ 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 ludge Survey
22. Did the facility fail to install and maintain a rain gauge? ❑ Yes o ❑ NA ❑ NE
23. If selected, did the facility fail to install and maintain rainbreakers on irrigation equipment? ❑ Yes ❑ No ❑ NA ❑ NE
Page 2 of 3 21412014 Continued

Facility Number: rly 2- Date of Inspection: -Z
24. Did the facility fail to calibrate waste application equipment as required by the permit? ❑ Yes �No[03
NA ❑ NE
25. Is the facility out of compliance with permit conditions related to sludge? If yes, check ❑ Yes 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 to provide documentation of an actively certified operator in charge? ❑ Yes o NA ❑ NE
27. Did the facility fail to secure a phosphorus loss assessments (PLAT) certification? ❑ Yes o ❑ NA ❑ NE
Other Issues
28. Did the facility fail to properly dispose of dead animals with 24 hours and/or document
❑ Yes
❑ No
❑ NA
❑ NE
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?
❑ Yes
❑ No
❑ NA
❑ NE
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
❑ Yes
❑ No
❑ NA
❑ NE
permit? (i.e., discharge, freeboard problems, over -application)
31. Do subsurface tile drains exist at the facility? If yes, check the appropriate box below.
❑ Yes
❑ No
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Application Field ❑ Lagoon/Storage Pond ❑ Other:
32. Were any additional problems noted which cause non-compliance of the permit or CAWMP?
❑ Yes
❑ No
❑ NA
❑ NE
33. Did the Reviewer/Inspector fail to discuss review/inspection with an on -site representative?
❑ Yes
❑ No
❑ NA
❑ NE
34. Does the facility require a follow-up visit by the same agency?
❑ Yes
❑ No
❑ NA
[] NE
Comments (refer Wquestion,#)'s 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) �E.
0 L/
6-46)h,'A �
w . n,4-w t7 C K) rr i vim` ►rl, ►r¢-. 4--p Sin n
Reviewer/Inspector Name:
Phone: 21 I —0 Zcyj
Reviewer/Inspector Signature:
Page 3 of 3
Date: . 2 j' — %S
21412014

-9 — s— c
0
(Type of Visit: $Com nce inspection Q Operation Review Q Structure Evaluation Q Technical Assistance I
Reason for Visit: Routine O Complaint O Follow-up O Referral O Emergency O Other C) Denied Access
Date of Visit: C�/� Arrival Time: KjL_] Departure Time:'--1 County:
Farm Name: ��G�����,42ryt V J___4C1(s 1__ Owner Email:
Owner Name: �f f, -�i e-n 15 t? Phone:
Mailing Address:
Physical Address:
Facility Contact: Title: Phone:
Onsite Representative:
Integrator:
Certified Operator: Certification Number:
Back-up Operator:
Location of Farm:
Latitude:
Certification Number:
Longitude:
Region:
Design Current Des gn Current
Design Current
Swine Capacity Pop. Wet Poultry Cap city Pop. Cattle
C**specify Pop.
Wean to Finish La er Dairy Cow
Wean to Feeder
-Layer
Dairy Calf
Feeder to Finish
Dairy Heifer
Farrow to Wean
Design Current Dry Cow
Farrow to Feeder
1Dr l;oultr, f Ca ace PaoP. Non -Dairy
ILavers Beef Stocker
Farrow to Finish
Gilts
Non -Layers
Pullets
Turke s
Beef Feeder
Beef Brood Cow
Boars
tither
Turkey Poults
Other
Other
Discharges and Stream Imaacts
1, is any discharge observed from any part of the operation? ❑ Yes ZrNo ❑ NA ❑ NE
Discharge originated at: ❑ Structure ❑ Application Field ❑ Other:
a. Was the conveyance man-made? ❑ Yes o NA /❑ NE
b. Did the discharge reach waters of the State? (If yes, notify DWQ) ❑ Yes o ❑ WA ❑ NE
c. What is the estimated volume that reached waters of the State (gallons)?
d. Does the discharge bypass the waste management system? (If yes, notify DWQ) ❑ Yes ro[o:
NA ❑ NE
2, Is there evidence of a past discharge from any part of the operation? ❑ YesNA ❑ NE
3. Were there any observable adverse impacts or potential adverse impacts to the waters ❑ YesNA ❑ NE
of the State other than from a discharge?
Page 1 of 3 21412011 Continued

Facili Number: - D Date of Inspection:
24. Did the facility fail to calibrate waste application equipment as required by the permit? ❑ Yes 0 <Nol[:] NA ❑ NE
25. is the facility out of compliance with permit conditions related to sludge? If yes, check F Yes Va ❑ 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 to provide documentation of an actively certified operator in charge? ❑ Yes��No
❑ NA ❑ NE
27. Did the facility fail to secure a phosphorus loss assessments (PLAT) certification? ❑ Yes -NA ❑ NE
Other Issues
28. Did the facility fail to properly dispose of dead animals with 24 hours and/or document ❑ Yes o ❑ NA ❑ NE
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:
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 an on -site representative?
34. Does the facility require a follow-up visit by the same agency?
❑ Yes ❑ No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes ❑ No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes ❑ No ❑ NA ❑ NE `
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ NA LINE
❑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).
51'�t.. c� e fLz rw e y C d —/3
Reviewer/Inspector Name:
Reviewer/Inspector Signature
Page 3 of 3
� r r
Phone: 11 7 Ze0
Date: ? P-111/ v
21412011

Facili Number: CM jDate of Inspection:
Waste Collection & Treatment
4. Is storage capacity (structural plus storm storage plus heavy rainfall) less than adequate? ❑ Yes
a. if yes, is waste level into the structural freeboard?
❑ Yes
Structure I Structure 2 Structure 3 Structure 4 Structure 5
No ' NA ❑ NE
o ❑ NA ❑ NE
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 No NA ❑ NE
(i.e., large trees, severe erosion, seepage, etc.)
6. Are there structures on -site which are not properly addressed and/or managed through a ❑Yes No ❑ NA ❑ NE
waste management or closure plan?
If any of questions 4-6 were answered yes, and the situation poses an immediate public health or environmjNo
al eat, notify DWQ
7. Do any of the structures need maintenance or improvement? ❑ YesN NA ❑ NE
8. Do any of the structures lack adequate markers as required by the permit? ❑ Yes ❑ 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 ONo ❑ NA ❑ NE
maintenance or improvement?
Waste Application
10. Are there any required buffers, setbacks, or compliance alternatives that need ❑ Yes �oEo]
NA ❑ NE
maintenance or improvement?
11. Is there evidence of incorrect land application? If yes, check the appropriate box below. ❑ Yes NNA ❑ NE
❑ Excessive Ponding ❑ Hydraulic Overload ❑ Frozen Ground ❑ Heavy Metals (Cu, Zn, etc.)
❑ PAN ❑ PAN > 10% or 10 lbs. ❑ Total Phosphorus ❑ Failure to Incorporate Manure/Sludge into Bare Soil
❑ Outside of Acceptable Crop Window ❑ Evidence of Wind Drift ❑ Application Outside of Approved Area
12. Crop Type(s): f-Q 5-6LU i Cc�— ,!�a V hoo tf/"
13. Soil Type(s):
14. Do the receiving crops differ from those designated in the CAWMP?
❑ Yes
F] N ❑ NA
❑ NE
15. Does the receiving crop and/or land application site need improvement?
❑ Yes
No NA
❑ NE
16. Did the facility fail to secure and/or operate per the irrigation design or wettable
[3 Yes
No CO]NA
[] NE
acres determination?
17. Does the facility lack adequate acreage for land application?
❑ Yes
N ❑ NA
❑ NE
18. Is there a lack of property operating waste application equipment?
❑ YesgNo
NA
❑ NE
Required Records & Documents
19. Did the facility fail to have the 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
NA
❑ NE
the appropriate box.
❑WUP ❑Checklists ❑ Design ❑ Maps ❑ Lease Agreements []Other:
21. Does record keeping need improvement? if yes, check the appropriate box below. [:]Yes No ❑ N ❑ NE
❑ Waste Application ❑ Weekly Freeboard ❑ Waste Analysis ❑ Soil Analysis ❑ Waste Transfers eather 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 o ❑ NA ❑ NE
23. If selected, did the facility fail to install and maintain rainbreakers on irrigation equipment? ❑ Yes ❑ No ❑ NA ❑ NE
Page 2 of 3 21412011 Continued

5/2
Type of Visit: Z) Com cc Inspection U Operation Review p Structure Evaluation Q Technical Assistance j
Reason for Visit: Routine 0 Complaint 0 Follow-up 0 Referral 0 Emergency 0 Other 0 Denied Access it
Date of Visit: R�Arrival Time: eiqq Departure Time: (% County: Region:
Farm Name: IV 6- 64 9:_en 0 ELL 6' (? Owner Email:
Owner Name: w t =� el + Phone:
Mailing Address:
Physical Address:
Facility Contact: Title:
Onsite Representative:
Integrator:
Phone:
Certified Operator: Certification Number:
Back-up Operator: Certification Number:
Location of Farm:
Latitude:
Longitude:
Design Current
Swine Capacity Pop.
Wean to Finish
Wean to Feeder
Wet Poultry
La er
Non -La er
Design
Capacity
Current
Pop.
Design Current
Cattle Capacity Pop,
DairyCow
DairyHei
D Cow
Non -Dairy
DairyCallCow
Beef Stoc
Feeder to Finish
Farrow to Wean
Farrow to Feeder
Farrow to Finish
Design Current
D , P�oultr, Ca aei P.o P.
La ers
Gilts
Non -La ers
Beef Feed
Boars
Pullets
Beef Broo
Other
Other
Turke s
Turke Poults
Other
Discharges and Stream Impacts
1. Is any discharge observed from any part of the operation? []Yes "No ❑ NA ❑ NE
Discharge originated at: ❑ Structure ❑ Application Field ❑ Other:
a. Was the conveyance man-made? ❑ Yes No ❑ NA ❑ NE
b. Did the discharge reach waters of the State? (If yes, notify DWQ) ❑ Yes ZNo [3 NA [] NE ,
c. What is the estimated volume that reached waters of the State (gallons)?
d. Does the discharge bypass the waste management system? (If yes, notify DWQ) ❑ Yes ❑ NA ❑ NE
2. Is there evidence of a past discharge from any part of the operation? ❑YesrNo
❑ NA ❑ NE
3. Were there any observable adverse impacts or potential adverse impacts to the waters [] Yes❑ NA ❑ NE
of the State other than from a discharge?
Page I of 3 21412011 Continued

Facili Number: 913 -0 jDate of Inspection:
Waste Collection & Treatment
4. Is.storage capacity (structural plus storm storage plus heavy rainfall) less than adequate?
❑ Yes
ff No NA
❑ NE
a. If yes, is waste level into the structural freeboard?
❑ Yes
o ❑ NA
❑ NE
Structure 1 Structure 2 Structure 3 Structure 4
Structure 5
Structure 6
Identifier:
Spillway?:
Designed Freeboard (in):
Observed Freeboard (in): 3? Ira
5. Are there any immediate threats to the integrity of any of the structures observed?
❑ Yes
No ❑ NA
❑ NE
(i.e., large trees, severe erosion, seepage, etc.)
6. Are there structures on -site which are not properly addressed and/or managed through a
❑ Yes
Er �No❑ NA
❑ NE
waste management or closure plan?
If any of questions 4-6 were answered yes, and the situation poses an immediate public health or environmental threat, notify DWQ
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 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 No ❑ NA ❑ NE
maintenance or improvement?
Waste Application
10. Are there any required buffers, setbacks, or compliance alternatives that need ❑ Yes No ❑ NA ❑ NE
maintenance or improvement?
11. Is there evidence of incorrect land application? If yes, check the appropriate box below. ❑ Yes EfNo ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Excessive Ponding ❑ Hydraulic Overload ' ❑ Frozen Ground ❑ Heavy Metals (Cu, Zn, etc.)
❑ PAN ❑ PAN > 10% or 10 lbs. ❑ Total Phosphorus [3 Failure to Incorporate Manure/Sludge into Bare Soil
❑ Outside of Acceptable Crop Window [] Evidence of Wind Drift ❑ Application Outside of Approved Area
00—
12. Crop Type(s): Q.
13, Soil Type(s):
14. Do the receiving crops differ from those designated in the CAWMP?
❑ Yes
o [3NA
❑ NE
15. Does the receiving crop and/or land application site need improvement?
❑ Yes
No ❑ NA
❑ NE
16. Did the facility fail to secure and/or operate per the irrigation design or wettable
❑ Yes
"'o NA
❑ NE
acres determination?
17. Does the facility lack adequate acreage for land application?
[] Yes
o NA
❑ NE
18. Is there a lack of properly operating waste application equipment?
[] Yes
No NA
❑ NE
Required Records & Documents
19, Did the facility fail to have the Certificate of Coverage & Permit readily available?
❑ Yes
❑ NA
❑ NE
20. Does the facility fail to have all components of the CAWMP readily available? If yes, check ❑ Yes No [] NA ❑ NE
the appropriate box.
❑WUP ❑Checklists ❑ Design ❑ Maps ❑ Lease Agreements ❑Other:
21. Does record keeping need improvement? If yes, check the appropriate box below. [] YesXNA
NA ❑ NE
❑ Waste Application ❑ Weekly Freeboard ❑ Waste Analysis ❑ Soil Analysis ❑ Waste TWeather Code
❑ Rainfall ❑ Stocking ❑ Crop Yield ❑ 120 Minute Inspections ❑ Monthly and 1" Rainfall Inspectdge Survey
22. Did the facility fail to install and maintain a rain gauge? ❑ YesNA ❑ NE
23. If selected, did the facility fail to install and maintain rainbreakers on irrigation equipment? ❑Yes ❑ NE
Page 2 of 3 21412011 Continued

Facili •Nwmher: -0 7 Date of Inspection: 5-116
24. Did the facility fail to calibrate waste application equipment as required by the permit? ❑ Yes NA ❑ NE
25. is the facility out of compliance with permit conditions related to sludge? If yes, check ❑ Yes��NoCO3 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 to provide documentation of an actively certified operator in charge? ❑ Yes o NA ❑ NE
27. Did the facility fail to secure a phosphorus loss assessments (PLAT) certification? ❑YesgN�0
❑ 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?
24. 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:
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 an on -site representative?
34. Does the facility require a follow-up visit by the same agency?
❑ Yes ❑ No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes [] No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes ❑ No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes ❑ No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ NA ❑ NE
Comments (refer to question #): Explain any YES answers and/or any additional. recommendations'or. any other comments.
Use drawings of facility to better explain situations (use additional' ages as necessary
c7r2-
Reviewer/Inspector Name:
Reviewer/Inspector Signature: 1 L .i J!ag L r LP Q_� 4
Page 3 of 3
Phone: +71 t- g z O U
Date: S% (6 113
21412011

Type of Visit
Compliance Inspection
O Operation Review O Structure Evaluation
Q Technical Assistance
Reason for Visit
Q'Routine O Complaint
O Follow up O Referral O Emergency
0 Other ❑ Denied Access
Date of Visit: Arrival Time: 'C/O Departure Time: County: Gyc"727 Region: RG/P
Farm Name: ���t11/ C,,••�crm t`F �Vy Owner Email:
Owner Name: Phone:
Mailing Address:
Physical Address:
Facility Contact:
Title:
Onsite Representative: I Integrator:
Certified Operator:
Back-up Operator:
Location of Farm:
Phone No:
Operator Certification Number:
Back-up Certification Number.
Latitude: = o = 1 = Longitude: = o = 4 = 1{
Design Current
Design Current
Design Current
Swine Capacity Population
Wet Poultry C«apacity Population
Cattle Capacity Population
❑ Wean to Finish
❑ Layer
❑ DairyCow
❑ Wean to Feeder
❑ Non -Layer
❑ DairyCalf
❑ Feeder to Finish
❑ DairyHeifer
❑ Farrow to Wean
pry Poultry
❑ D Cow
❑ Farrow to Feeder
❑ Non -Dairy
❑ Farrow to Finish 0
❑ Layers
❑ Beef Stocker
❑ Gilts
❑ Non -Layers
❑Beef Feeder
❑ Boars
❑ Pullets
❑ Beef Brood Cow
ke
❑ Turs
Other
❑ Other
❑ Turke Poults
❑ Other
Number of Structures:
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)
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 adverse impacts or potential adverse impacts to the Waters of the State
other than from a discharge?
❑ Yes ONo ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes
ONo
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Yes
8'No
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Yes
,0 No
❑ Yes
)No
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Yes
J�Ko
❑ NA
❑ NE
Page I of 3 12128104 Continued

Facility Number: 93 _ ! Date of Inspection
Waste Collection & Treatment
4. Is storage capacity (structural plus storm storage plus heavy rainfall) less than adequate? ❑ Yes 2No []NA ❑ NE
a. If yes, is waste level into the structural freeboard? ❑ Yes 0 No ❑ NA ❑ NE
Structure I Structure 2 Structure 3 Structure 4 Structure 5 Structure 6
Identifier: 2F
Spillway?:
Designed Freeboard (in):
Observed Freeboard (in):
5. Are there any immediate threats to the integrity of any of the structures observed'? ❑ Yes
P"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
PNo
❑ 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
ZrNo
❑ NA ❑ NE
8. Do any of the stuctures lack adequate markers as required by the permit? ❑ Yes
P 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
ZNo
❑ NA ❑ NE
maintenance or improvement?
Waste Application
10, Are there any required buffers, setbacks, or compliance alternatives that need ❑ Yes
�"No
❑ NA ❑ NE
maintenance/improvement?
11. Is there evidence of incorrect application? If yes, check the appropriate box below. ❑ Yes
Z 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
❑ Outside of Acceptable Crop Window ❑ Evidence of Wind Drift ❑ Application Outside of Area
12. Crop type(s)
13. Soil type(s)
14. Do the receiving crops differ from those designated in the CAWMP?
❑ Yes
ZNo
❑ NA
❑ NE
15. Does the receiving crop and/or land application site need improvement?
Yes
❑ No
❑ NA
❑ NE
16. Did the facility fail to secure and/or operate per the irrigation design or wettable acre determination ?
❑ Yes
FerNo
❑ NA
❑ NE
17. Does the facility lack adequate acreage for land application?
❑ Yes
Ja-No
❑ NA
❑ NE
18. Is there a lack of properly operating waste application equipment?
❑ Yes
�3 No
❑ NA
❑ NE
.A4,.,, ;«s `.� o�;..yi 4 , r4 ,,;r i .`°4:m` t��F�:�, �#,�` rr9
Ca�nments (refer?to'questloW#) Eiplane`any YES'answer"s and/or any recammEndahonsior¢any other, comments
fuse draw�ri s;of faeilit' to better ex lai&situations use additional a es as'nece`ssa y�€ t f f' ) t
(� ey=T,i!11�
Reviewer/inspector Name f,`i�i�, �,.aF #. : ` Phone:00^
Reviewer/Inspector SignatureDate:
Page 2 of 3 12128104 Continued

Facility Number: — Date of Inspection
Re uired Records & Documents
19. Did the facility fail to have Certificate of Coverage & Permit readily available? ❑ Yes ZNo ❑ NA ❑ NE
20. Does the facility fail to have all components of the CAWMP readily available? If yes, check ❑ Yes oNo ❑ NA ❑ NE
the appropriate box. ❑ WUP ❑ Checklists ❑ Design ❑Maps El Other
21. Does record keeping need improvement? If yes, check the appropriate box below. ❑ Yes 2No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Waste Application ❑ Weekly Freeboard ❑ Waste Analysis ❑ Soil Analysis ❑ Waste Transfers 2 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
ONo
❑ NA
❑ NE
23.
If selected, did the facility fail to install and maintain rainbreakers on irrigation equipment?
❑ Yes
ZNo
❑ NA
❑ NE
24.
Did the facility fail to calibrate waste application equipment as required by the permit?
❑ Yes /EfNo
❑ NA
❑ NE
25.
Did the facility fail to conduct a sludge survey as required by the permit?
❑ Yes
0No
❑ NA
❑ NE
26.
Did the facility fail to have an actively certified operator in charge?
❑ Yes
;2'No
❑ NA
❑ NE
27.
Did the facility fail to secure a phosphorus loss assessment (PLAT) certification?
❑ Yes
jErNo
❑ NA
[I NE
Other Issues
28.
Were any additional problems noted which cause non-compliance of the permit or CAWMP?
[:]Yes
;]'No
❑ NA
❑ NE
29.
Did the facility fail to properly dispose of dead animals within 24 hours and/or document
❑ Yes
0-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
V1 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
/O No
❑ 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
4 No
❑ NA
❑ NE
33.
Does facility require a follow-up visit by same agency?
❑ Yes
PNo
❑ NA
❑ NE
Additional Comments andbr Drawings kti.'N�ti;
Oki
f
2 J 2 �� C•s
1 C-- 2 6 °f /v:.
7� ?-e f !v;� l 7
Page 3 of 3 12128104

t.
Qr visit �,C.,o/mpliance Inspection U Operation Review U Structure Evaluation U Technical Assistance
for Visit XJ Routine O Complaint O Follow up O Referral 0 Emergency 0 Other ❑ Denied Access
Date of Visit: 17 a9 Arrival Time: Departure Time; t'��%r County: �crr�^ Region: ��
Farm Name: Owner Email:
Owner Name: �� L��' h ��� a r' Phone:
Mailing Address:
Physical Address:
Facility Contact: Title:
Onsite Representative:
Certified Operator: _
Back-up Operator:
Phone No:
Integrator:
Operator Certification Number:
Back-up Certification Number:
Location of Farm: Latitude: 0 e 0 . = 1{ Longitude: = ° = , ❑
Design Current
Swine Capacity Population
MLD7!esl'90!1 Current
Wet Pcity Population
Design Current
Cattle Capacity Population
o Finish
❑ La er
❑ Dai Cow
o Feeder
❑Non -La er
❑Dai Calf
to Finish
to Wean
to Feeder
to Finish
WGilts
�00
Dry Poultry
ers
❑ Dai Heifer
❑ D Cow
Non -Dairy
❑Beef Stocker
❑ Beef Feeder
Beef Brood Cow
Number of Structures:
n-La ers
llets
rEE3
rke s❑
Other rke Foults
❑ Other her
Discharges & Stream impacts
1. Is any discharge observed from any part of the operation?
❑ Yes
ONo
❑ NA
❑ NE
Discharge originated at: ❑ Structure ❑ Application Field ❑ Other
a. Was the conveyance man-made?
❑ Yes
,Q No
❑ NA
❑ NE
b. Did the discharge reach waters of the State? (if yes, notify DWQ)
❑ Yes
❑'No
❑ NA
❑ NE
c. What is the estimated volume that reached waters of the State (gallons)?
d. Does discharge bypass the waste management system? (If yes, notify DWQ)
❑ Yes
La'No
❑ NA
❑ NE
2. Is there evidence of a past discharge from any part of the operation?
❑ Yes
,0No
❑ NA
❑ NE
3. Were there any adverse impacts or potential adverse impacts to the Waters of the State
❑ Yes
,IJ No
❑ NA
❑ NE
other than from a discharge?
Page I of 3
12128104
Continued

Faci ity Number: S'3 _ C11 Date of Inspection �7-ems
Waste Collection & Treatment
4. Is storage capacity (structural plus storm storage plus heavy rainfall) less than adequate?
❑ Yes PNo
❑ NA
❑ NE
a. If yes, is waste level into the structural freeboard?
❑ Yes ;D'No
❑ NA
❑ NE
Structure I 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?
[I Yes E] 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 gNo
❑ 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 ,0 No ❑ NA ❑ NE
8. Do any of the stuctures lack adequate markers as required by the permit? ❑ Yes ;2-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 EIVo ❑ NA ❑ NE
maintenance or improvement?
Waste Application
10. Are there any required buffers, setbacks, or compliance alternatives that need ❑ Yes ONo ❑ NA ❑ NE
maintenance/improvement?
11. Is there evidence of incorrect application? If yes, check the appropriate box below. ❑ Yes ErNo ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Excessive Ponding ❑ Hydraulic Overload ❑ Frozen Ground ❑ Heavy Metals (Cu, Zn, etc.)
❑ PAN ❑ PAN > l0% or 10 lbs ❑ Total Phosphorus ❑ Failure to Incorporate Manure/Sludge into Bare Soil
❑ Outside of Acceptable Crop Window ❑ Evidence of Wind Drift ❑ Application Outside of Area
12. Croptype(s) Ale ZZ1"A-re f �.
13. Soil type(s)
14, Do the receiving crops differ from those designated in the CAWMP? ❑ Yes
EJ No
❑ NA
❑ NE
15. Does the receiving crop and/or land application site need improvement? ❑ Yes
F!3No
❑ NA
❑ NE
16. Did the facility fail to secure and/or operate per the irrigation design or wettable acre determination?[] Yes
2rNo
❑ NA
❑ NE
17. Does the facility lack adequate acreage for land application? ❑ Yes
ffNo
❑ NA
❑ NE
18. Is there a lack of properly operating waste application equipment? ❑ Yes
P�No
❑ NA
❑ NE
.'as s1.� ��i`�i-a�1 �?.,{+lsi"
Comets (r ferltoiq ue ttion #} $Ezp aft any YESlanswers and or asny re�con m ndat ns or any other comments.
ll@@s��ee �ryawJ. of facurty to bettertexplam situations.4u�pages4as;neacpessarky){:
AL
T
Reviewer/Inspector Name //�r yry� Phone: �%/f-1-4011- 5'1 ec
Reviewer/Inspector Signature: Date: 3-
Page 2 of 3 12128104 Continued

Facility Number: 9 7 — Date of Inspection >—G9
Rectuired Records & Documents
19. Did the facility fail to have Certificate of Coverage & Permit readily available?
20. Does the facility fail to have all components of the CAWMP readily available? If yes, check
the appropirate box. ❑ WUP ❑ Checklists ❑ Design El maps El Other
[I Yes 0No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes E]'No ❑ NA ❑ NE
21.
Does record keeping need improvement? If yes, check the appropriate box below.
❑ Yes
21'No
❑ 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
❑ NA
❑ NE
23.
If selected, did the facility fail to install and maintain rainbreakers on irrigation equipment?
❑ Yes
,�eNo
ld No
❑ NA
❑ NE
24.
Did the facility fail to calibrate waste application equipment as required by the permit?
❑ Yes
�Io
❑ NA
❑ NE
25.
Did the facility fail to conduct a sludge survey as required by the permit?
❑ Yes
01No
❑ NA
❑ NE
26.
Did the facility fail to have an actively certified operator in charge?
❑ Yes
ZrNo
❑ NA
❑ NE
27.
Did the facility fail to secure a phosphorus loss assessment (PLAT) certification?
❑ Yes
j2j"No
❑ NA
❑ NE
Other Issues
28. Were anv additional problems noted which cause non-compliance of the oermit or CAWMP? ❑ Yes ET'No ❑ NA ❑ NE
29. Did the facility fail to properly dispose of dead animals within 24 hours and/or document
❑ Yes
O 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
[2rNo
❑ 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
0No
❑ 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
2rNo
❑ NA
❑ NE
33. Does facility require a follow-up visit by same agency?
❑ Yes
,DNo
❑ NA
❑ NE
Additional;Commentsandlor_Draivings: s r j a
Page 3 of 3 12128104
Page 3 of 3 12128104

Division of Water Quality 3 / w o
Fk ity Number —� 0 Division of Soil and Water Conservation
0 Other Agency
Type of Visit QrlCo lance Inspection O Operation Review O Structure Evaluation O Technical Assistance
Reason for Visit Routine O Complaint O Follow up O Referral O Emergency O Other ❑ Denied Access
Date of Visit: ,,r Arrival Time: Departure Time: County:
Farm Name: __LN S - '� Owner Email:
Owner Name: Phone:
Mailing Address:
Physical Address:
'Facility Contact: Title:
Onsite Representative:
Integrator:
Phone No:
Certified Operator: /M I$/`4 r2 C� r't e — Operator Certification Number:
Back-up Operator: Back-up Certification Number:
Location of Farm:
Swine
Wean to Finish
Wean to Feeder
Feeder to Finish
Farrow to Wean
Farrow to Feeder
Farrow to Finish
Gilts
Boars
Other
❑ Other
Region:
Latitude: ❑ o = { ❑ Longitude: = ° =1 ❑ u
Design Current Design Current
Capacity Population Wet Poultry Capacity Population
❑ Layer
❑ Non -La er I F�
Dry Poultry
❑ Layers
❑ Non -Layers
❑ Pullets
❑ Turke s
❑ urkey Pouets
❑ 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?
Design Current
Cattle Capacity Population.
❑ Dairy Cow
❑ Dairy Calf
❑ Dairy Heifer
❑ Dry Cow
❑ Non -Dairy
❑ Beef Stocket
❑ Beef Feeder
❑ Beef Brood Cow
Number of Structures: F1
b. Did the 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 adverse impacts or potential adverse impacts to the Waters of the State
other than from a discharge?
❑ Yes 0 No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes N NA ElNE
El Yes No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes yNoO
❑NA ElNE
ElYes NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes ❑ No ❑ NA ❑ NE
12128104 Continued

Facility Number:__ t2!
Date of Inspection r'
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 I Structure 2 Structure 3 Structure 4
Identifier:
❑ Yes a
No - NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes No ❑ NA ❑ NE
Structure 5 Structure 6 t�
Spillway?:
Designed Freeboard (in):
Observed Freeboard (in): d t7
5. Are there any immediate threats to the integrity of any of the structures observed?
❑ Yes
No NA
ElNE
(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 thre , notify DWQ
7. Do any of the structures need maintenance or improvement`?
El;No
No' NA
❑ NE
8. Do any of the stuctures lack adequate markers as required by the permit?
❑ Yes
NA
❑ NE
(Not applicable to roofed pits, dry stacks and/or wet stacks)
4. Does any part of the waste management system other than the waste structures require
❑Yes
No ❑ NA
❑ NE
maintenance or improvement?
Waste Application
10. Are there any required buffers, setbacks, or compliance alternatives that need ❑ Yes ZNo❑ NA ❑ NE
maintenance/improvement?
11. Is there evidence of incorrect application? If yes, check the appropriate box below. ❑ Yes No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Excessive Ponding ❑ Hydraulic Overload ❑ Frozen Ground ❑ Heavy Metals (Cu, Zn, etc.)
❑ PAN ❑ PAN > 10% or 10 lbs ❑ Total Phosphorus ❑ Failure to Incorporate Manure/Sludge into Bare Soil
❑ Outside of Acceptable Crop Window ❑ Evidence of Wind Drift ❑ Application Outside of Area
12. Crop type(s) e 9-rt-0 G`py',, Say
13. Soil type(s)
I4. Do the receiving crops differ from those designated in the CAWMP? ❑ Yes �No
NA ❑ NE
15. Does the receiving crop and/or land application site need improvement? ❑ YesTNA ❑ NE
16. Did the facility fail to secure and/or operate per the irrigation design or wettable acre determination?❑ YesA ❑ NE
17. Does the facility lack adequate acreage for land application? ❑ YesA ❑ NE
18. Is there a lack of properly operating waste application equipment? ❑YesA ❑ NE
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):
Reviewer/inspector Name � �� .�G Phone: Zrt�c7
Reviewer/Inspector Signature: Date:
12128104 Continued

Facility Number: 93 -O Date of Inspection I 0
Required Records & Documents
19. Did the facility fail to have Certificate of Coverage & Permit readily available? ❑ Yes o NA ❑ NE
20. Does the facility fail to have all components of the CAWMP readily available? If yes, check ❑ Yes o 'NA ElNE
the appropirate box. El ElChecklists ❑ Design El ❑Other
21. Does record keeping need improvement? If yes, check the appropriate box below. ElYes 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 eather Code
22. Did the facility fail to install and maintain a rain gauge? El Yes N '❑ NA ❑ NE
23. If selected, did the facility fail to install and maintain rainbreakers on irrigation equipment? ❑ Yes ❑ NA ❑ NE
24. Did the facility fail to calibrate waste application equipment as required by the permit? El YesfNo
❑ NA ❑ NE
25. Did the facility fail to conduct a sludge survey as required by the permit? El Yes❑ NA ❑ NE
26. Did the facility fail to have an actively certified operator in charge? El Yes❑ NA ❑ NE
27. Did the facility fail to secure a phosphorus loss assessment (PLAT) certification? El Yes❑ NA ❑ NE
Other Issues
28. Were any additional problems noted which cause non-compliance of the permit or CAWMP? ❑ Yes ❑ No ❑ NA ❑ NE
29. Did the facility fail to properly dispose of dead animals within 24 hours and/or document
❑ 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
❑ 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
❑ No
❑ NA
❑ NE
General Permit? (icl discharge, freeboard problems, over application)
32. Did Reviewer/Inspector fail to discuss review/inspection with an on -site representative?
❑ Yes
❑ No
❑ NA
❑ NE
33. Does facility require a follow-up visit by same agency?
❑ Yes
❑ No
❑ NA
❑ NE
Additional Comments and/or Drawings:
12128104

Facility NIumber
(Division of Water Quality 6/7
0 Division of Soil and Water Conservation
0 Other Agency
Type of Visit d C pliance inspection 0 Operation Review 0 Structure Evaluation 0 Technical Assistance
Reason for Visi 0 Routine 0 Complaint 0 Follow up O Referral 0 Emergency 0 Other ❑ Denied Access
Date of Visit: Arrival Time: ® Departure Time: County:
Farm Name: Jvc IZm D!-' LV25 e, Owner Email:
Owner Name:
Mailing Address:
Physical Address:
Facility Contact:
Title:
Onsite Representative: /
Certified Operator: _&ay-:1 ti z i
Back-up Operator:
Location of Farm:
Swine
Wean to Finish
Wean to Feeder
Feeder to Finish
Farrow to Wean
Fawdw to Feeder
arrow to Finish
Gilts
Boars
Other
❑ Other
Phone:
Phone No:
Integrator:
Operator Certification Number:
Back-up Certification Number:
Region:
Latitude: = o = t Qis Longitude: = ° = ' 0
Design Current Design Current
Capacity Population Wet Poultry Capacity Population
�� ❑ Layer
lILNon-La et
Dry Poultry
❑ Layers
❑ Non -La ers
❑ Pullets
❑ Turkeys
❑ Turkey Pou Its!
❑ Other
Design Current
Cattle Capacity, Population
❑
Dairy Cow
❑
Dairy Calf
❑
Daia Heifer
❑
Dry Cow
❑
Non -Dairy
❑
Beef Stocker
❑
Beef Feeder
❑
Beef Brood Cow
Number of Structures:
Discharges & Stream Impacts
1. Is any discharge observed from any part of the operation? ❑ Yes No ❑ NA ❑ NE
Discharge originated at: ❑ Structure ❑ Application Field ❑ Other
a. Was the conveyance man-made? ❑ Yes N ❑ NA ❑ NE
b. Did the discharge reach waters of the State? (If yes, notify DWQ) ❑ Yes No NA ❑ NE
c. What is the estimated volume that reached waters of the State (gallons)?
d. Does discharge bypass the waste management system? (If yes, notify DWQ) ❑ Yes NA ❑ NE
2. Is there evidence of a past discharge from any part of the operation'? El Yes o ❑ NA El NE
3. Were there any adverse impacts or potential adverse impacts to the Waters of the State ❑ Y ❑ No ❑ NA ❑ NE
other than from a discharge?
12128104 Continued

Facility Number: —
Date of Inspection I ILZWE
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 Structure 2 Structure 3 Structure 4
Identifier:
❑ Yes e00
NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes 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 ZfNo 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 environment;No
re , notify DWQ
7. Do any of the structures need maintenance or improvement? ❑ Yes
NA ❑ NE
8. Do any of the stuctures lack adequate markers as required by the permit? ❑ YesNA ❑ 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 NA ❑ NE
maintenance or improvement?
Waste Application
10. Are there any required buffers, setbacks, or compliance alternatives that need ❑ Yes VrNo ❑ NA ❑ NE
maintenance/improvement?
I L Is there evidence of incorrect application? If yes, check the appropriate box below. ❑ Yes ❑ 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
❑ Outside of Acceptable Crop Window ❑ Evidence of Wind Drift ❑ Application Outside of Area
12. Crop type(s) M S'
13. Soil type(s)
14. Do the receiving crops differ from those designated in the CAWMP? ❑ Yes N NA ❑ NE
15. Does the receiving crop and/or land application site need improvement? ❑ Yes N 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? ❑ Yes No ❑ NA ❑ NE
18, Is there a lack of properly operating waste application equipment`? El Yes;No ❑ NA ❑ NE
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):
AL
Reviewer/Inspector Name Phone:
Reviewer/Inspector Signature: 21 Date: 2
t 12128104 Continued

Facility Number: —6 Date of Inspection Z9 u
Required Records & Documents
19. Did the facility fail to have Certificate of Coverage & Permit readily available'? ❑ Yes ZNozinNA ❑ 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 El Design ❑Maps ❑ 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 ❑ 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 rp,
❑ NA ❑ 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?
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 phosphorus loss assessment (PLAT) certification?
Other Issues
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 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?
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
General Permit? (ie/ discharge, freeboard problems, over application)
32, Did Reviewer/inspector fail to discuss review/inspection with an on -site representative?
33. Does facility require a follow-up visit by same agency?
Comments and/or Drawings:
❑ Yes r I No NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes o NA ❑ NE
f
❑ Yes o NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes o ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes ❑ No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes ❑ No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes ❑ No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes ❑ No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes ❑ No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes ❑ No ❑ NA ❑ NE
12128104

Type of Visit,W
Compliance Inspection
0 Operation Review 0 Structure Evaluation
0 Technical Assistance
Reason for Visit
Qrkoutine 0 Complaint
0 Follow up 0 Referral 0 Emergency
0 Other ❑ Denied Access
Date of Visit: / Z Arrival Time: 1 7 Departure Time: County: W+A 01-41"l Region:
Farm Name:
Owner Name:
Mailing Address:
Physical Address:
Facility Contact:
Title:
Owner Email:
Phone:
Onsite Representative: M ft*�f' "f CZ - 1 G C—l. Integrator:
Certified Operator:
Back-up Operator:
Location of Farm:
Swine
Phone No:
Operator Certification Number: ___"Z A 8 0 1—
Back-up Certification Number:
Latitude: 0 0 = =61 Longitude: 0 ° = 6 =
11
Design Current Design Current
Capacity Population Wet Poultry Capacity Population
❑ Layer
❑ Non -La et
❑ Wean to Finish
❑ Wean to Feeder
❑ Feeder to Finish
❑ Farrow to Wean
❑ Farrow to Feeder
❑ Farrow to Finish
/Z
q-6L
❑ Gilts
t z(s*
❑ Boars
Other
❑ Other
Dry Poultry
❑ Layers
❑ Non -Layers
❑ Pullets
❑ Turkeys
❑ Turkey Pouets
❑ 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'?
Design Current
Cattle Capacity Population
❑ Dairy Cow
❑ Dairy Calf
❑ Dairy Heifer
❑ Dry Cow
❑ Non -Dairy
❑ Beef Stocker
❑ Beef Feeder
❑ Beef Brood Cow
Number of Structures:
b. Did the 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 adverse impacts or potential adverse impacts to the Waters of the State
other than from a discharge?
❑ Yes 9 No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes ❑ No to NA ❑ NE
ElYes ElNo ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes ❑ No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes PNo ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes.)zNo ❑ NA ❑ NE
12128104 Continued

Facility Number: — Date of Inspection l
Waste Collection & Treatment
4. Is storage capacity (structural plus storm storage plus heavy rainfall) less than adequate?
❑ Yes Pj`No ❑ NA ❑ NE
a. If yes, is waste level into the structural freeboard?
❑ Yes ❑ No ❑ NA ❑ NE
Structure I Structure 2 Structure 3 Structure 4
Structure 5 Structure 6
Identifier:
Spillway?:
Designed Freeboard (in):
Observed Freeboard (in): a
5. Are there any immediate threats to the integrity of any of the structures observed?
❑ Yes No ❑ NA ElNE
(ie/ large trees, severe erosion, seepage, etc.)
14
6. Are there structures on -site which are not properly addressed and/or managed
❑ Yes FfNo ❑ 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 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 F,�rNo []NA ❑ NE
maintenance or improvement?
Waste Application
10. Are there any required buffers, setbacks, or compliance alternatives that need
❑ Yes 9No ❑ NA ❑ NE
maintenance/improvement?
11. Is there evidence of incorrect application? If yes, check the appropriate box below. ❑ Yes oNo ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Excessive Ponding ❑ Hydraulic Overload ❑ Frozen Ground ❑ Heavy Metals (Cu, Zn, etc.)
❑ PAN ❑ PAN > 10% or 10 lbs ❑ Total Phosphorus ❑ Failure to Incorporate Manure/Sludge into Bare Soil
❑ Outside of Acceptable Crop Window ❑ Evidence of Wind Drift ❑ Application Outside of Area
iqs 'fl7 rZa /�
12. Crop type(s) `�£ S Cam - }ja S . Cr W —
13. Soil type(s) �(st- c. o u.X V ba,,rLjr__ _ _ A-s N {. -
14. Do the receiving crops differ from those designated in the CAWMP? ❑ Yes ZNo ❑ NA ❑ NE
15. Does the receiving crop and/or land application site need improvement? ❑ Yes No ❑ NA ❑ NE
16. Did the facility fail to secure and/or operate per the irrigation design or wettable acre determination,[--] Yes /No ❑ NA ❑ NE
17. Does the facility lack adequate acreage for land application? ❑ Yes EJNo ❑ NA ❑ NE
18. Is there a lack of properly operating waste application equipment? ❑ Yes ❑'No ❑ NA ❑ NE
Reviewer/Inspector Name �. �} 0 {-( J' VrJ. p: Phone: 79f 4Z O
Reviewer/Inspector Signature: i,.,— a.-�— Date: ( -,,r[
12128104 t Continued

Facility Number: IJ— Date of Inspection
Required Records & Documents
19. Did the facility fail to have Certificate of Coverage & Permit readily available? ❑ Yes �No El NA [I NE
20. Does the facility fail to have all components of the CAWNIP readily available? If yes, check El Yes KNo ❑ NA ❑ NE
the appropirate box. ❑ WUP ❑ Checklists . ❑ Design ❑ Maps ❑ Other
21. Does record eeping need improvement?1f yes, check the appropriate box below. ❑ Yes ff No ❑ NA ❑ NE
s b
❑ Wast Application ❑ Weekl/Frec oard ❑ Wa&WAnalysis ❑ Soil A alysis ❑ Waste Transfers ❑ Annual Certification
❑ Rainfall ❑ Stop3Fing ❑ Crd ❑ 120 Minute Inspections ❑ Monthly and V Rain Inspections ❑ Weather Code
22. Did the facility fail to install and maintain a rain gauge? ❑ Yes gfNo ❑ NA ❑ NE
23. If selected, did the facility fail to install and maintain rainbeakers on irrigation equipment? ❑ Yes grNo ❑ NA ❑ NE
24. Did the facility fail to calibrate waste application equipment as required by the permit? ❑ Yes ONo ❑ NA ❑ NE
25. Did the facility fail to conduct a sludge survey as required by the permit? ❑ Yes 9No ❑ NA ❑ NE
26.
Did the facility fail to have an actively certified operator in charge?
❑ Yes Zf No
❑ NA ❑ NE
27.
Did the facility fail to secure a phosphorus loss assessment (PLAT) certification?
❑ Yes ,J No
❑ NA ❑ NE
Other Issues
28.
Were any additional problems noted which cause non-compliance of the permit or CAWMP?
❑ Yes ZfNo
❑ NA ❑ NE
29.
Did the facility fail to properly dispose of dead animals within 24 hours and/or document
❑ Yes (ffNo
❑ 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 ff 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 oNo
❑ 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 f!TNo
❑ NA ❑ NE
12128104

Type of Visit 0 Compliance Inspection 0 Operation Review 0 Structure Evaluation 0 Technical Assistance
Reason for Visit O Routine O Complaint O Follow up O Referral O Emergency 0 Other ❑ Denied Access
Date of Visit: Arrival Time: 1 Departure Time: County: 1N*a1LV__ Region:
Farm Name:
Owner Name:
Mailing Address:
Physical Address:
Facility Contact:
Title:
Owner Email:
Phone:
Onsite Representative: M A iL` r� r_,4 G s_7l Integrator:
Operator Certification Number: (L Z 33
Phone No:
Certified Operator:
Back-up Operator:
Back-up Certification Number:
Location of Farm: Latitude: = e 0 , = Longitude: = ° = 6 =
ii
Design @urrent'
;Design Current;llesign
Current
Swine Cap�acty
Population
Wet Poultry"
Capacty Population
Cattle
Capacity
Population
❑ Wean to Finish
❑ La er
-�
❑Dai Cow
❑ Wean to Feeder
-Layet
iry Calf
❑ Feeder to Finish
ry
❑Dai Heifer
❑ Farrow to Wean
Dry Poultry
a,
❑ Dry Cow
❑ Farrow to Feeder
❑ Non -Dairy
❑ Farrow to Finish
❑ La ers
❑ Beef Stocker
❑ Gilts
❑ Non -La ers
❑Beef Feeder
1.
❑ Boars
❑ Pullets
❑ Beef Brood Cowl
❑ Turkeys
Other
❑ Turkey Poults
Number of Structures:
❑ Other
❑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)
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 adverse impacts or potential adverse impacts to the Waters of the State
other than from a discharge?
❑ Yes No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes
ezNo El NA El NE
❑ Yes 9No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes A No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes ONo []NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes 9No ❑ NA ❑ NE
kti1:..3
12/28104 'Continued '�
4

.J
Facility Number: —
Date of Inspection G
Waste Collection & Treatment
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):
5. Are there any immediate threats to the integrity of any of the structures observed? ❑ Yes P10 ❑ 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 [INA ❑ 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? El Yes (� No ❑ NA El NE
(Not applicable to roofed pits, dry stacks and/or wet stacks)
9. Does any part of the waste management system other than the waste structures require ❑ Yes �No ❑ NA ❑ NE
maintenance or improvement?
Waste Application
10. Are there any required buffers, setbacks, or compliance alternatives that need ❑ Yes ZNo ❑ NA ❑ NE
maintenance/improvement'?
11. Is there evidence of incorrect application? If yes, check the appropriate box below. ❑ Yes PNo ❑ 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
❑ Outside of Acceptable Crop Window ❑ Evidence of Wind Drift ❑ Application Outside of Area
12. Crop type(s) Ir- � S
13. Soiltype(s) C_GZ % < v".r
14. Do the receiving crops differ from those designated in the CAWMP? ❑ Yes Kd,�
o ❑NA ElNE
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 acre determination%❑ Yes o ❑ NA ❑ NE
17. Does the facility lack adequate acreage for land application? ❑ Yes o ❑ NA ❑ NE
18. Is there a lack of properly operating waste application equipment? ❑ Yes No ❑ NA ❑ NE
Reviewer/Inspector Name ;.
Phone:
Reviewer/Inspector Signature:
a
Date:
12128104
Continued

i
Facility Number: Date of Inspection
Required Records & Documents
19. Did the facility fail to have Certificate of Coverage & Permit readily available?
.C/o 3
20. Does the facility fail to have all components of the CA MP readily available? If yes, check
the appropirate box. ❑ WDP ❑ Checklists ❑ Design V Maps ❑Other
21. Does record keeping need i prove en ? If yes, check the appropriate box Belo
Mal 2 7 k IZA 1q�C, 4 14 t-T '76 3
❑ Wast,;. pplication ❑ We�j(1y Freeboard ❑ Waste Analysis ❑ Soil Analysis
❑ Yes No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes gNo ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes ONo ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Waste Transfers ❑ Annual Certification
Y.
❑ RoKall El$to ing ❑ Crop Yield, ❑ 120 Minute Inspections El Monthly and I" Rain Inspections ElWeaVr Code
I;� t• r✓Fr ((
22. Did the facility fail to install and maintain a rain gauge? ❑ Yes ONo ❑ NA ❑ NE
23. If selected, did the facility fail to install and maintain rainbreakers on irrigation equipment? ❑ Yes VNo ❑ NA ❑ NE
24. Did the facility fail to calibrate waste application equipment as required by the permit?
❑ Yes PNo
❑ NA
❑ NE
25. Did the facility fail to conduct a sludge survey as required by the permit? P4 c
❑ Yes No
❑ NA
❑ NE
26. Did the facility fail to have an actively certified operator in charge?
❑ Yes
❑ NA
❑ NE
27. Did the facility fail to secure a phosphorus loss assessment (PLAT) certification?
❑ Yes ONo
❑ NA
❑ NE
Other Issues
28. Were any additional problems noted which cause non-compliance of the permit or CAWMP?
❑ Yes �N
[INA
❑ NE
29. Did the facility fail to properly dispose of dead animals within 24 hours and/or document
El
❑ 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?
El Yes No
ElNA
ElNE
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 Z
ElNA
ElNE
General Permit? (ie/ discharge, freeboard problems, over application)
7N9
32. Did Reviewer/Inspector fail to discuss review/inspection with an on -site representative?
ElYesNA
❑ NE
33. Does facility require a follow-up visit by same agency?
❑ Yes No
❑ NA
❑ NE
Additional Cotnmetits:and/or Drav►+ings "'<u tt ` �i,�s±a`c�d
C.,� �a.� �i�{ d s� ..f 6 [aot� Asa— ,cJ � `+� C .✓� '" ,� r "''� .tea G.` �r.e� ti w v P)
A
ao R, a-t.v^�- �� A Ak cf r � � 1 C+4 31 � W U (' -
`ice 1-�` - W J �Af-R_� --VP uI S' �s
12/28/04
1

of Visit SKompliance inspection O Operation Review O Lagoon Evaluation
Reason for Visit 10Routine O Complaint O Follow up O Emergency Notification Q Other ❑ Denied Access
Facility Number
Date of Visit:"F=
Time:
3
erational Q Below Threshold
�ermitted G'115ertified 0 Conditionally Certified © Registered Date Last Operated or Above Threshold: .........................
FarmName: .... .........R`rs.. -.,5.t ......................... County:.........1�. F£!•j..............................................
Owner Name: ---------- ----------. Phone No:
-- -- ------------------------ -
MailingAddress: .......................................................................................................................................................................................................... ..........................
Facility Contact: .............................................................................. Title: Phone No:
Onsite Representative: ..r�.�.Q-t� .--•-........... .................................. Integrator:......................................................................................
Certified Operator: ................................................... ............................................................. Operator Certification Number:.........1. Z- 3i......
Location of Farm:
[]Swine ❑ Poultry ❑ Cattle ❑ Horse Latitude • 4 it Longitude • 6 64
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 gal/min?
d. Does discharge bypass a lagoon system? (If yes, notify DWQ)
2. Is there evidence of past discharge from any part of the operation?
3. Were there any adverse impacts or potential adverse impacts to the Waters of the State other than from a discharge?
Waste Collection & Treatment
4. Is storage capacity (freeboard plus storm storage) less than adequate? ❑ Spillway
Structure 1 Structure 2 Structure 3 Structure 4 Structure 5
❑ Yes RfNo
❑ Yes ZNoo
❑ Yes (1QO
❑ Yes No
El Yes I
❑ Yes .5� "0
❑ Yes
Structure 6
Idcn ti FIC r:................................................................................................................................................................................
Freeboard (inches):
12112103
Continued

acility,Number: a— Date of Inspection ti
5. Are there any immediate threats to the integrity of any of the structures observed? (ie/ trees, severe erosion, ❑ Yes INO
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 maintenance/improvement? ❑ Yes [�To
9. Do any stuctures lack adequate, gauged markers with required maximum and minimum liquid level ❑ Yes [lo
elevation markings?
Waste Application
10. Are there any buffers that need maintenancelimprovement? ❑ Yes AN,
11. Is there evidence of over application? If yes, check the appropriate box below. ❑ Yes Zo
❑ Excessive Ponding ❑ PAN ❑ Hydraulic Overload ❑ Frozen Ground ❑ Copper and/or Zinc
12. Crop type `jam= 5 (Z-.) 5-'_
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 o
16. Is there a lack of adequate waste application equipment? ❑ Yes No
Odor Issues
17. Does the discharge pipe from the confinement building to the storage pond or lagoon fail to discharge at/or below Q-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 �dN_ o
19. Is there any evidence of wind drift during land application? (i.e. residue on neighboring vegetation, asphalt, ❑ Yes No
roads, building structure, and/or public property)
20. At the time of the inspection did the facility pose an odor or air quality concern? If yes, contact a regional ❑ Yes � JIN o
Air Quality representative immediately.

Facility Number: 9 _ Date of Inspection
Required Records & Documents
21.
Dail to have Certificate of Coverage & General Permit or other Permit readily available?
❑ Yes .0 No
22.
Does the facility fail to have all components of the Certified Animal Waste Management Plan readily available?
(ie/ WUP, checklists, design, maps, etc.)
❑ Yes /
23.
below.
Does record keeping need impro7ent? Tf yes, check the appropria7p,
❑ Yes No
❑ We Application ❑ Fre d ❑ Waste Agalysis ❑ Soiling
24.
Is facility not in compliance with any appli able6 setback criteria in effect at the time of design?
❑ YesZfNo
25.
Did the facility fail to have a actively certified operator in charge?
❑ Yes No
26.
Fail to notify regional DWQ of emergency situations as required by General Permit?
/Z
r
(iel discharge, freeboard problems, over application)
❑ Yes 0
27.
Did Reviewer/Inspector fail to discuss review/inspection with on -site representative?
_
❑ Yes No
28.
Does facility require a follow-up visit by same agency?
❑ Yes 4No
29.
Were any additional problems noted which cause noncompliance of the Certified AWMP?
❑ Yes ZfNo
NPDES Permitted Facilities
30.
Is the facility covered under a NPDES Permit? (If no, skip questions 31-35)
❑ YesNo
31.
If selected, did the facility fail to install and maintain rainbreakers on irrigation equipment?
❑ Yes ❑ No
32.
Did the facility fail to install and maintain a rain gauge?
❑ Yes ❑ No
33.
Did the facility fail to conduct an annual sludge survey?
❑ Yes ❑ No
34.
Did the facility fail to calibrate waste application equipment?
❑ Yes ❑ No
35.
Does record keeping for NPDES required forms need improvement? If yes, check the appropriate box below.
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ Stocking Form ❑ Crop Yield Form ❑ Rainfall ❑ Inspection After I " Rain
❑ 120 Minute Inspections ❑ Annual Certification Form
12112103

q/6
Type of Visit J0 Compliance Inspection 0 Operation Review 0 Lagoon Evaluation
Reason for Visit Routine 0 Complaint 0 Follow up O Emergency Notification 0 Other ❑ Denied Access
Facility Number Date of Visit: Time:rO rZa
Not Operational Q Below Threshold
ErPermitted�Certified [3 Conditionally Certified [3 Registered Date Last Operated orr� Above Threshold:
Farm Name:: r., �— 4' 1p County: W P`AW
Owner Name: Phone No:
Mailing Address:
Facility Contact:
Title:
Phone No:
Onsite Representative: Integrator:
Certified Operator: Operator Certification Number: 8
Location of Farm:
❑ Swine ❑ Poultry ❑ Cattle ❑Horse Latitude ' ° 66 Longitude a 6 °°
Design Current ` Design Current Design .:..' Current
Swine Capacity Po ulatton .w Poultry Capacity Population Cattle Capacity Population
❑ Wean to Feeder
/&D
❑ Feeder to Finish
o
❑ Farrow to Wean
❑ Farrow to Feeder
❑ Farrow to Finish
❑ Gilts
❑ Boars
'3 �� t
n E Nuinber�of�i�agoons _�(_�; ❑ Subsurface Drains Present _ :111:1 Lagoon Area 10 Spray Ftetd Area
Holding Ponds / Solid Traps 10 No Liquid Waste Management S stem r 101.
Discharges 8r Stream Impacts
I. 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 gat/min?
d, Does discharge bypass a lagoon system'? (If yes, notify DWQ)
2. Is there evidence of past discharge from any part of the operation?
3. Were there any adverse impacts or potential adverse impacts to the Waters of the State other than from a discharge?
Waste Collection & Treatment
4. Is storage capacity (freeboard plus storm storage) less than adequate? ❑ Spillway
Structure I Structure 2 Structure 3 Structure 4 Structure 5
Identifier:
Freeboard (inches):
05103101
❑ Yes .2 No
❑ Yes [;Vo
❑ Yes P4o
❑ Yes OINo
❑ Yes
J;2rN°
❑ Yes
❑ Yes
'f"0
7 0
Structure 6
Continued

Facility Number: 3 — Date of Inspection
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 Application
10. Are there any buffers that need maintenance/improvement?
11. Is there evidence of over application? 1 %M0 Z�
Excessive Ponding El PAN [I Hydraulic Overload
S
12. Crop type - �£S LJ C 4 ihi --
13. Do the receiving crops differ with those designated in the Certified Animal Waste Management Plan (CAWMP)?
14. a) Does the facility lack adequate acreage for land application?
b) Does the facility need a wettable acre determination?
c) This facility is pended for a wettable acre determination?
15. Does the receiving crop need improvement?
16. Is there a lack of adequate waste application equipment?
Regpired 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 Anima}�3e 07iagement Plan readily available?
(ie/ WUP, checklists, design, maps, etc.) r`,7� -Z •I17
0
19. Does record keeping need improvement? (ie/ irrig�n, fre oard, w is anafysis & soil s�mp(b a ports)
20, Is facility not in compliance with any applicable setback criteria in effect at the time of design?
21. Did the facility fail to have a actively certified operator in charge?
22. Fail to notify regional DWQ of emergency situations as required by General Permit?
(ie/ discharge, freeboard problems, over application)
23. Did Reviewer/Inspector fail to discuss review/inspection with on -site representative?
24. Does facility require a follow-up visit by same agency?
25. Were any additional problems noted which cause noncompliance of the Certified AWMP?
❑ Yes �No
❑ Yes /No
❑ Yes RfNo
❑ Yes [1No
❑ Yes PI'
❑ Yes No
ElYes ,No
❑ Yes L2fNo
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes No
❑ Yes No
❑ Yes ONO
❑ Yes NO
—
❑ Yes No
❑ Yes No
[:]Yes �2No
❑ Yes 2rNo
❑ Yes 21�o
❑ Yes �ao
❑ Yes JErN0
No violations or deficiencies were noted during this visit. You will receive no further correspondence about this visit.
CoMS
mments?(refer to question #}; Explain any:YES answers, and/or any reco or any otF
endatinns
Use ilrnwings.of facility to better explain situations: (use additional, pages as�nec scary}s} Field CopyentW 71
❑Final Notes
554ZD So�c_ i SS'i E."flaP(i'�eA1.
S_4• E. PtiL"
P--¢— r rtp Cam; r fie_ s 6 , ca 3 Tr.� 50 '�1S
Reviewer/Inspector Name v\
Reviewer/Inspector Signature: Date: Q' 3
05103101 1 Continued

Facility Number: r—lip IDate 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
liquid level of lagoon or storage pond with no agitation?
27. Are there any dead animals not disposed of properly within 24 hours?
28. Is there any evidence of wind drift during land application? (i.e. 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 egNo
❑ Yes No
❑ Yes o
❑ Yes �No
❑ Yes No
❑ Yes [ YNo
❑ Yes /❑ No
Additionalwin s•' Oit11Ae11t3alt .ilr..CR g_•tu'.��,r <.wv .�-:�.v� a.. -, ,:�= : .:,: �. ..: tr �. ,: ., _ '' ��i^=�w%h�a-�' a'?�L::�r^.. �,z
7
O5103101

7N
Type of Visit Compliance Inspection O Operation Review O Lagoon Evaluation
Reason for Visit PrRoutine O Complaint O Follow up O Emergency Notification O Other ❑ Denied Access
Facility Number Date of Visit: 7 !� O� ime:
Not O erational 0 Below Threshold
P/permitted PCertified E3Conditionally Certified © Registered Date Last Operated or Above Threshold:
Farm Name: County: _ L,)"d x
Owner Name:
Mailing Address:
Facility Contact: Title:
Onsite Representative: Ah , G f-L__
Certified Operator:
Location of Farm:
Phone No. -
Phone No:
Integrator:
Operator Certification Number: Mcf V a
❑ Swine ❑ Poultry ❑ Cattle ❑ Horse Latitude ' 4 64 Longitude ' 4
Design
Current
Design Current Design Current
Poultry
Ca aci L',a ulation Cattle Ca aci i'o ulation
❑ Wean to Feeder
❑ La er
❑ Dairy IFeeder
to Finish ��
❑ Non -La er
❑ Non -Dairy❑
Farrow to Wean
Farrow to Feeder❑Other
IEEE
Farrow to Finish
TOtal DB51ri Ca acl
Gilts
Boars
Total SSLW
Number of LagoonsF==]
Subsurface
❑
Drains Present ❑ ea
La oon Ar
❑ Spray Field Area
Holding Ponds / Solid Traps SO No Liquid Waste Management System
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 gal/min?
d. Does discharge bypass a lagoon system? (If yes, notify DWQ)
2. Is there evidence of past discharge from any part of the operation?
3. Were there any adverse impacts or potential adverse impacts to the Waters of the State other than from a discharge?
Waste Collection & Treatment
4. Is storage capacity (freeboard plus storm storage) less than adequate? ❑ Spillway
Structure I Structure 2 Structure 3 Structure 4 Structure 5
Identifier:
Freeboard (inches): s
05103101
❑ Yes , No
❑ Yes �No
❑ Yes <0
❑ Yes
ETNo
❑ Yes
01N,
❑ Yes
;TNo
❑ Yes , No
Structure 6
Continued
9

Facility Number: 12 — o Date of Inspection 7 ! oZ
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?
❑ Yes 0 No
❑ Yes 2 No
❑ Yes PNo
❑ Yes WNo
❑ Yes E2'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 [ZNo
12. Crop type DES C�IYF--
13. Do the receiving crops differ with those designated in the Certified Animal Waste Management Plan (CAWMP)? ❑ Yes �3No
14. a) Does the facility lack adequate acreage for land application? ❑ Yes VNo
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 J3/No
16. Is there a lack of adequate waste application equipment? ❑ Yes &No
Iteguired Records & >no,gkr,ments qq
17. Fail to have Certificate of Covef ge��General Permit or other Permit rcadiYana
vail ble? ❑ Yeso
z4�
18. Does the facility fail to have all components of the Certified Animal Waste ment Plan readily available?
(ie/ WUP, checklists, design, maps, etc.) tf1�9 ❑ Yes ZNo
19. Does record keeping need improvement? (ic/ irr�tion, treeboard, � 9j%alyZsisZ& soil sample reports) ❑ Yes J2 o
20. Is facility not in compliance with any applicable setback criteria in effect at the time of design? ❑ Yes E� NNoo
21. Did the facility fail to have a actively certified operator in charge? ❑ Yes .1dNo
22. Fail to notify regional DWQ of emergency situations as required by General Permit?
(ie/ discharge, freeboard problems, over application) ❑ Yes ;Zmo
23. Did Reviewer/Inspector fail to discuss review/inspection with on -site representative? ❑ Yes P-110,
24. Does facility require a follow-up visit by same agency? ❑ Yes VNo
25. Were any additional problems noted which cause noncompliance of the Certified AWMP? ❑ Yes JZ/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 YluSdanswers°andlilt nny.recommendations or any othercomments
Use &awin s of facilit better ex lain situations `-(use ad
g y p_ additional pages as neceary) field Copy El Final Notes
„to
.,_ 41, e
Reviewer/Ins ectorName .S + „t T ? r:
P a h� .J S 7�° —
Reviewer/Inspector Signature: Date:
05103101 Continued

• Facility Number: q — o Date of Inspection 7 a Printed on: 1/9/2001
Odor Issues
26. Does the discharge pipe from the confinement building to the storage pond or lagoon fail to discharge at/or below C7 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 O'l�io
28. Is there any evidence of wind drift during land application? (i.e. residue on neighboring vegetation, asphalt, ❑ Yes �o
roads, building structure, and/or public property)
29. Is the land application spray system intake not located near the liquid surface of the lagoon? ❑ Yes F'Nb
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
31, Do the animals feed storage bins fail to have appropriate cover? ❑ Yes ;2-No
32. Do the flush tanks lack a submerged fill pipe or a permanent/temporary cover? rVes [I No
Ilona omments an or, raf�'1ng5 � �.:111;. 3 . , Is.i{ i a �, ��I'- 1 '_ �TW�.:.� , . �A sAddirl�q.a�.,i:
Z{, §� 3Z r.I° '�n%G '?�j�� ZED Br Div ���pJ�l,"T� I Al
5100

_„ ® j.7l ) ®f
Type of Visit A Compliance Inspection O Operation Review O Lagoon Evaluation
Reason for Visit W-outine O Complaint. O Fallow up O Emergency Notification O Other ❑ Denied Access
=Facility Number Date of Visit: 3ti Time: =�
tD Not Operational C Below Threshold
JZPermitted Ceerrttiified 13 Conditionally Certified ❑ Registered Date Last Operated or Above Threshold: .........................
FarmName: .......... �.l,..t G'.... �.M..........................................G. .. ...N. .. County: �r�! Aa e...................................................
Owner Name: ........................................................................................................... ...... ...'..... Phone No: .................................................................................
»..:.
FacilityContact: ............................................................................... Title:................................................................ Phone No:...................................................
MailingAddress: .......................................................................................................................................................................................................... ..........................
Onsite Representative: .... %k?. ... .4... .................................................. Integrator:........ ...... .... ' 0�,...................
Certified Operator:............................................................................................................. Operator Certification Number:
Location of Farm:
❑ Swine ❑ Poultry ❑ Cattle ❑ Horse Latitude • 1 66 Longitude • d «
Desi `
�'
Current , :` .
Desrgn Current. Design Curreiut iH,'
g ,
inie i, :.. Ca ac :.Po
nlahon �' Paultry�
Ca ace ` .,'Po' ulation Cattle
Ca' acr�Po"" ulatio"a �`�"i
...
i=
ayer;
,
❑Dairy
E 3
❑ Non -Layer
❑Non -Dairy
Farrow to Wean
Discharges & Stream ImnacLs
1. Is any discharge observed from any part of the operation? El Yes RNo
Discharge originated at: ❑ Lagoon El Spray Field [I Other
a. If discharge is observed, was the conveyance man-made? ❑ Yes R No
b. If discharge is observed, did it reach Water of the State? (If yes, notify DWQ) ❑ Yes 90
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 o
2. Is there evidence of past discharge from any part of the operation? El Yes �Vo
3. Were there any adverse impacts or potential adverse impacts to the Waters of the State other than from a discharge? ❑ Yes Jam _No
Waste Collection & Treatment
4. Is storage capacity (freeboard plus storm storage) less than adequate? ❑ Spillway ❑ Yes Q
Structure I Structure 2 Structure 3 Structure 4 Structure 5 Structure 6
Identifier: .................................... .................................... .................:..................................................... .................................... ....................................
Freeboard (inches):
5/00 3� Continued on back

1 1
Facility Number: ci — Date of Inspection
9 3J a
6. Are there structures on -site which are not properly addressed and/or managed through a waste management or
closure plan? I
❑ Yes
ZNo
(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
j2fNo
8. Does any part of the waste management system other than waste structures require maintenance/improvement?
❑ Yes
j'No
9. Do any stuctures lack adequate, gauged markers with required maximum and minimum liquid level
elevation markings?
❑ Yes
9j No
Application
_Waste
10, Are there any buffers that need maintenance/improvement?
❑ Yes
ANo
11. Is there evidence of over application? ❑ Excessive Ponding ❑ PAN
❑ Yes
[(No
12, Crop type TF_ s c - k R.4
13. Do the receiving crops differ with those designated in the Certified Animal Waste Management Plan (CAWMP)? ❑ Yes
ONo
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
El�qo
15. Does the receiving crop need improvement?
❑ Yes
;�TNo
16. Is there a lack of adequate waste application equipment?
❑ Yes
R*'No
Required Records & Documents
17.
Fail to have Certificate of Coverage & General Permit readily available? 3 4 95
facility have Certified Waste Manhgenient Plan
❑ Yes ZNO
18.
Does the fail to all components of the Animal readily available?
(ie/ WUP, checklists, design, maps, etc.)
❑ Yes ;3 &o
19.
Does record keeping need improvement? (ie/ irrigation, freeboard, waste analysis & soil sampjelf'eports)
❑ Yes 2-1�o
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 XNo
22.
Fail to notify regional DWQ of emergency situations as required by General Permit?
(ie/ discharge, freeboard problems, over application)
❑ Yes J21<0
23.
Did Reviewer/Inspector fail to discuss review/inspection with on -site representative?
❑ Yes PI/No
24.
Does facility require a follow-up visit by same agency?
❑ Yes OINo
25.
Were any additional problems noted which cause noncompliance of the Certified AWMP?
❑ Yes ��` ""
0 NO-06,146_6ris of dtzfciehdO's rvtere noted- ilitr.ifig �his:visit; • Y;oO, wi1i-tebd*e fio: lrutth6e
. • .corresnoridence:about: this :visit. ::.:::: , :::::.::::................. .
99

Facility Number: 3 — Date of Inspection 3a
Odor Issues
26. Does the discharge pipe from the confinement building to the storage pond or lagoon fail to discharge attor below ;3-1�es ❑ 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 ZNo
28. Is there any evidence of wind drift during land application? (i.e. residue on neighboring vegetation, asphalt, ❑ Yes [2rNo
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 E2No
31. Do the animals feed storage bins fail to have appropriate cover? ❑ Yes Iff No
32. Do the flush tanks lack a submerged fill pipe or a permanent/temporary cover? L'Yes ❑ No
5/00

10—Routine 0 Complaint 0 Follow-up of DWQ inspection 0 Follow-up of DSWC review Q_Other J
Facility Number ,� f Date of Inspection 6 i 1 ao
Time of Inspection 3 O 24 hr. (hh:mm)
C141'e'rmitted JCKertified [3 Conditionally Certified © Registered 10 Not O erational Date Last Operated:
..........................
FarmName: ......%.cr ......rla.y.......� County:.....�A��...... .................................................... Owner Name: S [ ...C.�..r......�.....................�?..?.... !......A .................................................... ... Phone No:.......................................................................................
Facility Contact: ..
Mailing Address:.,
Title: .
Onsite Representative:...M -s -% 'C^j 6 L%--
........................................................
Certified Operator:.... ...............................
Location of Farm:
Phone No:
Integrator: ..... :%! '......................................................... AC...... ....
Operator Certification Number:
.............. ............................. .............................................................................................................. ..................... .............. ....................................... ................... I ..........
....
...
Latitude �� • "Z� ®�� Longitude ©• 04' 7«
Ga. De§ign Current : Desygn Current't�, r� .� {;N{1E esign Current `171
,Swine Ca"pici0i"Population Poultry Capairity,_Populatio`ri''.,Cattle�� t�Capacrty�;Popeilatian�:`
❑ Wean to Feeder
❑ Feeder to Finish
❑ Farrow to Wean
❑ Farrow to Feeder
Farrow to Finish
❑ Gilts
❑ Boars
. ❑ Non -Layer
❑`Other
9
Discharges §i Stream Impacts
1. Is any discharge observed from any part of the operation? ❑ Yes 2fNo
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 ycs, notify DWQ) ❑ Yeso
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 �o
2. Is there evidence of past discharge from any part of the operation? ❑ Yes 131�0
3. Were there any adverse impacts or potential adverse impacts to the Waters of the State other than from a discharge? ❑ Yes P-Iqo
Waste Collection & Treatment
4. Is storage capacity (freeboard plus storm storage) less than adequate? ❑ Spillway ❑ Yes 12-�o
Structure 1 Structure 2 Structure 3 Structure 4 Structure 5 Structure 6
Identifier:
Freeboard(inches): .........................................................................................................................................................................
5. Are there any immediate threats to the integrity of any of the structures observed? (ie/ trees, severe erosion, ❑ Yes ,0-'No
seepage, etc.)
3/23/99 Continued on back

Facility Number: — / Date of Inspection zr
6. Are there structures on -site which are not properly addressed and/or managed through a waste management or
closure plan? ❑ Yes ;3<0
(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 JONo
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/eNo
Waste Application
10. Are there any buffers that need maintenance/improvement? ❑ Yes jErNo
11. Is there evidence of over application? ❑ Excessive Ponding ❑ PAN ❑ Yes E]INo
12. Crop type
13. Do the receiving crops differ with those designated in the Certified Animal Waste Management Plan (CAWMP)? ❑ Yes J"No
14. a) Does the facility lack adequate acreage for land application? ❑ Yes P'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 ZNo
16. Is there'a lack of adequate waste application equipment? ❑ Yes p'�o
Required Records & Documents
IT.
Fail to have Certificate of Coverage & General Permit readily available?
❑ Yes Q10
-18.
'Does the facility fail to have all components of the Certified Animal Waste Management Plan readily available?
Yes &No
(ie/ WUP, checklists, design, maps, etc.)
❑
19.
//
Does record keeping need improvement? (ie/ irri ation, frKeboard, wastelanalysis & soil satl�ple reports)
❑ Yes J:TKIC)
20.
Is facility not in compliance with any applicable setback criteria in effect at the time.of design?
❑ Yes P140
21.
Did the facility fail to have a actively certified operator in charge?
❑ Yes'0140
22.
Fail to notify regional DWQ of emergency situations as required by General Permit?
(ie/ discharge, freeboard problems, over application)
❑ Yes ..EJ`No
23.
Did Reviewer/Inspector fail to discuss review/inspection with on -site representative?
❑ Yes Ej'/No
24.
Does facility require a follow-up visit by same agency?
❑ Yes PIN o
25.
Were any additional problems noted which cause noncompliance of the Certified AWMP?
❑ Yes J o
�'�i4 yiQl �igrAs:o dgfcie�cie wire �Qte lir log 4][tis;vjsit! • ;Y:oO ivili•tea0i*6 iJo i'u>ftf
coriesporidence: a�oitt this visit: ........ ...::.:...:.................
f-AA^" 1-00 -c, G Nto - '-R 1L . mA J &1 A J ] cTAG(Ad1 Ts=.r-> . I A
3u'K� P�/r"+P inIC� ­1 ^!o V_ S t7rC. ( LA-ULAp__: Vke. 'qi ) idD r CAAU-V-D' /�i'Pt1 GA"�' an! e
"I. -rL oo',s Ar91, QC.'T t
"-
Reviewer/Inspector!�r.a,�_1eoi lY.E sl in.f7
ii7�f � �JTe° it :` 3t�i' ,.►,U`itii Reviewer/Inspector NameSignature. , .:.
,, ��, cJ w. Date: 6 Zj VS0

Facility Number: — 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 ;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 El 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 0 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 sbutters, etc.) ❑ Yes JNo
3I. Do the animals feed storage bins fail to have appropriate cover? ❑ Yes dNo
32. Do the flush tanks lack a submerged fill pipe or a permanent/temporary cover? Yes ❑ No
Z�' � 3-L . A c-"J V T/ . ";�QJ►1? y A-,Ul-

13 Division of Soil and:Water Conserrvation OperationtReview
tt _ Y'. ...J �1 e - -' a '� t,, i,
'0 Division of Soil and Water Conservation Coinpliance Inspection " �, ;
Jr °, w ' ? 0
,
►vision of Water Qushty -;Compliance Inspec4on ;
,r t.
I y
O Agency l�peratian Review.
.. .. ..
OOther -
.... . ,� r ...r.,l ....I'.... w... r 's7...
'Routine Q Com�iaint Q follow-up of DWQ insect tion 0 Follow-up of DSWC review 0 Other
Facility Number p Date of inspection
Time or Inspection o 24 hr. (hh:mm)
Permitted Certified 0 Conditionally Certified 0 Registered 10 Not Operational Date Last Operated:
t.R42-sxJ
Farm N:imc:.................. ....t.....,r..................................................................................... Cou��ty:..... ....................,.....
............................... .......................
OwnerName:................................................................................................................... Phone No:.......................................................................................
Facility Contact: ............................................................ ....Title: Phone No:
MailingAddress: ..................................................................................................... ................ ........................................................................
Onsite Representative: M.!►R-r' +� Ewi Gte�,. A �¢k Litegrator: � t.�...................
............. ....
Certified Operator: ................................................... ............................................................. Operator Certification Number:
Location of Farm:
Latitude 9 ° •4 Longitude • 4 4 164
Design Current
Swine Capacity Population
❑ Wean to Feeder
❑ Feeder to Finish
❑ Farrow to Wean
❑ Farrow to Feeder
❑ Farrow to Finish
❑ Gilts
❑ Boars
.., NuEitnlie`r of Lagoons.
\�
Iolding Po�ndsll Solid Traps
Design Current Design Current
1?oultry� :_'_Ca `acity Population ` _Cattle Capacity Population
❑ Layer ❑Dairy
❑ Non -Layer I ❑ Non -Dairy
❑ Other
' Total Design Capacity
Total SSLW
k... . ..... .... -.
E E' ❑ Subsurface Drains Present ❑Lagoon Area[[]Spray Field Area ;
irl
❑ No Liquid Waste Management System f
Discharge- v
& Stream Imacts
1. Is any discharge observed from any part of the operation? ❑ Yes �No
Discharge originated al: ❑ Lagoon ❑ Spray Field ❑ Other
a. If discharge is observed, was the conveyance man-made'? ❑ Yes ZNo
h. 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. Dices discharge bypass a lagoon system? (Il'yes, notify DWQ) ❑ Yes No
2. Is there evidence of past discharge from any part of the operation? ❑ Yes V(No
3. Were there any adverse impacts or potential adverse impacts to the Waters of the State other than from a discharge? ❑ Yes ZNo
Waste Collection & Treatment
4. Is storage capacity (freeboard plus storm storage) less than adequate? ❑ Spillway ❑ Yes /No
Structure I Structure 2 Structure 3 Structure 4 Structure 5 Structure 6
Identifier:
Freeboard(inches): ..........r?/................................................................................................................................................................................................
5. Are there any immediate threats to the integrity of any of the structures observed? (ie/ trees, severe erosion, ❑ Yes PNo
seepage, etc.)
3/23/99 Continued on back

Facility Number: Date of Inspection 0 /
6. Are there structures on -site which are not properly addressed and/or managed through a waste management or
closure plan? ❑ Yes ;dNo
(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 V�No
8. Does any part of the waste management system other than waste structures require maintenance/improvement? ❑ Yes TZNO
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 �N0
1. Is there evidence of over application? ❑ Excessive Ponding ❑ PAN ❑ Yes ZNo
12. Crop type E 5' t-L- 1P_ r6 V--A-L t
13. Do the receiving crops differ with Ittrose 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 ZNNo
16. Is there a lack of adequate waste application equipment? ❑ Yes IdNo
Required Records & Documents
17. Fail to have Certificate of Coverage & General Permit readily available? ❑ Yes 5eNo
I & Does the facility fail to have all components of the Certified Animal Waste Management Plan readily available?
(ie/ WUP, checklists, design, maps, etc.) ❑ Yes Wio
I9. Does record keeping need improvement? (ie/ irrigation, freeboard, waste analysis & soil sample reports) ❑ Yes 0 No
20. Is facility not in compliance with any applicable setback criteria in effect at the time of design? Cl Yes ONO
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?
(ic/ discharge, freeboard problems, over application) ❑ Yes �No
23. Did Reviewer/Inspector fail to discuss review/inspection with on -site representative? ❑ Yes po�p 0
24. Does facility require a follow-up visit by same agency? ❑ Yes
25. Were any additional problems noted which cause noncompliance of the Certified AWMP? ❑ Yes ;�No
Reviewer/Ins ector Name t. I�����'� ' ` e ve 1�[
p .�� i O��c Sr,?" ati��� �_�/v.
Reviewer/Inspector Signature: ��� ��— Date:
3/23/99

Facility Number: �3— p� Date of Inspection lD I
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
IVNo
28.
Is there any evidence of wind drift during land application? (ix, residue on neighboring vegetation, asphalt,
❑ Yes
PNo
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
V(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?
ElYes
VN o
No
32.
Do the flush tanks lack a submerged fill pipe or a permanent/temporary cover?
❑ Yes
ltiona omments-an or rawings t, i'' f, x i Hu ,G
{,
.,.. ...-:... :. :. .... ...... ..s. ..... .._' 1. 1 1
3/23/99

f
Division of Soil and Water Conservation - Operation Review
Division of Soil and Water Conservation - Compliance Inspection
© Division of Water Quality - Compliance Inspection
[] Other Agency - Operation Review
JoRoutine 0 Complaint Q Follow-np of D1i'Q ins c ytion 0 17ullou'-Ill)oI' I)SNVC review 0 Other
� . Facility Number M��11m� w� 1).try of Inspection �p
1.1111V of Insjwvtion ; D 24 hr. (hh:mm)
© Permitted © Certified 0 Conditionally Certified [] Registered JE3 Not ()pet-ationall Date Last Operated:
Farm Name: .....r�.�...�...,.�......,..�.. ...............::......::...... County:..l.Y...ri..�!'.._.........................................
.............................................................
OwnerName: Phone No:...................................................................................... ............................................................................................
FacilityContact: .................... ............ ............... ............................... 1 itie:................................................................ Phone No:
`Tailing AddrLss.................................................................................. ........................................................................... ..........................
nnsitc Rcpresentativc: f n.I).. C�.�...3...I >`'.'... .. Integritor':
Certified Operator: ................................................... ............................................................. Operator C.er•titicatiou Number:..........................................
Location of Farm:
T
Latitude �•�i - Longitude " 1 16
Design Current Design Current Design Current
Swine Capacity Population Poultry Capacity Population Cattle Capacity Population
❑ Wean'to Feeder ❑ Layer ❑ Dairy
❑ Feeder to Finish ❑ Non-Laycr ❑ Non -Dairy
❑ Farrow to Wean
El Farrow to Feeder ❑ Other
arrow to Finish Total Design Capacity
❑ Gilts
❑ Boars Total SSLW
Number of Lagoons ❑ Subsurface Drains Present ❑ Lagoon Area ❑ Spray Field Area
Holding Ponds 1 Solid Traps ❑ No Liquid Waste 'Management System
DischarLes & Stream Impacts
1. Is any discharge observed from any part of the operation (If yes, notify DWQ)'? ❑ Yes No
Discharge originated iw ❑ Lagoon ❑ Spray Field ❑ Other
a. If dischargc is observed, was the convQyance in, El Yes No
h. II'discharrg,c is observed. did it reach: ❑ Surfacc Waters ❑ Waters of the State ❑ Yes P No
c. tf dischart-,e is observed. what is the cstinmt.:d Ilow in valhnin7
d. I OCS discharge hypass a lagoon systcm7
2. Is there evidence of past discharge from any part of the operation'?
3. Were there any adverse impacts to the waters of the State other than from a discharge'?
Waste Collection & Treatment
4. Is storage capacity (freeboard plus storm storaYl,c) less than adCCluatC?
SU'nCttire I Structure 2 Structure .-, Struciurc 4
❑ Yes
No
❑ Yes
No
❑ Yes
No
❑ Yes
No
Struciurc 5 Structure fi
1dG1C:fICi';
freeboard(Inchl;S): .................................................................................................................................................................................................
1 !`f)/99
Continued on back

Facility Number: Date of Inspection
5. Are there any inuncdiate threats to the integrity of any of the structures observed'? (ic/ trees, severe crosion.
J Seepage, cte.)
6. Are there structures on -site which are not properly addressed anti/or managed through a waste nanaganent 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 pact of the waste management system other than waste structures require maintenance/improvement?
9. Do any stuctures lack adequate, gauged markers with required top of dike, maximun and minirnun
liquid level elevation markings'?
Waste Application
10. Are there any bufferS that need nu,intenance/itt7prnvesnent?
11. Is there evidence of over application'?
12, Crop type:5.��..q-.P
❑ Ponding ❑ Nitrogen
■
❑ Yes ❑Ao
9111'es ❑ No
❑ Yes [--Y­No
❑ Yes P] No
❑ Yes No
❑ YesXNo
.................................................................................................................................................................................
13. Do the receiving crops differ with those designated in the Certified Animal Waste Management Plan (CAWMP)?
14. Does the facility lack wettable acreage for land application? ffootprint)
15. Does the receiving crop need improvement'?
16. Is there a lack of adequate waste application equipment?
Itcttuired Records & Documents
17, Fail to have Certificate of Covera0c & General Permit readily available'?
18. Does the facility fail to have all components of the Certified Animal Waste Management Plan readily available'?
(ic/ WUP, checklists, design, maps, etc.)
19. Does record keeping need improvement'? (ic/ irrigation. Freeboard, waste analysis & so� amp c reports)
Ail oFe-
20. Is facility not in compliance with any applicable scthack criteria in effect at the time of design'?
21. Did the facility fail to have a certil'ictl operator in responsible charge?
22. Fail to notify regional DWQ of enici-ency situations as required by General Permit'?
(ic/ 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'?
0. NA.vioaations.ar, detidenc'jes .w.ere noted du:rin}; .this:vis' t:. Y;ou will.re�ceive na further .:.
correspoHideitce; ahotit: 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):
!q . 57-7�tLLrc�,-a )c eeive- �� ,o 2 �►cv�s �v �l
f ti 7l f C e-P L41 L. L.S ?� e C "147 56 z7 �,`, 6W
C��SLs C "'�jUCfaL r h/e-t'f l CtOS�t-„G) CW&�GC/-S & ' 7)w`
f'--X e—VC- If Q,,o dry l tl5 7/14 - EA
IReviewer/Inspector Name
❑ Yes No
❑ Yes 0 No
❑ Yes IZNo
[—]Yes ZNo
❑ Yes P No
❑ Yes /No
❑ Yes No
❑ Yes No
❑ Yes No
❑.Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes W'No
❑ Yes N
Reviewer/Inspector Signature: `^,71LVA11. , EZL. .. Date: W1 11 161 1 I/6/99

1
f
10 Routine 'O Complaint O Fallow -up ofDWO inspection O Follow-up ofDSWC review. O Other l
Facility Number Date of Inspectionf ly
Time of Inspection L _ 24 hr. (hh:mm)
Registered [3 Certified 0 Applied for Permit 0 Permitted 10 Not Opera Date Last Operated:
-
Farm Name: G....... .., ► .......O.F .�&�. , i County:.. , ,IA %l �-t ...... �tl.:�..y.............
OwnerNam ................... ................................. .......... .............. ...................................... I ...::.... Phone No:.......................................................................................
FacilityContact:.............................................................................. Title:................................................................ Phone No:...................................................
MailingAddress: ..................................................................................................................... ...........................
Onsite Representative:,/1!Y:t.T(./ ............ t. Integrator:
Certified Operator;
Location of Farm:
Operator Certification Number-, ...............
Latitude =• =' =" Longitude =• =' ="
r
'
;s e Design Current
Svme -���, Ga acit Po Matron
❑"Wean to Feeder
❑Feeder to Finish
`
'%'
" °Design Current $De51gri, Nw '',Current
Poult Ca aci Po elation'' Cattle Ca yxcilpopultion
❑ La er ❑Dairy:
y
❑Non Layer
[] Non Dairy
y
Farrow to Wean
❑Farrow to Feeder
s.... ��,Aa'
s ❑Other zI°•x
r� Toftimesigm. Npacity 'lwl
rV4
t, F
O S
arrow to Finish
Gilts
❑ Boars
Number of�Lagooas /Holding Ponds ❑ Subsurface Drains Present ID Lagoon Area
10 No Liquid Waste Management System
❑ Spray Field Area
.pw
General
1. Are there any buffers that need maintenancelimprovement?
❑ Yes'- No
2. is any discharge observed from any part of the operation?
es
T Discharge originated at: Diagoon ❑ Spray Field ❑ Other
0
a. If discharge is observed, was the conveyance man-made?
❑ Yes '_ - o
b. If discharge is observed, did it reach Surface Water? (If yes, noti€yDWQ)
❑'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)
El Yes ;1 0
3. Is there evidence of past discharge from any part of the operation?
T ❑ Yes No.y-''
f:
4. Were there any adverse impacts to the waters of the State other than from a discharge?
4'- :.
❑ Ye OK'o
5. Does any part of the waste management system (other than lagoonstholding ponds) require
.Yes ' ❑•No
maintenance/improvement?
( yy
6. Is facility not in compliance with any applicable setback criteria in effect at the time'of design? rj ®CesNo
7. Did the facility fail to have a certified operator in responsible charge? !
al
y ❑ Yes �No
7/25/97
Continued on back

a
i
i Facility Number:
8. Are there lagoons or storage ponds on site which need to be properly closed? 4cs o
Structures (LagognsZolding Ponds Flush Ptts, etc.)
9. Is storage capacity (freeboard plus storm storage) less than adequate? ❑ Yes dNo
Structure 1 Structure'-) Structure 3 Structure 4 Structure 5 Structure G
Identifier:
Freeboard(ft):................5...................................................................................................................................................................................................
10. Is seepage observed from any of the structures? Yes ❑ No
11. Is erosion, or any other threats to the integrity of any of the structures observed? ❑ Yes gNo
12. Do any of the structures need maintenance/improvement? Yes ❑ No
(If any of questions 9-12 was answered yes, and the situation poses
an immediate public health or environmental threat, notify DWQ)
13,
Do any of the structures lack adequate minimum or maximum liquid level markers?
Yes
❑ No
Waste Application
14.
Is there physical evidence of over application?
❑ Yes
[ZNo
(If in excess of WMP, or runoff entering waters of the State, notify DWQ)
15.
Crop
type ................................................................................................................................................................................................
16.
Do the receiving crops differ with those designated in the Animal Waste Management Plan (AWMP)?
❑ Yes
❑ No
17.
Does the facility have a lack of adequate acreage for land application?
❑ Yes
EffNo
18.
Does the receiving crop need improvement?
❑ Yes
❑ No
19.
Is there a lack of available waste application equipment?
❑ Yes
❑ No
20.
Does facility require a follow-up visit by same agency?
❑ Yes
CZNo
21.
Did Reviewer/Inspector fail to discuss reviewlinspection with on -site representative?
❑ Yes
[No
22,
Does record keeping need improvement?
❑ Yes
E4
r
Certified or Permitted Facilities Only
23.
Does the facility fail to have a copy of the Animal Waste Management Plan readily available?
❑ Yes
�'No
24.
Were any additional problems noted which cause noncompliance of the Certified AWMP?
❑ Yes
P-�'qo
No
25.
Were any additional problems noted which cause noncompliance of the Permit?
❑ Yes
❑
[_No.vidlidoits-iiideficiencies.were;nt ted....................
during this.visit.,You.v+iid receive:noftiriher :
corre POWehO A oitt �this:visit: " � •
A 1 rr, H I C4- 7r_4 A-r, ( /v -r, co f--t_ L'v t--
�do P6"'o e'4-GX 1'(i
/'3- 41�6 Ivor m4,1 6-z)
mPw . P4N -7b r-iA4-
19 P-4�u
ivy.
cACF144N -,
5 "Ice t mffG ,0-n
IV �rJ ,"t r w�i //ar
1-46 -MW
(ll/4vY.�- �1� ,� G!/L�.�iNi✓l� lJ��� �.� b�. Qv712S�97
i Rev iew'er/inspector Name a
1J 1 Reviewer/Inspector Signature:
Date:

❑Division of Soil and Water Conservation 0 Other Agency�x
Sion of Water Quality '
,� -A 4e �i'CS'"",'RY'2--:s,_,p'e"'A.',;...':�sC-' ,, ...��,".yl,:;i^4;C"�"m'"f2•,6??''�Y:"i�l°2'"ru 'AC:10,e-.s,-"E''P^... _�`�'.�
Routine O Complaint 'O Follow-up of MV0 ins action 0 Follow-up or DSWC review O Other
Facility Number Date of Inspection 7
Time of Inspection 24 hr. (hh:mm)
© Registered [3 Certified [�A�p/plied for PermitE {�erm,,itttted 0 Not O eratianal, - /Date Last Operated:
Farm Name: � : C........... k ' C......tr'�iTL............Y...fV County:...•[ l.!9:r ....1.....•........................•............
--qq sz uu
Owner Name:...... ...'1......L. ... Phone No: o`' 1...s..•......z .......................
!!•...............•.•......•••............................... ti
Facility Contact: triy r✓�?t!.... F.tt�....� Title: Phone No:............. l.............
Mailing Address: ..........!..... ....................................................................................... ............•.............
TJ.Q... �..V..�....�`...`�...•.... ..•.. .'..
Onsite Re.presentative...... ...�-.i! eir nl.: 6.......{—"`w//Lsr ........ Integrator:.....��...# t.`� ........................
C
Certified OperatorAqrh^.......... ....... �,;.�................................. ... Operator Certification Number;...................
I..ocation of Farm. (3/ 1
......................................................................................
Latitude
Design -A .Cur
Swine „ -Capacity` Ponn
❑ Wean to Feeder
❑ Feeder to Finish
❑ Farrow to Wean
❑ ow to Feeder
Farrow to Finish
Q BU
❑ Gilts
❑ Boars
................................................... I .................. I ............
Longitude =° 11
Design Current
Poultry r Capacity Population` ' C
General
I. 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, did it reach Surface Water? (if yes, notify DWQ)
c. If discharge is observed, what is the estimated flow in gal/min?
A. 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?
a 7. Did the facility fail to have a certified operator in responsible charge?
7/25/97
❑ Yes No
❑ Yes No
❑ Yes 2rNo
❑ Yes ltf No
❑ Yes "v
❑ Yes No
Continued on back

J � w
Facility Number: , j — O
8. Are there lagoons or storage ponds on site which need to be properly closed? ❑ Yes No
Structures (Lap-oons,Ilolding Ponds, Flush Pits, etc.)
9. Is storage capacity (freeboard plus storm storage) less than adequate? ❑ Yes �'No
ntcture i Structure r Structure 3 Structure 4 Structure 5 Structure 6
identifier: / Z
.r ................. ........ ............................................. ...I.............................................................................................
r f "
Freeboard (ft): ..........�[.......... ...............
�I..L7....................................................•................•.............................•....................................... •..........
10. Is seepage observed from any of the structures? SELr Gvr^�a.Wr es ❑ No
11. Is erosion, or any other threats to the integrity of any of the structures observed? ❑ Yes o .
12. Do any of the structures need maintenance/improvement? ❑ Yes J o
(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 o
Waste_ Application
14. Is there physical evidence of over application? ❑ Yes _T:
(If in excess of WMP, or runoff entering waters of the State, notify DWQ)
15. Crop type ..... Q,(-=............................................................................•.........................••........•...........................................................................�...._._.......
16. Do the receiving crops differ with those designated in the Animal Waste Management Plan (AWMP)? ❑ Yes ad o
17. Does the facility have a lack of adequate acreage for land application? ❑ Yes o�
18. Does the receiving crop need improvement? ❑ Yes ,EO
19. Is there a lack of available waste application equipment? ❑ Yes o
20. Does facility require a follow-up visit by same agency? ❑ Yes No
21. Did Reviewer/Inspector fail to discuss review/inspection with on -site representative? ❑ Yes No
22. Does record keeping need improvement? ❑ Yes o
For Certified or Permitted Facilities Only
23. Does the facility fail to have a copy of the Animal Waste Management Plan readily available? ❑ Yes No
24, /Were additional problems noted which cause noncompliance of the Certified AWMP? ❑ Yes No
25ny additional problems noted which cause noncompliance of the Permit? ❑ Yes No
No.violations-or, deficiencieswere-noted.during this_:visit::You4ill rkeive•nto-ftirrlier
:. • correspondence ab'ouf this;visit:" : .. . . :.:: .. . . . :. . .: .: :.:.:: . : ... .
Reviewer/Inspector Name
Reviewer/Inspector Signature: dui L Date:

Inspection
1 •
Facility Number: —
8. Are there lagoons or storage ponds on site which need to be properly closed?
Structures (Lagoons Holding Ponds, Flush Pits, etc.)
9. Is storage capacity (freeboard plus storm storage) less than adequate?
Structure 1 Structure 2
Identifier:
f...........................................
Freeboard (ft): ...... .:. ..........."..
10. Is seepage observed from any of the structures?
Structure 3 Structure 4 Structure 5
................................................................ .............................
❑ Yes ONo
❑ Yes 0
Stnicture 6
........................................................................................❑11 Yes ....,...N�
11.
Is erosion, or any other threats to the integrity of any of the structures observed?
❑ Yes
No
12.
Do any of the structures need maintenance/improvement?
❑ Yes
No
(If any of questions 9-12 was answered yes, and the situation poses
an immediate public health or environmental threat, notify DWQ)
13.
Do any of the structures lack adequate minimum or maximum liquid level markers?
❑ Yes
0�_O
Waste_ Application
14.
Is there physical evidence of over application?
❑ Yes
, No
(If in excess of WMP, or runoff entering waters of the State, notify DWQ)
15.
Crop type t.�rAr �..........................................................................................................................................�....�
16.
17.
Do the receiving crops differwiththose designated in the Animal Waste Management Plan (AWMP)?
Does the facility have a lack of adequate acreage for land application?
❑ Yes
❑ Yes
0<0
No
18. Does the receiving crop need improvement? ❑ Yes Jd"No
19. Is there a lack of available waste application equipment? El Yes a..
20. Does facility require a follow-up visit by same agency? ❑ Yes:N`o�
N
21. Did Reviewer/Inspector fail to discuss review/inspection with on -site representative? ❑ Yes
22. Does record keeping need improvement? ❑ Yes No
For C rtil-ted or Permitted Facilities Only
23. Does the facility fail to have a copy of the Animal Waste Management Plan readily available? ❑ Yes ZN
24. Were any additional problems noted which cause noncompliance of the Certified AWMP? ❑ Yes
25. W any additional problems noted which cause noncompliance of the Permit? ❑Yes o
No.Vloiations''O[ deficienCieS.were-noted-during this'visit.. YOU.Win I'eCeive;ino' ftirther'.
. • correspQndepce about this` visit: " . . . , : : . .: . ... . : . . . :. .
Reviewer/Inspector Name
Reviewer/Inspector Signature: Date:

State of North Carolina
Department of Environment
and Natural Resources
Division of Water Quality
James B. Hunt, Jr., Governor
Wayne McDevitt, Secretary
A. Preston Howard, Jr., P.E., Director
T
/ • •
11A
NCDENR
NORTH CAROLINA DEPARTMENT OF
ENVIRONMENT' ANo NATURAL RESOURCES
June 24,1998
MEMORANDUM
{
TO: Buster Towell z
Division of Water Quality — Raleigh Regional Office
�z
z =�
FROM: Sonya Avant
Division of Water Quality
SUBJECT: Inspection Forms
Please fill out the highlighted area and send the inspection form back to me as soon as possible.
If you have any questions please call me at [phone] extension 571.
P.O. Box 29535, Raleigh, North Carolina 27626-0535 Telephone [phone] Fax [phone]
An Equal Opportunity Affirmative Action Employer 50% recycled110% post -consumer paper

Facility Number 93 1 Date of Inspection
Time of Inspection 24 hr. (hh:mm)
13 Registered ® Certified 13 Applied for Permit ® Permitted 0 Not Opera Date Last Operated:
FarmName: EL.C.M.I;.airm............................................................................................ County: Warr= ............................................. HRQ............
OwnerName: Marlin .................................... End ........................................................... Phone No: ZS2..915.�-2�3.7............................................................
Facility Contact: > as ba�r�t. u1<kr�er....................................... Title: meager............................. . Phone No: ZS2-4 , 116G.......................
.................. ...............
Mailing Address: fit.j,jQ.tM.IOS.......................................................................................... Nulxtxa..N.C........................................................... 27.5.63 .............
Onsite Representative: Alf a. a1�l�CAI�IC.............................................. I..................... Integrator: ......................................... ..................................
Certified Operatorl!`".filx................................... Ejt&d ................................................. Operator Certification Number:INZ33 .............................
Location of Farm:
Latitude 36 • 29 30 Longitude 7s • o9 66
❑ Wean to Feeder
❑ Feeder to Finish
❑ Farrow to Wean
❑ Farrow to Feeder
® Farrow to Finish
1000
❑ Gilts
❑ Boars
General
1. Are there any buffers that need maintenance/improvement?
❑ Yes
® No
2. Is any discharge observed from any part of the operation?
❑ Yes
® No
Discharge originated at: ❑ Lagoon ❑ Spray Field ❑ Other
a. If discharge is observed, was the conveyance man-made?
❑ Yes
® No
b. If discharge; is observed, did it reach Surface; Water? (If yes, notify DWQ)
❑ Yes
® No
c. If discharge is observed, what is the estimated flow in gal/min?
d. Does discharge bypass a lagoon system? (If yes, notify DWQ)
❑ Yes
® No
3. Is there evidence of past discharge from any part of the operation?
❑ Yes
® No
4. Were there any adverse impacts to the waters of the State other than from a discharge?
❑ Yes
® No
5. Does any part of the waste management system (other than lagoons/holding ponds) require
❑ Yes
® No
maintenance/improvement?
6. Is facility not in compliance with any applicable setback criteria in effect at the time of design?
❑ Yes
® No
7. Did the facility fail to have a certified operator in responsible charge?
❑ Yes
®No
7/25/97
Continued on back

IFakility limber: 93-1 ' Date of Inspection u
S. Are there lagoons or storage ponds on site which need to be properly closed?
"tructur La n Holdin nd - Flu h Pits etc.
9. Is storage capacity (freeboard plus storm storage) less than adequate?
Structure 1 Structure 2 Structure 3
Identi Fier: #.1................ ............... #.2................ ................... ..........
Freeboard (ft): .. . 5' 7.0' . ................ ..............TQ..............
10. Is seepage observed from any of the structures?
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes ® No
Structure 4 Structure 5 Structure 6
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
t4. Is there physical evidence of over application?
(If in excess of WMP, or runoff entering waters of the State, notify DWQ)
...................................
® Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes ® No
15. Crop type ....................... k:Par17............................................................................................................................................. ...........................................................
16. Do the receiving crops differ with those designated in the Animal Waste Management Plan (AWMP)? ❑ Yes ® No
17. Does the facility have a lack of adequate acreage for land application?
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 "e tfi 1 r Permitted Facilities nl
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 defidencies.were noted dtiring.this visit.., You, will receive.no.further..::
c0rresporideht6 about; this visit. .
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes ®No
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes ® No
Reviewer/Inspector Namea:-,un o,ss=,xa�:i3:m:°°,•: s! i s°u, ei i €ilt';.3,spa. _.'r tW,
n �1" W, t��s
l
Reviewer/Inspector Signature: Date:

F-
State of North Carolina
Department of Environment -and Natural Reaouroes
Raleigh Regional Office
DIVISION OF LAND RESOURCES
Wayne McDevitt, Secretary
Jamer B. Hunt, h., Gava9or Ju 1 y 9, 1998
N.C. Farm
RT 1, Box 125-C
Warrenton, NC 27589
Attn: Martin Engel
RE: NC Farm Lagoon
Warren County
WARRE-002-L
Dear Mr. Engel.:
An inspection of the subject low hazard dam located SR 1300
was performed on June 2, 1998 pursuant to the North Carolina Dam
Safety Law of 1967.
The Dam Safety Law of 1967 provides for the certification and
inspection of darns, in the interest of public health, safety, and
welfare, in order to prevent injuries to persons:. damage to
property: and to ensure the maintenance of stream flows.
According to the above mentioned visual inspection, the dam
appears to be in a stable condition at this time.
Although no specific problems were observed, we recommend the
following items pertinent to maintenance and operation of all, dams:
(1) Maintain a ground cover sufficient to restrain
accelerated erosion on all earthen portions of the
structure. This -will enhance the stability of the
structure, should these portions become exposed to
overflow or other forms of concentrated flow.
(2) Remove all thick undergrowth from the slopes and crest of
the dam. This will serve to (A) prevent the formation of
an root system which could ultimately result in failure
of the structure, (B) reduce the possibility of damage to
the dam due to the uprooting of trees by wind or other
natural causes, and © facilitate the inspection and
wo Bassett Vri", guise 101 ' Rakish, NC 2700
Voice (910)5 � l1
An Rq+W OoprtwaftyA�aeaXUAW

1z 2
Ar. Engel
Judy 91 1998
increase the likelihood of early detection of more
j serious problems connected with the dam.
(3) Periodically monitor the dam and appurtenant works with
respect to elements affecting their safety. This is in
light of the legal duties, obligations, and liabilities
arising from the ownership and/or operation of a dam.
Although the inspections by our staff are relatively
infrequent.and offer no safety guarantees, we hope you will use the
information provided in this letter as you fulfill your obligation
to safely maintain and operate your dam. In order to help us keep
our records up-to-date and therefore serve you better, please
notify us concerning any changes in address or ownership. Your
cooperation in this effort is greatly appreciated.
If there are any questions or if we can be of any assistance,
please do not hesitate to contact us.
Sincerely,
Ahmad Al-Sharawneh
Environmental Technician
Land Quality Section
Raleigh Regional Office
cc: Mr. Jim Leumas, P.E.
AA

ems+[, DSWC Animal Feedlot Operation Review R ,
LJ
DWQ Animal Feedlot Operation Site Inspection '�
x
a
� tr
P—Routine O Com plaint Q Foil ow -up oft) W) ins ection Q Follow-tt of DSNVC; review O Other
Dote of Inspection
Facility Number7=M--E=1:--3Lj
rime of Inspection � c2l 24 hr. (hh:mm)
Total Time (in fraction of hours
Farm Status: [3 Registered []Applied for Permit (ex:1.2;z for I hr IS min)? Spent on Review
R}Certified [3 Permitted or Inspection (includes travel and processing)
0/jNot Operational J Date Last Oaperated.�....s.............�..................................................{.........,.j,...............�..........,.,....`.,................................
Farm Name':...,�,....�Operated
f�I�.l. rUt�w.S �+ ,[� .. Count.v.........'�.t 1, i��.l..t.:.:..lu.............................
OwnerName:................................................... ........................................................................ Phone\o:.....................,.......,.........................................................
FacilityCoutuct............................................................................... Title:..........,.....,........,...................................... Phone No:...................................................
MailingAddress: ....................'...,..................,................................... ..........................
Onsite Representative:.. ,rt♦�r:'�#-,�� . Integrator:..... �.....C,,,...,................................................
1
` Certified Operator: .................. Operator Certification Number:.,,,,,..,...,...
Location of Farm:
Latitude Longitude Q•
Type of Operation i
� Destgny Current ,
Swuze -> CapacitY.:
Population .,
❑ Wean to Feeder
Feeder to Finish
❑ Farrow to Wean
" ❑ Farrow to Feeder
Farrow to Finish Q
Other.._.. .........
ulfry ;Capacity Population Cattle
Layer ❑ Dain
Non -Layer ❑ Non -
Subsurface Drains Present j}p Lagoon Area i0 Spray Field Area
General
I. 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, did it reach Surface Water'? (If yes, notify DWQ)
c. if discharge is observed, what is the estimated flow in gal/niin?
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
4/30/97 maintenance/improvement?
❑ Yes 0 No
❑ Yes �No
❑ Yes No
❑ Yes No
❑ Yes. 21,;o
❑ Yes
VN/;,
❑ Yes
�N
Yes
,
❑eRl1 �4
Continued
on,

`racwtyNumber:( ��
s
4 fii Is facility not in compliance with any applicable setback criteria in effect at the time of design?
7. Did the facility fail to have a certified operator in responsible charge?
8. Are there lagoons or storage ponds on site which need to be properly closed'?
Structures (Laiootts and/or Holding Ponds)
9. Is storage capacity (freeboard plus storm storage) less than adequate?
Freeboard (ft): Structure 1 Stwctult 2 Structure 3 Structure 4
�, <'
❑ YesNo
❑ Yes I <O
❑ Yes �10
❑ Yes VNo
Structure 5 Structure G
I0. epage observed from any of the structures? �f ❑ Yes ❑ No
11. Is erosion, or any other threats to the integrity of any of the structures observed? ❑ Yes ONo
12. Do any of the structures need maintenance/improvement? Yes ❑ No
(If any of questions 9-12 was answered ,yes, and the situation poses
an immediate public health or environmental threat, notify D WQ)
E 13. Do any of the structures lack adequate minimum or maximum liquid level markers? jrYes ❑ No
Waste Application
14. is there physical evidence of over application'? ❑ Yes o
(If in excess of WMF', or runoff entering waters of the State, notify DWQ)
I o
15. Crop type i ........................................ .......................................................................................................................................................I.........................
I6. Do the receiving crops differ with those designated in the Animal Waste Management Plan (AWMP)? [,j Yes O'No
17. Does the facility have a lack of adequate acreage for land application? ❑ Yes !d No
18. Does the receiving crop need improvement? ❑ Yes OAo
` 19.
Is there a lack of available waste application equipment?
❑ Yes
C040
t
20.
Does facility require a follow-up visit by same agency?
❑ Yes
40
' 21.
Did Reviewer/Inspector fail to discuss review/inspection with on -site representative?
❑ Yes
�No
For Certified Facilities Only
22.
Does the facility fail to have a copy of the Animal Waste Management Plan readily available?
❑ Yes
PNo
23.
Were any additional problems noted which cause noncompliance of the Certified AWMP?
❑ Yes
00
24.
Does record keeping need improvement?
Ep"Yes
❑ No
72!$•— { `7 % "Tr7C L
5 �5 D ) du ef �
COvlo� & p
Lz:-x r-r. F::7fK'P )9--` 19 �)- 5 6— `5 Y 15T" `7
Or- Q 4&t- OF /-177!'a c) -66 04k), r_ - ,
r- , Ft&nVK t:;� }-.Lw P,,� C,c-t-tiNn.,
T6 pIUQ r
E&ti11,*t'OC
Reviewer/Inspector Name
Reviewer/Inspector
Date: 9
cc: Division of Water Quality, Water
Section, Facility Assessment Unit
4/30/97

vate of Inspection I --
f
I N 1-t' l,,.7 ell
:57%l U c 1?112- LAE�C�-oa.,cJ
tiOT1 r7/tz�
a- 4 c 6
r-4A., l P y6
/-:�TIfT
A
A-- 7 ,77-k IE7 /J
4/30/97

State of North Carolina
Department of Environment and Natural Resources
Raleigh Regional Office
James B. Hunt, Jr., Governor Division of Soil and Water Conservation Wayne McDevitt, Secretary
September 12, 1997
Martin Engel
Rt 1 Box 105
Norlina, NC 27563
SUBJECT: Operation Review Summaries and Corrective Action Recommendations
Spring Valley Farms Facility Nos. and 93-34
NC Farm Partnership Facility 3-1
Warren County
Dear Mr. Engel,
On September 9, Operation Reviews were conducted of the Spring Valley Farms, facility nos. 93-6 and 93-34,
and NC Farm Partnership, facility no. 93-1. These Reviews, undertaken in accordance with G.S. 143-215.1 OD, are one
of two visits scheduled for all registered livestock operations during the 1997 calendar year. The Division of Water
Quality will conduct a second site inspection.
During the Review, it was determined that waste was not being discharged to the waters of the State,and the
animal waste collection, treatment, storage and disposal systems were properly maintained and operated under the
responsible charge of a certified operator. The following observances were discovered and noted for corrective action or
response:
1. Vegetation needs to be established on all bare areas on the lagoons and on the rainwater diversion
pathway. The vegetation should prevent erosion from occurring in the future.
2. The Waste Utilization Plans(WUPs) need to be adjusted to show proper nitrogen loading levels for both your
soybeans and Fescue crops. Please contact your technical specialist, Bruce Perkinson, to remedy this situation.
After the WUP crop nitrogen loading rates are changed, you will need to do the nitrogen balance sheets for your
records.
3. The 3 seeps discovered by the back base of the primary lagoon at facility no. 93-1 have been reported to both
the Division of Water Quality and the Warren District office. When I spoke with Bruce Perkinson of the Warren
office, he stated that your farm manager had been in to discuss the problem with him and that an appointment
with an engineer from PIC was set for September 11. 1 would like to commend you for the rapid response to the
potential threat that the seeps present. Water Quality personal plan to take samples to determine if the seeps
are from the lagoon or another source.
4. Facility no. 93-34 has no designated operator in charge of the waste system. I have enclosed the form to be
fill out and sent to the Division of Water Quality to correct this oversight.
The Division of Soil and Water Conservation appreciates your cooperation with this Operation Review. Please
do not hesitate to call me at 919/571-4700 ext. 208 if you have any questions, concerns or need additional information.
Sincerely,
Margaret O'Keefe, Environmental Engineer I
cc: Warren Soil and Water Conservation District
Judy Garrett, Water Quality Regional Supervisor
DSWC Regional Files
3800 Barrett Drive, Suite 101 ' Raleigh. NC 27609
Voice [phone] • FAX (919)571,4718
An Equal [Opportunity Affirmative Action Employer
30%recycled/ 10%post-consumer paper

OPERATIONS BRHNCH - Wo Fax:[phone] Jul 18 ' 95 15:56 P. 06�'07
Sitc kcgui= 3rrrzsscd3atc AttenticD
r�.a�t1y 2FumLar•: q 3 _I
SITE VJSITARYZaR )
DA-M• J 1 ' I � 1995
I
County,
Aeent Visitit g Sim Phouc; a ,
On Site Repmrentat vo: Phone:
�G
Typc of CpmdoR: Swim it Pc' ultry Cattle
i]ttRi2fl C:1Pait) , /U o -0 1- 4,2 NUMber of Animz& on slw
Type or I.-,=tifltt: C,nnmd Ac ial
Girds YCcs or Ala
Does tho AjdmA Wpste LaSwu hay: wMcicat finel:eard of t Foot t 25 Xrw 24 hour ctvrm cvrnm
(apptoxirmiiciy I Fuat+7inche.0 '—'cDur No AuItWlr=lc cwd:, �_T-=t _._ ___ istcS�•
For facilkie.4 will! Laom tl=a ate ision(hj, pimse itdoiess the Qd-.crJR+ was' rhzl -uwd under th-6
coiW11C)it5 section.
%Vies any ::=pup observed tmm ttre lb�al►Eaj': Y� ux i o l�'e� !!1L'CC ctc�slp�1 of
Zx 941quete Iartd avallibia for land appiirluixrt?(Yrs ititz is the cuvcrcmop :zlegrraZc? ccs�rNu
Addidotlal ComInencs-.
r
Fe- to [phone])
Signature a r Armt

i
I
of North Carolina
Department of Environment,
Health and Natural Resources `
Raleigh Regional Office
James B. Hunt, Jr., Governor
Jonathan B. Howes, Secretary p E H N F
Boyce A. Hudson, Regional Manager
Division of Environmental Management
August 10, 1995
Deiter Engel
Route 1, Box 105
Norlina, N.C. 27563
Subject:Compliance Inspection Report
North Carolina Farm Partnership
Secondary Road 1311
Warren County
Dear Mr. Engel:
On July 27, 1995, Mr. Steve Mitchell, from the Raleigh Regional Office conducted a compliance inspection
of the subject animal facility. This inspection is a part of the Division's efforts to determine potential
problems associated with liquid waste disposal systems.
Mr. Mitchell's site visit determined that wastewater from your facility was not discharging to the surface
waters of the state, nor were any manmade pipes, ditches, or other prohibited conveyances (for the
purpose of willfully discharging wastewater) observed.
Please continue to properly manage the waste and wastewater generated by this farm to prevent the
possibility of an illegal discharge. Effective wastewater treatment and facility stewardship are a
responsibility of all animal facilities. The Division of Environmental Management is required to enforce
water quality regulations in order to protect the natural resources of the State.
This office would also like to take this opportunity to remind you that you are required to have an approved
animal waste management plan by December 1997. This plan must be Certified by a designated technical
specialist or a professional engineer. For a listing of certified technical specialists or assistance with your
waste management plan you should contact your local Soil and Water Conservation District.
The Raleigh Regional office appreciates your cooperation in this matter. It you have any questions
regarding your inspection please call Steve Mitchell at [phone].
Sincerely, n n
dy arrett
Water Quality Supervisor
cc: Warren County Health Department
Bruce Perkinson - Warren County Soil and Water Conservation District
Steve Sennett - Regional Coordinator, Division of Soil and Water Conservation
RRO and Central Files
3800 Barrett Drive. Suite 101, Raleigh, North Caropna 27609 Telephone [phone] FAX [phone]
An Equal Opportunity Affirmative Action Employer 50% recycled/ 10% past -consumer pope►

Site Requires Immediate Attention:
Facility No. _93-1_,_,
DIVISION OF ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT
ANIMAL FEEDLOT OPERATIONS SITE VISITATION RECORD
DATE: July 27, 1995
Time:
Farm Name/Owner:NC Farm Partnership/Deiter Engel
Mailing Address: Route 1 Box 105 Norlina, N.C. 27563
County: Warren
Integrator: Phone:
On Site Representative: Frances Sandgerath Phone:[phone]
Physical Address / Location : S . R . 1311 east of Wise; NC
Type of Operation: Swine _XX_ Poultry Cattle
Design Capacity: _1000 Number of *Animals on Site:
DEM Certification Number: ACE DEM 'Certification Number: ACN
Latitude: 36' 29127" Longitude: 78' 09' 24" Elevation: Feet
Circle Yes or No
Does the Animal Waste Lagoon. have sufficient freeboard of 1 Foot + 25 year 24 hour
storm event (approximately 1 Foot + 7 inches) Yes Actual Freeboard: 3_Ft. Was any
seepage observed from the lagoon(s)? No Was any erosion observed? No Is
adequate land available for spray?. Yes Is the cover crop adequate? Yes
Crop (s) being utilized: Coastal
Does the facility meet SCS minimum setback criteria? Yes. 200 Feet from Dwellings?
Yes 100 Feet from Wells? Yes
Is the animal waste stockpiled within 100 Feet of USGS Blue Line Stream? No
Is animal waste land applied or spray irrigated within 25 Feet of a USGS Map Blue
Line? No
Is animal waste discharged into waters of the state by man-made ditch, flushing
system, or other similar man-made devices? No If Yes, Please Explain.
Does the facility maintain adequate waste management records (volumes of manure,
land applied, spray irrigated on specific acreage with cov op) ? Yes /No
Additional Comments: -
Inspector Steve Mitchell Signature
cc: Facility Assessment Unit Use Attachments if Needed.

SI77E YLSIZ'A' 0x REC©M
DA I—.:: � j 24,1995
owner, A"
county,
'I1t VlS3ti7 Sits
On Site ReFr=cntWva: 1=ltaae:
Miysicad Addnw
Meiling Addrrss: 'k7 J� �.
Al
�l *
' catua
ncsiat1 Capcaiy: 'f _IJ D a 5�g(�7 Numb,---. of Amiml4 cn gift:
1:�iti[I2{iQ: —a � 3Q 1.4Q�It{fS i �r o f 12 a
SysAerial_ orJntr= om Gnmad c—�~ •.�•�.L�_
Circle Yes or No
Docs eh: AninA Waste Lagacn hove ¢ul Lunt frrebersd of I Fool + 25y= 24 hour 6tv.,m event
(approximately I Foot T 7 tochcs) :ram r o Actual I'r �aa,d: ! :'i �_____
Por facilities wdth more than = ?agrm. plcsse aftess the lht-
colmile.1ts scctinA.
Wns the I4gcoll(s)? Yes or , o wm tLCx cr040a G: tta:. c:: m?: Ym
Is acxruete )And a-va able for 12nd "icaLion? Yrs 11j6 Is the a�vcz- crag ?deq�a�`I �r ?►�o
Additrano tmmen��; r�
r
-Lao 0
Fx.-, to [phone]
Sigmw m of :?gimi
rr/l i
/� F4.�rl

NUH I H UAHULI NA
Department of Environmental Qual

North
GRAPHIC SCALE
i,oao o mo Loco 2000
(ro rear )
SCALE 1 in. = 2,000 ft.
Bracey, VA. - N.C.
N3630—W7807/7.5
1070
Contour Interval: 10 feet
Warrenton, N.C.
N3622.5—W7607.5/ 7.5
1070
Contour Interval: 10 feet
Figure 2: Topographical Map
3
Quadrangle Location

3 tN�
P� Ch ifhmc�
<
N
H
til tmt
-Z'
�7
A
A..
77
\f
7
-j
1 A
2 hi
if
If
50
Y19
-v
D�2
397 �93
GRAPHIC SCALE
2,000
North IN FErr
SCALE 1 in. = 2,000 ft.
r------
Bracey, VA. - N.C.
N3630—W7807/7,5
1970
Contour Interval; 10 feet
Warrenton, N.C. Quadrangle Location
N3622.5—W7607.5/7.5
1970
Contour Interval: 10 feet
Figure 2. Topographical Map
3

GRAPHIC SCALE
0
North ( IN FEET)
* SCALE 1 in. = 2,000 ft.
Bracey, VA. - N.C.
N3630—W7807/7.5
1970
Contour Interval: 10 feet
Warrenton, N.C.
N3822.5—W7807.5/7.5
1970
Contour Interval: 10 feeL
Figure 2: Topographical Map
3
Quadrangle Location

A+ •.�.
ti
14,

�/� -`i IBC .,__ _. Y� �af-'rVv�rs�
Sc��'l� I�i�t��Sl�.

Y
W7

I3-4 roc s vn -jW i 5tti�

I - " "
i6`1 WA
v- ,, -V *.i

a3—1 �L Fq��n ��,-4-�-�'s�ti�
ger�ivl� �Gc,�O�

AR.

q 3- l r.('C F��rvv�
7Gtl-�VLC!("i�l1s
SP1��it�G, �Gt,�Qai�

WIN
im
h
r
g�At
_
Y

�3-S t$�--. F�rv� !?c�r�sltii�
Se���v � l��od�,

01. t,,
k
�
j

q3-t f cC T�wrm
se-e-p,vti9 iA&OVL

� ' � .T - ;Y.� � .
. � 1 v p �-
�'� � � a vri ""PCs. �- .`}�q.
A f "�
,e i, 1 '�
� � \.
I .�". C., " a. u. �.
�t � _ t44 `u ..
.� � �; M1 \
� �A'rf ' i "'w v.�
A
y�T �1 ? '

�'�v�i aL �rvv� �Gr-�"V1CX'SVIA�i

4 $ ^ � ! i V- ,v Wt i'g V-A-vuzr,,64p
set . V l Lccc�cYS1�,

-_• j v. -+
a : `-?`
�=
Xrci- t
r- .� � � i
�,. V
ems...? t . -, . �: �
� �;s
c. �.
.,
K :.

sc���� lccc,C�

13 -1 t�L P-V Awx,5 i p

MEMO
DATE:
SUBJECT:.5z- �
7 a 7,01-✓i9/2DS T*E E✓9S/�
c�2�.�X . 7-ftf r2/f���ipi ma's �a G�9T�,[7 ate/ �y� ri9jln'1
J�2aPF'RT�' = ��'f' �assi�Gt' �/•✓ �'o�vT/��r�,n��9j/gin/
�/sGt//�jz�� �/�rlJ �%ice �%�//�I�LT/9� j�� /,%!s /�/✓J/�/Y���
Z 141 �,r�in/i9TIv�/ .9r � PTliy i�/� f�/sri9i,�GF_ Tisf�
.� i5�,�'�fT o fi'r - �1 %C 1�✓S d✓g�e 1 -Z- /oo a t !yam
k41/Tff 7'i%7igeG d `
/T -� T6 �I�LS i9sT o/ : r� Lf6oav✓
tee✓ IY66.,r.7S/9R l , fS
From: ?kz? zed
, srarE o-
+'n North Carolina Department of Environment
„ ' Health, and Natural Resources prin[ed on Ae,,ed paper

,ter. - •�«
Awr
AgrMasteTechnology, Inc.
�
700-108 Blue Ridge Road
Raleigh, North Carolina 27606
Phone: [phone]
Fax: [phone]
JAN 5 l99B U`
Mr. Kenneth Schuster, P.E.
Ms. Judy Garett
Ms. Terri Hollingsworth
North Carolina Department of Natural Resources
Raleigh Regional Office
3800 Barett Drive, Suite 101
Raleigh, NC 27609
January 5, 1998
RE: Proposed Corrective Action Plan for the Seepage Problem at the NC Farm
Partnership Facility in Warren County, NC (Facility #93-1)
Dear Sir or Madam:
The NC Farm Partnership's Warren County Daughter Nucleus site is a 1,000 sow farrow to
finish site. It is located east of Wise, NC on County Road 1311. The general location of the
site is marked on Figure 1, the County Road Map. The site property boundary, lagoons, and
production buildings are shown on Figure 2, the USGS topographical map. Figure 3 is a map
showing the location of GPS points that were taken by Agri -Waste Technology, Inc. on
December 17, 1997. A written description of each of the points follows this map (Table 1).
This letter describes the proposed solution for the seepage problem on the eastern side of '.he
main lagoon.at the NC Farm Partnership's Warren County site. This corrective action plan
can be divided into three main sections: (1) Collect any liquid that has the potential to seep
from the Iagoon and pump it back into the main lagoon, (2) Remove the crossover pipe
between the two lagoons and close the second smaller lagoon, and (3) Repair areas with
erosion and maintain the lagoon with vegetation/mowing, etc. T"nis letter, along with the
attachments, will describe the proposed changes and repairs to the lagoon to end the seepage
problem and the violation of the "no -discharge permit".
1
"Concepts in Agricultural Byproduct` Utilization"

C
9 g �
V I K G I N I A
9 U R G s C O U N T Y 9 R
h � �
--- lam`_ .1. � ,I_._._._..._
� -- •� 4 -- � ,,,bra •1 i Ii .
Oy! '"Q��., r •:� ems. � ,.,� •- ny f :� � . +. r yr, I 1 �' r.s
1305
1239
1210
r H� ah
I C
% 3�
/ ' -- - !31
n w—Mft '
2.6
pop..
wX.W r� I • .6 i..
207
ISM
.92 r. 31 y y
Car
,` �� U i '•
i wpr. wr
yI
f 1 J ..' • •\ r 1• C �' 1 9a9 3?2 .1
1116
e r e I I•).
. Site location
North GRAPHIC SCALE
( IN MI=
SCALE: 1 inch = 2 mi. Site Location
Warren County, North Carolina
NC Farm Partnership
County Road Map
Figure 1; County Road Map
2

GRAPHIC SCALE
LODO o 5oO i.n s.DW 4.0oO
North ( IN FEET )
* SCALE 2 in. = 2,000 ft.
Bracey, VA. - N.C.
N3630—W7807/7.5
1970
Contour Interval: 10 feet
Warrenton, N.C.
N3622.5—W7807.5/7.5
1970
Contour Interval. 10 feet
Figure 2: Topographical Map
3
Quadrangle Location

INC Farm Partnership
Site Map 'V
Daughter Nucleus Site
Warren County,NC
�3p5
Le
end
r
Road/Righway
Stream
Property Une
Application Field
Production Building
ICE
Lagoon
TO
CPS Point
GRAPHIC SCALE
400 0 200 400 600 1600
(IN FEET)
1 INCH = ouv T.I.
N
Wind Rose 0(*)
(lean percent of timewlad 1. blowing from theindicated direatlon, wE
D.1� from N.Um j Cb�U, Dal. Cm r.
CeII.v1.d l MI�.1I..d NC.
Ihppet: Zia.-]ee3_
S
i
I
- Daughter Nucleus Site
l e. 9cWe
Warren CountziaB_—
Dr i by:
Agrn-haste Technology, inc
rooaloe tine Ridge Road Rev.ed by:
(OI G) Big-0011 Arenag Number
dAnr (ane) e2e-1e07
NCFP-SM2
Figure 3: GPS ?dap
4

Table Z: GPS Point Description Table
Point
Number
Latitude
Longitude
Description
3
36.4832497
78.2307814
1-85 and Oine Road Intersection
(Not Shown)
4
36.4918113
78.1570333
Main Lagoon Corner
5 .
36.492I904
78.1561589
Main Lagoon Comer
6
36.4926249
78.1559211
Monitoring Well in Berm
7
36.4925910
78.1559943
Monitoring Well in Berm
8
36.4927769
78.15568870
Recovery Ditch (Center)
9
36.4929647
78.15493910
Sample Point
10
36.4925909
78.15499660
Surface Water (Small intermuttent
creek)
11
36.4929700
78.15599080
Lagoon Corner
12
36.4929531
78.15678650
Crossover pipe between two
lagoons.
13
36.4935315
78.1569010
Second lagoon comer (closest to
buildings)
14
36.4931605
78.15712270
Second lagoon comer (closest to
main lagoon)
15
36.4939178
78.15677940
Second lagoon corner
16
36.4937568
78.15793270
Second lagoon comer
17
36.4922101
78.15758580
Main lagoon corner
18
36.4931444
78.15754290
Outermost building corner
19
36.4910612
78.15724960
Outermost building comer

1.0 Lagoon Seepage Collection System
All potential seeping lagoon liquid will be collected at one of two points; the recovery wells
and the recovery ditch. These can be seen on Figures 4 and 5 which show a cross-section
and a plan view of the proposed changes to the Warren County site's waste system,
respectively.
First, there are two "observation holes" in the northeastern comer of the main lagoon. These
two "observation holes" will be converted to recovery wells and two additional wells will be
installed to the north and south of the existing wells as shown on the schematic "NCFP-
FM1". Currently these "observation holes" are 32-34 feet deep. The additional wells will be
of similar depth. The purpose of these wells will be to reduce the level of the saturation zone
in the lagoon berm during wet conditions. This will help ensure that the saturation zone
remains below ground level and can be collected in the recovery ditch. Each well will have a
dedicated pump that will be controlled by a float switch.
The second point where liquid will be collected will be the recovery ditch which will be
constructed at the locations shown on the drawing "NCFP-FM1". The recovery ditch will be
constructed approximately 10-15 feet downslope from the toe of the slope of the berm. Once
liquid enters the recovery ditch, it will flow down the line to a concrete sump. Liquid from
the sump will be pumped back into the main lagoon. The pump will utilize a float control
which automatically turns the pump on and off according to the level in the sump. Because
of the local topography, it may be necessary to have two sumps for the recovery ditches to
drain into.
Prior to the excavation of the recovery ditch, the vegetation and top 6-8 inches of soil along
the bottom 5' of the outside slope should be removed (See drawing "NCFPCAPS").
Additionally, the top 6-8 inches of the area which is 30' downslope from the toe -of -the -slope
of the berm should be removed. This disturbed area will then need to be scarified and
compacted using a sheepsfoot roller. Soil will then be added in compacted lifts of 6" (prior
to compaction — 9" thick). The added soil should be compacted to 95% of the Maximum Dry
Density (MDD) at fl- 2% of Optimum Moisture Content (OMC). A small berm will be
created on top of the added soil and upslope from the recovery ditch so that any precipitation
will.be diverted away from the ditch. A PVC pipe will be installed through the diversion
berm which empties downslope of the recovery ditch. This pipe will be positioned so that
rain water will not be allowed to pool behind the diversion berm. The schematic
"NCFPCAPS" shows the ditch and the added soil in relation to the existing berm and slope.
Please note, it may be necessary to clear additional areas of vegetation and soil to
accommodate the natural grade beyond the toe of the slope.
The recovery ditch will be constructed as shown in the schematic, "NCFPCAPS". The ditch
will be excavated with a back -hoe or trenching equipment and will be sloped towards the
concrete sump in order to ensure adequate flow. A 6" perforated drainage pipe will be placed
in the bottom of the ditch and will be sloped toward the concrete sump.
6

.: liquid'.."
Schematic of the Corrective Action Plan
NC Farm Partnership
Warren County, North Carolina
Recovery Wells
Uguld la pumped from well
back Into the letooa.
/Pump
Ir l/ tlf
az-8d it,
Soil Added in 6" Compacted Lifts
Cross —Section View
Notes
cover Ditc
RainWater eiversion er The recovery trench will vary in depth
The rain water diverston berm will to ensure that there is adequate slope
be approximately 2' in height. A to prevent sedimentation in the pipe.
6' PVC pipe will be placed through Width of ditch is dependent on the
the diversion berm to allow water to equipment used.
flow from behind the berm to the other Recovery Wells
side of the recovery trench. This pipe There will be 3 recovery wells with depths
will be placed at the lowest point so approximately 32' deep. Each well will
that no water will be retained behind have a dedicated pump on a level switch.
the diversion berm. The wells will be spaced at approximately 25'.
Rain Water Diversion Dike
Toe —of —Slope
Recovery Ditch
Drams ].to concrete beam
end is than pumped periodically
back to the lagoon.
Caution: Cave in protection must be used
during the construction of the recovery
ditch if workers must go into the ditch.
�'n° ` NC Farm Partnership
u. z:
Warren County Site Corrective Action Plan
Warren County, NC
tTeWrlOe ��s Mw.
AIAr'� Agri-lla0tc rechrtology, Inc o9[, r..a rar.
© 7
00R-a1
(leea e Blue
RRoad
igh. NL Rryeed bT
azo4
0191ens.ig N—bm®
NCFPCAPS

NC Farm Partnership
Facility Map
Daughter Nucleus Site
Warren County, NC
Crossover Pipe
(To be removed)
Le end
Rand/Highway
Stream
10Z2////. Property Line
g�f11P Production Building
lagoon
Intercepter Ditch Sump
(Note: Not to Scale)
Pipe
Second \ ^
Lagoon Flow \]9rg'(+ ,Pipe through diversion berm
J to the bottom of the slope.
�o� / �;'Rain Water Diversion Berm
Additional Recovery Well
—Existing Recovery Wells
Additional Recovery Well
4 `� 4PIow
Main Flow j
Lagoon
Interception Ditch
GRAPHIC SCALE
200 0 50 100 200 400
(IN FEET)
1 INCH = <UV FT,
Approximate Toe of Slope
Note: This drawing is meant to shore
a general concept of the components
of the proposed corrective action plan.
The exact location of the components µ111
be determined in the field to best utilize
the existing grade and topography.
N
nu. I:
Wind Rose f5z North Carolina Farm Partnership
Mean yercent of time I"'i Daughter Nucleus Site
wmd L blowing from Lhe g
indicated direction. - seder
W E Warren Count NC 'n�9e
t � �AOe 1'- 20p
Al11rT Agri -haste Technology. Ine jy Y ,,j_4
700-108 Blue Rldge Road X-1-d by,
Raleigh, NC neWl
S ©"® PAX (011) art-1607 14 ➢hem hua,bet:
NCFA—FM1
Figure 5: Plan View of the Proposed Changes
8

The ditch will then be backfilled with gravel. Care will be taken to ensure that the gravel
does not crush or otherwise damage the perforated pipe during installation.
The disturbed areas will be seeded with an appropriate type of vegetation. If it is necessary,
the area will also be, fertilized and limed to ensure a good stand of grass.
2.0 Closing the Smaller Lagoon
The crossover pipe between the main lagoon and the lagoon to the north should be removed
and the berm should be repaired at this location. The berm will be repaired by adding soil in
6" lifts and compacting with a sheepsfoot roller. The lifts should be compacted to 95% of the
Maximum Dry Density (MDD) at +1- 2% Optimum Moisture Content (OMC).
The second, smaller lagoon will then be closed by land applying all lagoon liquid and sludge.
Liquid and sludge samples will be taken from this lagoon to determine the nutrient content.
After the nutrient content is established, the liquid and sludge will be applied at proper
agronomic rates as determined by the crop grown and MRCS Standards 590 and 633. The
empty lagoon will then either be filled with soil or a principal and an, emergency spillway
will be added as per NRCS Conservation Practice Standard 378. The area will then be re -
vegetated in accordance with NRCS Technical Guide Standard 342.
3.0 General Repairs and Maintenance
The following repairs will be made to the main lagoon to prevent erosion and increase the
stability of the structure:
1. The small gullies and rills on the back slope of berm will be filled with clay and
compacted using a sheepsfoot roller. Appropriate seeding will be used to ensure that
adequate vegetation will be established.
2. Repair all erosion damage to the berm at the inflow pipes from the barns. This
will be done by compacting clay in 6" lifts with a sheepsfoot roller. The lifts should be
compacted so that they are at 95% Maximum Dry Density (MDD) at +/- 2% Optimum
Moisture Content (OMC). An erosion control mechanism will be constructed to ensure that
the inflow pipes do not erode the banks further. Figures 6 and 7 show options that will
protect the berm of the lagoon from erosion caused by the inflow pipes.
3. All trees and brush will be removed from the lagoon berms and the berms will be
re -seeded using an appropriate grass type.
4. The lagoon berms will be mowed regularly and inspected weekly for erosion and to
prevent brush and trees from growing on the lagoon berms.
5. All pumps and piping will be inspected every 2 weeks to ensure that they are in
proper repair.
9

Cross Section A —A
6.00'
Rip -rap
Inflow Pipe 120*
6.0"
0 0 0 0000000 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0
000000
000000000000
00
Top of Her
p
Non -woven
Geotextile
a
p
�
0
ro
ti
10,
o
0
A Inflow Pipe
Vl
Rip -rap
6„
a
B
Note?
Inflow Pipe constructed
by cutting
10 foot long slots in
the top of the
pipe. The slot should
be a 12C° arc
as shown in Section
A -A. The slots
B
should be separated
by C long uncut
Sections as shown in
Section B-B.
Non -woven
Geotextile
Elevation View
2 0"
NC Farm "Partnership
Inflow Pipe Protection
Warren County, NC
Cross Section B--B
6.00'
Rip -rap Inflow Pipe
00000000000000 0000000000000C
o°o°o�o°a°o�o°o
Non -woven
Geotextile
" ` NC Farm Partnership
2.0" 1
""° zi Inflow Pipe Protection
s re/ve'
Warren County, NC
Br b7-
Agri -Waste TecRi ft. R 1 y
700 R-le h. N 278 Ito.d CheeYed �:
06
(asa) Dr oar.
rug [vial, ezv—iem or.+,n{ x„mro.r.
NCFP—IP

NC Farm Partnership
DN Site
Rip —Rap Inlet Protection Details
(Revised 1/03/96)
A
8 -12` dia. Rip -rap
°°
co
o°
Exposed 30 mil HDPE aterial
A
HDPE secured by burial
Pipe prof des through HDPE
Top of Berm sealed x% caulk.
r 8" -12' dia. Rip -Rap
Minimum inflow Pipe
slope = 0.3 % —
Cross Section
Detail of
Cross Section A —A
8'-12" dia. Rip -Rep
0.6 Compacted
Earthen "Wedge`
1
1
O'
1.0•
1.0
Lagoon Floor 30 orRegwvelent /
Inlet Channel Construction Notes:
1. Inlet channel is constructed by forming
2' high compacted earthen berms 5.7'
apart along the slope of the lagoon
and draping a 22' wide roll of 30 mil
HDPE over the berms. The HDPE is then
secured by 6" —12" diameter Rip —rap on
the outside slopes of the earthen berms
and the edges of the HDPE are buried.
2. Inlet channel (sluice trench) is lined
with 30 mil HDPE material. Rip —rap
is used to secure the HDPE material.
The edges of the HDPE are buried.
The HDPE material lining the inside
of the inlet channel is exposed from
the inlet pipe to the last 5' of the
channel in the lagoon floor.
NC Farm Partnership
nw z:
R, -Rap inlet Protection Details
esmn �'
Lagoon Floor Warren County NC .jj -
Avrri n-Vert. 7—en°r. 1n°
35tli M—M C[herYed br
© 1. (S h. MC 27.4
x.
{Diet es�-.nze
rer f9iti� n,-eyLr.nee Nambee
NP.%Is I

None of the work outlined in this plan will begin until we have written approval from DENR.
Once an acceptable plan is in place, we will contact your office to let you know when the
work is scheduled to begin. This will allow your office to inspect the construction if this is
desired.
Thank you for allowing the extension for this corrective action plan. If you have any
questions about this plan, please contact either me or Hal Langenbach at [phone].
CC: Mr. Markin Engel
PICNC6
12
Sincerely,
c . OM.-S 4
' '�- 6-1
L. M. Safley, Jr., Ph. D., P.E.
President

i
4
UNITED STATES
DEPARTMENT OF
AGRICULTURE
March 31, 1998
Martin Engel
Route 1
Norlina, NC 27553
Mr. Engel:
NATURAL RESOURCES
CONSERVATION
SERVICE
133 1/2 S. MAIN STREET
WARRENTON
NORTH CAROLINA 27589
On November 5, 1997 the Field Office Staff_, Kim Kroger, Geologist,
NRCS, NRCS, and Frank Evans, Civil Engineering Technician, NRCS, visited
your swine operation. While there we looked at the condition of the
existing lagoon, excavated 8 pits and logged soils information, and
obtained 2 samples to send to the NRCS Soil Mechanics Laboratory at
Fort worth, Texas.
The existing lagoon was constructed in 1988-89 without NRCS
assistance. According to FSA maps, the lagoon has a surface area of
2.7 acres. You stated the lagoon averaged 17 feet deep with
approximately 2.5:1 side slope. We checked the height of the dam and
it checked 32.3 feet. The lagoon falls under the NC Dam Safety Law.
An intercepter trench had been excavated to catch the liquids flat
were seeping :-hru the lagoon and then pumped back into the Lagoon.
Two test wells had also been installed thru the embankment.
The options discussed were (1) to install a soil liner, (2) install a
synthetic liner, and (3) construct a new lagoon.
Leland Saele, Environmental Engineer, AgSTAR, NRCS, met with you in
December, 1997 and shared with you about that program.
we have just received the lab report on the soil sent for testing and
it is okay for a soils liner.
On options I and 2 the rock out croppings would be required to be
removed so that the existing lagoon would have a smoother interior to
allow for sealing with soil or installing a synthetic liner.
In order to line the slopes with soils, the liner thickness will be
partially determined by the width of the equipment used to put the
material in horizontal Layers for compaction. A pan width is normally
8-10 feet wide. Assuming a 2.0 foot thick soils liner in the bottom,
the estimated volume required for a soils liner is 15,00.0 - 15,000
cubic yards.
If a synthetic liner is used the liner would have to be'protected from
the rock. It is estimated that there would be approximately 120,000
square feet of synthetic liner.

The volume of soil to be removed for a new lagoon would depend on
where it would be located in the existing pasture and the topography
of that area.
A lot of the exterior slope of the existing lagoon needs to be
reworked to remove the rills and then be re --vegetated.
We are at the point now that you need to make a decision as to how you
want to address the problems you have with the lagoon and if you need
further assistance from us.
Please keep in mind, that since the existing lagoon falls under the NC
Dam Safety Law, you need to coordinate any work done on it with them.
Call if you have questions.
OjAeP6 ��
Dave Little
District Conservationist
CC: Tom Wetmore, AC
Angela Jessup, Engineer
Frank Evans, Civil Engineering Technician
Kim Kroeger, Geologist
Leland Seale, AgStar Engineer
Buster Towell, DWQ

State of North Carolina
Department of Environment, Health and Natural Resources
Division of Water Quality
Non -Discharge Permit Application Form / Survey
(THIS FORM MAY BE PHOTOCOPIED FOR USE AS AN ORIGINAL)
General Permit - Liquid Animal Waste Operations
The following questions have been completed utilizing information on file with the
Division. Please review the information for completeness and make any corrections
which are appropriate. If a question has not been
complete as best as possible. Do not leave
Application Date: _�)_ — to
I. REQUIRED ITEMS CHECKLIST
Please indicate that you have included the following required items by signing
item.
comp etea-by`((,t,hej Divisi� ,
e tioin_> n`" }
'�-18
OEIINR RAIEiGH
REGIONAL OFFICE
your initials in the space n
t—
. .
One completed and signed original and one copy of the application for General Permit - Animal
�I
Waste Operations;
=2.
. Two copies of a general location map indicating the location of the animal waste facilities and
} C3 `-a
Q
field locations where animal waste is disposed;
MCIW
ca r"- -,�
ua
C7
-�- 3.
Two copies of the Certified Animal Waste Management Plan (CAWMP). If the facility does
aC
not have a CAWMP, one must be completed prior to submittal of a general permit application
L _
"�?
'for animal waste operations.
L_i
i..
CM
'GENERAL
II:
INFORMATION:
43 - I
1: Farm's name: NC Farm Partnership
2. Print Land Owner's name: DictezEngel
3. Land Owner's Mailing address: Rt I Box I O5
City: Norlina NC Zip: 27563
:Telephone Number: 456-2437
4•.- County where farm is located: Warren
please
-xt to each
Applicants Initials
E
ME.
5. Farm Location (Directions from nearest major highway. Please include SR numbers for state roads. Please include a copy
of a county road map with the location of the farm identified): SR 131_1. Hwy l East 0.5 miles on 1311.
6. Print Farm Manager's name (if different from Land Owner): Martin Engel_ T „_
7. Lessee's / Integrator's name (if applicable; please circle which type is listed): Pig_Inprovement Co.
FORM: AWO-G-E 2/26/97 Page 1 of 3

III. OPERATION INFORMATION:
1. Farm No.: jda-25 311 — 1.
2. Operation Description: operation
Feeder to Finish
8800 - Certified Design Capacity
Is the above information correct? 0 yes; © no. If no, correct below using the design capacity of the facility
Type of Swine No. of Animals Type gf Poultry No. of Animals Tyne of Cattle No. of Animals
0 Wean to Feeder 0 Layer 0 Dairy
0 Feeder to Finish 0 Non -Layer 0 Beef
0 Farrow to Wean (# sow) 0 Turkey
0 Farrow to Feeder (# sow)
0 Farrow to Finish (# sow)
Other Type of Livestock on the farm: No. of AnimalsL
12 .5
3. Acreage cleared and available for application: 4+4 ; Required Acreage (as listed in the CAWMP): 4�L 172
4. Number of Lagoons: I ; Total Capacity: f3i2ifij Z 03q 6 n 6 Cubic Feet (ft3)
Number of Storage Ponds: ; Total Capacity: --- 1_4Q 9 S Z Cubic Feet (ft3)
5. Is animal waste being applied on any field which has subsurface drains? YES or NO (please circle one)
6. Are subsurface drains present in the vicinity of or under the lagoon? YES or NO (please circle one)
IV. APPLICANT'S CERTIFICATION:
I, (Land Owner's name listed in question II.2), attest that
this application for • L-6r t 6 Gov -&I -i wu hc%w. 1 1t bQ1,Ai „ (Farm name listed in question It. 1)
has been reviewed by me and is accurate and complete to the best of my knowledge. I understand that if all required parts of this
application are not compind that if all requir,supporting information and attachments are not included, this application package
will be returned to me as inc olete. , (( ��
Signature
r%
V . MANAGER'S .CERTIFICATION:
Date (S -- i C) — "1 %
only if different from the Land Owner)
I, �.. (Manager's name listed in question I1.6), attest that this
application far,K6rE L m?b r-iNzrQkiQ (Farm name listed in question II.1)
has been reviewed by me and is accurate and complete to the best of my knowledge. I understand that if all required parts of this
application are not completed and that if all requirsupporting information and attachments arelnot included, this application package
will be returned as inc i te. n
Signature i " Date 6_�'__VO
THE COMPLETED APPLICATION PACKAGE, INCL DING ALL SUPPORTING INFORMATION AND MATERIALS,
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,. NORTH CAROLINA 27626-0535
TELEPHONE NUMBER: [phone]
FORM: AWO-G-E 2/26/97 Page 2 of 3

:I'tAk1 tLAL.N'l' A
MAR 15 1995
;._WASTE •,UTILIAZTION.-PLAN........
Producer: /1op-T14 CF1 J2aA_TN,
Location: 'RT I o x low" /1,RR W,9 N• G
Telephone: C� q� ,S+C�6 - d213 7
Type Operation: ,5G _fgc'
Number of Animals: /000 5ocv glow _ 1 fN_sN
(Design Capacity)
The waste from -,your animal facility must be land applied at a
specified rate to prevent pollution of surface and/or groundwater.
The plant nutrients in the animal waste should be used to reduce
the amount of .commercial fertilizer required for the crops in the
fields where the waste is to be applied. This waste utilization
plan uses nitrogen as the limiting nutrient. Waste should be
analyzed before each application cycle. Annual soil tests are
strongly encouraged so that all plant nutrients can be balanced for
realistic yields of the crop to be grown.
Several factors are important in implementing your waste
utilization plan in order to maximize the fertilizer value of;;,the
.waste and to ensure that it is applied in an environments �fe
manner. Always apply waste based on the needs of the croRto�bs'
grown and the nutrient content of the waste. Do not applypno='t;'r
nitrogen than the crop can utilize. Soil types are importantud"
they have different infiltration rates, leaching potentialw,on
exchange capacities, and available water holding capacitiem4.
Normally waste shall not be applied to land eroding at grejEtek- U�In
5 tons per acre per year. With special precautions, waste,cima ,e
applied to land eroding at up to 10 tons per acre per year. D��tot'
apply waste on saturated soils, when it is raining, or when tif6<'14g
surface is frozen. tither of these conditions may result in runoff
to surface waters which is not allowed under OEM regulations. Wind
conditions should also be considered to avoid drift and downwind
odor problems. To maximize the value of nutrients for crop
production and to reduce the potential for pollution, the waste
should be applied to a growing crop or applied to bare ground not
more than 30 days prior to planting. Injecting the waste or
disking will conserve nutrients and reduce odor problems.
The estimated acres needed to apply the animal waste is based on
typical nutrient content for this type of facility. Acreage
requirements should be based on the waste analysis report from your
waste management facility. Attached you will find information on
proper sampling techniques, preparation, and transfer of waste
samples to the lab for analysis.
t
This waste utilization plan, if carried out, meets the requirements
for compliance with 15A NCAC 2H.0217 adopted by the Environmental
Management Commission.
1

ATTACMIENT A
Amount of Waste Produced Per Year(gallons, ftl, tons, etc.)
00 0 animals x d'd 30 ( amt . ) waste/animal/year 30 eve ( amt . )
waste/year.
Amountof Plant .Available Nitrogen_(PAN) Produced .Per Year
Qo 2- animals X o?( lbs . PAN/animal/year = D 1bs . PAN/year.
(PAN from N. C. Tech. Guide Std. 633)
Applying the above amount of waste is a big job. You should plan
time and have appropriate equipment to apply the waste in a timely
manner.
The following acreage will be needed for waste application based on
the crop to be grown and surface application:
Tract Field Soil
# No. Type
Table 1: ACRES OWNED BY PRODUCER
Crop Lbs. N Acres Lbs. N Month of
Per Ac.# Utilized Application
r.�
r�■
r�
r�.�.��r��cirr_r�!
ir�rr�
r��J.�er�
rM
* This N is from animal waste only. if nutrients from other
sources such as commercial fertilizer are applied, they must be
accounted for. N must be based on realistic__yield expectation.,
NOTE: The applicator is cautioned that P and K may be over applied
while meeting the N requirements. Beginning in 1996 the Coastal
Zone Management Act will require farmers in some eastern counties
of North Carolina to have a nutrient management plan that addresse_
all nutrients. This plan only addresses Nitrogen.
2

Attachment A
Page 1
WASTE UTILIZATION PLAN
Producer A . [_ County
Address �" Kind of Operation Z�jpjo
11541&0 -- &Tak Type of Waste Facility 1,iQ6a®A1
Your animal waste management facility has been designed for a given
storage capacity. When.the waste reaches the designed level, it must
be land applied at a specified rate to prevent pollution of surface
and/or ground water. The plant nutrients in -the animal waste should be
used to reduce the amount of commercial fertilizer required for the
crops on the fields where the waste is to be applied. This waste
utilization plan uses nitrogen as the limiting nutrient. Waste should
be analyzed before each application cycle and annual soil tests are
encouraged'so that all plant nutrients can be balanced for realistic
yields of the crop to be grown.
Several factors are important in implementing your waste utilization
plan in order to maximize the fertilizer value of the waste and to
ensure that it is applied in an environmentally safe manner. Always
apply waste based on the needs of the crop to be grown and the nutrient
content of the waste. Do not apply more nitrogen than the crop can
utilize. Soil types are important as they have different infiltration
rates and leaching potential. Waste shall not be applied to land
eroding at greater than 5 tons per acre per year. Do not apply waste
on saturated soils or on land when the surface is frozen. Either of
these conditions may result in runoff to surface waters. Wind
conditions should also be considered to avoid drift and downwind odor
problems. To maximize the value of nutrients for crop production and
to reduce the potential for pollution, the waste should be applied to a
growing crop or not more than 30 days prior to planting. Injecting the
waste or disking will conserve nutrients and reduce odor problems.
The acres needed to apply the animal waste is based on typical nutrient
content for this type of facility. Acreage requirements may be more or
less based on the waste analysis report from your waste management
facility.
The design of your waste management facility is based on the following:
Amount
of Waste
Produced Per Year:
AO0
anirdals x'
�7 waste/animal/yr =
r y oo0total waste produced.
M

Attachment A
Page 2
Amount of Nitrogen Produced Per Year:
animals x lbs N/animal/yr = total N
Applying the above amount of waste is a big job. You should plan time
and have appropriate equipment to apply the waste in a timely manner.
Your facility is designed for ® days of storage. Therefore it
will need -to be emptied every months.
The following acreage for waste application will'.be-needed,based on the
crop to be grown and surface application:
Field
Soil
Type,
Crop
Realistic
Yield
tbs. N
Per Ac.
Acres
Lbs, N
Utilized
Month of
Application
.r`C. L
3v
Ud
p a -dG,
a"
ROr-7
-CL
'-4 sr —le c'
UO
Nil- OCT
-E'
Cx�'C-rL
U c T
`mac Lac'
L— �1
TOTAL
Amount of N Produced
Surplus Deficit
d Pi
OO
Narrative of Operation
L�
Call the Soil and water Conservation District Office after you receive
waste analysis report to obtain the amount per acre to apply and the
irrigation application rate prior to applying waste.
Prepared by
cam[ o
ame Title Date
JConcurred in by
Produc Date
{Copy 10 producer and copy w case Mel

ATTACIaIENT A
Sr' UTILIZATION
Table 2: ACRES WITH AGREEMENT OR LONG TERM LEASE
(Agreement with adjacent landowner must he attached)
(Required only if operator does not own
adequate land (see Required Specification 21)
Tract Field Soil Crop Lbs. N Acres Lbs. N Month of
# Type Per Ac.* Utilized Application
* See footnote for Table 1.
Totals from above Tables
Acres Lbs, N
Utilized
Table 1 . 417
Table 2
Total 1 42 ;t, e 3005nir,
Amount of N P oduced M26000
Surplus orcaaficit 'yf173
NOTE: The Waste' Utilization Plan must contain provisions for
periodic land application of sludge at agronomic rates. The
sludge will be nutrient rich and will require precautionary
measures to prevent over application of nutrients or other
elements.
3

u
ATT.kci-ME`TT A .
See attached map showing the fields to be used for the utilization
of waste water.
Application of Waste by irrigation
Field Soil Type Crop Application Application)
No. Rate(In/Hr) Amount(In.)I
Lacid
+
TRIS TABLE IS NOT NEEDED IF WASTE IS NOT BEING APPLIED BY IRRICATION, SOBER A SIMILAR TABLF. if= 8,
NE=XD FOR DRY LITTER OR SLURRY.
Your facility is designed for .r days of temporary storage and
the temporary storage must be removed on the average of once every
Ix MONTHS. In no instance should the volume of waste being
stored in your structure exceed Elevation Sec- Nor,:!'
Call the local Natural Resources Conservation Service (formerly
Soil Conservation Service) or Soil and Water Conservation District
office,after you receive the waste analysis report for assistance
in determining the amount per acre to apply and the proper
application rate prior to applying the waste.
4

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

ATTACHLNIENT "A"
rWASTE UTILIZAT.I.ON •PL-AN -,
REQUIRED SPECIFICATIONS
(ccw3cirmad)
7. Liquid waste shall be applied at rates not to exceed the
soil infiltration rate such that runoff does not occur
offsite or to surface waters and in a method which does
not cause drift from the site during application. No
ponding should occur in order to control conditions
conducive to odor or flies and provide uniformity of
application..
8. Animal waste shall not be applied to saturated soils,
during rainfall events, or when the surface is frozen.
9. Animal waste shall be applied on actively growing crops in
such a manner that no more than 20 to 25 percent of the
leaf area is covered431th s-dids, 0,4,YA,t zy-3-9-ys�
10. Waste nutrients shall not be applied in fall or winter for
spring planted crops on soils with a high potential for
Leaching. Waste nutrient loading rates on these soils
should be held to a minimum and a suitable winter cover
crop planted to take up released nutrients. Waste shall
not be applied more than 30 days prior to planting of the
.crop on bare soil.
11. Animal waste shall not be applied closer than 25 feet to
surface water. This distance may be reduced for waters
that are not perennial provided adequate vegetative filter
strips are present. (See Standard 393 - Filter Strips)
12. Animal waste shall not be applied closer than 100 feet to
wells.
13. Animal waste shall not be applied closer than 200 feet of
dwellings other than those owned by the landowner.
14. Waste shall be applied in a manner not to reach other
property and public right-of-ways.
15. Animal waste shall not be discharged into surface waters,
drainageways or wetlands by a discharge or by over -
spraying. Animal waste may be applied to prior converted
wetlands provided they have been approved as a land
application site by a "technical specialist". Animal
waste should not be applied on grassed waterways that
discharge directly into water courses, and only then at
agronomic rates provided the application causes no runoff
or drift from the site.
0

.,,:�y7A5TE UTILIZATION PLAN. �:
REQUIRED SPECIFICATIONS.
f[ondnued}
16. Domestic and industrial waste from washdown facilities,
showers, toilets, sinks, etc., shall not be discharged
into the animal waste management system.
17. Lagoons and other uncovered waste containment structures
must xnaintain a maximum operating level to provide
adequate storage for a 25-year, 24-hour storm event in
addition to the one (1) foot mandatory freeboard.
18. A protective cover of appropriate vegetation will be
established on all disturbed areas (lagoon embankments,
berms, pipe runs, etc.). If needed, special vegetation
shall be provided for these areas and shall be fenced, as
necessary, to protect the vegetation. Vegetation such as
trees, shrubs, and other woody species, etc. are limited
to areas where considered appropriate. Lagoon areas
should be kept mowed and accessible. Lagoon berms and
structures should be inspected regularly for evidence of
erosion, leakage, or discharge.
19. If animal production at the facility is to be suspended or
`.terminated, the owner is responsible for obtaining and
implementing a "closure plan" which will eliminate the
possibility of an illegal discharge, pollution and
erosion.
20. Waste handling structures, piping, pumps, reels, etc.,
should be inspected on a regular basis to prevent
breakdowns, leaks, and spills. A regular maintenance
checklist should be kept on site.
7

ATT kCIrUENT A
�,t.WASTE UTILIZATION=PLAN_ .-
WASTE UTILIZATION PLAN AGREEMENT
Name of Farm: RRI-P CAROM -WA fnm rg4sH-1I3
Owner/Manager Agreement
I (we) understand and will follow and implement the specification
and the operation and maintenance procedures established in the
approved animal waste utilization plan for the farm named above. I
(we) know that any expansion to the existing design capacity of the
waste treatment and storage system or construction of new
facilities will require a new certification to be submitted to the
Division of Environment Management (OEM) before the new animals are
stocked. I (we) also understand that there must be no discharge of
animal waste from this system to surface wasters of the state from
a storm event less severe than the 25--year, 24-hour storm. The
approved plan will be filed on --site at the farm office and at the
office of the local Soil and Water Conservation District and will
be available for review by OEM upon request.
Name of Fac:
(Please
print)
Signature:./
Name of Manager(If different from owner):
Signature: Date:
Name of Technical Specialist: (Please priatilzur- ,CoLk_'NL'20 d
Affiliation : _ 0622i:04 5 Lyc 0
Address (Agency):
Signature . Date:

ATTACKYIEVT A
ILIZATT:�: PLAN
:.:...: ..........
x
ANIMAL WASTE UTILIZATION AGREEMENT
(Aeeded *air It Addltlo8481 1804 hMM to be I4418ed, •!a.)
I, , hereby give
permission to apply animal waste from his Waste Uti ization System
on acres of my land for the duration of time shown below.
I understand that this waste contains nitrogen, phosphorous,
potassium, and other trace elements and when properly applied
should not harm my land or crops. I also understand that the use
of waste will"reduce my need for commercial fertilizer.
Adjacent Landowner:
Waste Producer:
Date:
Date:
Technical Representative: Date:
SWCD Representative:
Term of Agreement:
,19_ to
(Minlaum of Tan roars an Gast Sharad ;tens)
(See Required Specification No. 2.)
Date:
a a_
P1

ANI24AL WASTE 13I1 AGEH. NT PLAN CERTIFICATION FOR EXISTING FEEDLOTS
Please return the completed form to the Division of Environmental Management at
the addrean on the reverse aide of this form.
Name of farm (Ples1se print): I"
Mailing Address:
Phone No.: '
Count (of farm):44
Farm location: Latitude and Longitude: 41',jor'/7 �'.b (required). Also,
please attach a copy of a county road map with location identified.
Type of operation (swine, layer, dairy, etc.):
Design capacity (num)aer of animals) :AaDd__seW_ ' tar r_sN _
Average size of operation (12 month population avg.):
Average acreage needed for land application of waste (acres):
Technical Specialist Certification
As a technical specialist designated by the North Carolina Soil and Water
Conservation Commission pursuant to 15A NCAC 6F .0005, 1 certify that the
existing animal waste management system for the farm named above has an animal
waste management plan .that meets the operation and maintenance standards and
'specifications of the Division of Environmental Management and the USDA -Soil
Conservation Service and/or the North Carolina Soil and Water Conservation
Commission pursuant to 15A NCAC 2H.0217 and 15A IICAC..6F .0001-.0005. The
following elements and their corresponding minimum criteria have been verified
by me or other designated technical specialists and are included in the plan as
applicable: minimum separations (buffers); adequate quantity and amount of land
for waste utilization (or use of third party); access or ownership of proper
waste application equipment; schedule for timing of applications; application
rates; loading rates; and the control of the discharge of pollutants from
stormwater runoff events less severe than the 25-year, 24-hour storm.
Name of Technical Sp list (Pl ase Print): ' 942kJW4,A1
Affiliation (Agency): c.
Address : �Z- S. S .G Phone No.
Signature: Date:
q saaaaceaandtaaaa=aaaaa==aaa=aaaaaanaaee^a--==aa--a=a=-a.--aa-=cveeaaaa
owner/Hanager Agreement
I (we) understand the operation and maintenance procedures established in the
approved animal waste management plan for the farm named above and will implement
these procedures. I (we) know that any,expansion to the existing design capacity
of the waste treatment and storage system or construction of new facilities will
require a new certification to be submitted to the Division of Environmental
Management before the new animals are stocked. I (we) also understand that there
must be no discharge of animal waste from this system to surface waters of the
state either directly through a man-made conveyance or through runoff from a
storm event less severe than the 25--year, 24--hour storm. The approved plan will
be filed at the farm and at the office of the local Soil and Water Conservation
District.
Name of Land z (Pies Prin t
Signature: ^ Date:
Name of Hanager, if different ,from owner (Please print):
Signature: Date:_
Note: A change in land ownership requires notification or a new certification
(if the approved plan is changed) within 60 days of a title transfer.
DEM USE ONLY: ACEff

61a,e or ivcrm Carolina
Department of Environment,
Health and Natural Resources
Division of Environmental Management
James B. Hunt, Jr., Governor
Jonathan B. Howes, Secretary
A. Preston Howard, Jr., P.E., Director
_CERTIFICATION,._FOR EXISTINQ FEEDLOTsa
INSTRUCTIONS FOR CERTIFICATION OF APPROVED ANIMAL WASTE MANAGEMENT PLANS FOR
EXISTING ANIMAL WASTE MANAGEMENT SYSTEMS SERVING FEEDLOTS
In order to be deemed permitted by the Division of Environmental Management
(DEM), the owner of any existing animal waste management system constructed and
operational before January 1, 1994 which is designed to serve greater than or
equal to the animal populations listed below is required to submit a signed
certification form to DEM before JAnlary 1, _1998. Pasture operations are
exempt from the requirement to be certified.
100 head of cattle -
75 horses
250 swine
1,000 sheep
30,000 birds with a liquid waste system
The certification must be signed by the owner of the feedlot (and manager if
different from the owner) and by any technical specialist designated by the Soil
and Slater Conservation Commission pursuant to 15A NCAC 6F .0001- .0005. The
technical specialist must verify that all applicable operation and maintenance
standards and specifications can be met. Existing systems are not required to
meet design and construction standards and specifications. '
Although the actual number of animals on the facility may vary from time to time,
the design capacity of the waste handling system should be used to determine if
a farm'is subject to the certification requirement. For example, if the waste
system for a feedlot is designed to handle 300 hogs but the, average population
will be 200 hogs, then the waste management system requires a certification.
This certification is required by regulations governing animal waste management
systems adopted by the Environmental Management Commission (EMC) on December 10,
1992 (Title 15A NCAC 2H .0217).
On the reverse side of this page is the certification form which must be
submitted to OEM before January 1, 1998, Assistance in completing the form can
be obtained from one of the local agricultural agencies such as the Soil and
Water Conservation District, the USDA -Soil Conservation Service, or the N.C.
Cooperative Extension Service. The completed form should be sent to:
Department of Environment, Health and
Division of Environmental Management
Water Quality Section, Planning Branch
P.O. Box 29535
Raleigh, N.C. 27626-0535
Phone: 919-733-SO83
Form ID: ACE'XIST0194
Natural Resources
Steve W. Tedder, Chief
Water Quality Section
Date: DC-C'-_A N
P.O. Box 29535. Raleigh, North Carolina 27626-43535 Telephone [phone] FAX [phone]
An Equal opportunity Affirmative Action Employer 50% recycled/ I C% post -consumer paper

p.T
��Tf Ai
f� �I�P
5�1
V4'4-
oe
71,
'j

NC -CONS- i
-1-70
U.S. pE'ARTMIENT OF AGRICULTURE
SOIL CONSERVATION SERVICE
SOIL MAP LEGEND
Name Address Zq �.
`0tL5 ON THIS UNIT OF LAND ARE:
MAPSYMBOL I MAPPING UNIT
�11...J Cecil sandy loam slope - Le&end
19 Appling sandy loam
27 Durham sandy loam C - B-IE%
45 Cecil clay loam D - 16
38Y Louisburg loamy coarse sandy
100 Chswacle (mixed alluvial) soil y
I
VTEgPgETAINTERPRETATIONS OF SOILS
GROUPINGS
Ile
llle
Yl e
PASTURELAND SUITABILITY
Well drained upland Piedmont soil with moderate slope range, the
topsoil is composed of a sanly loam from 7 to 10 inches thick over
a red clay subsoil extending from 40 to 60 inches below the surface.
I
This soil is well suited to pastureland use. 11, 19, 27, 45s 38.
This soil is simular to the lle soil described above except that the
Inoreased slope also increases the ohances of erosion. This soil is
also suited to pastureland use, 11, 190 270 45p 380
Same soil as described above except that steep slopes result in
severe erosion limitations. Suited to paeturelande May be some dif«'
ficulty getting good fescue stand established. 27DIl
t

50
WARRENTON QUADRANGLE
NORTH CAROLINA— WARREN CO.
7.5 MINUTE SERIES (TOPOGRAPHIC 5°
155 12 250 000 FEET 156 15l 7$ °07'30'r
`i - 36° 30'
4043
it i"
rx>n 'S + . 4 . \ •� l((1\`1 �/�I Jam; - ' ./: \ j ! r °`�`
;-,;� `,� �_, , `'���`;:1✓r`a1 ��., r � �� _�� ''1 , �4 `� ,.
l,�\� Y�f m • 1000000
1?/��\ " FEET
4042
300
13��.. Nr to
011l' ,w
���`� .1r ��! `ti`',Illl,! i� $,, I' �,II+`+I, •I } � I I 1
4041
•i 'I 1
r } �
7e J
\ l 1 --�11a, I.rl,
r I' ,
4040
' $
Ge
a039
1 r '�!. 1 t I ;' � ,��i : ` I � J,• r i�' �r '..no
}[14 F"I �. !r r'' I `}/ �, .•} war ao dr7/�,' {:
vy
I I ,',I •
I + 1
j n J
l;i � ; !i
I 1

r%A

l', yr. r5 ;''�•• y M' �: r.l. ' •{'.,�F� ylj. �� ��1 r.
r.
° •7Lyl;l�'i - r`tirl. ♦i,�l. ;I•�l1, LtwKr y�ttij�se�..
�+ ( •�' � L •k i7j��i
r y�i'fuAkd a{}k4' •� r �+. {�, " t {p{p'f rtr Jffi 'f.�5
.�•'ii vfiir,y n � .t, �_11 rla,�.� p. 2.��s.
„w� ' �.�i � V4 -ii,� �J+ tis; �,+ s' �, a ^./ J3�� F•tr:
h
=?���� Lr': r t c7 . t, ja+fb.L r^y � i` � " +,7� !T •+br'r,
Y '1F� x' � ? y Styr• r Mr��yy�i {�•Tt !, k• (1 r y'' i+ � L _ •' "Gr I�. ' = t

WaL-o--il CuwkLy 18
R1=RD OF COUVERNIX)R'S LAXISICNS AND PROGIU;SS
IN APPLICATION
Tract 0 ;� �h'` '`
rXIC10
14o.
plaRVICd
Applied
Land Use and Treatment.
Alte; native Conservation SXstem
Ac.
Yr.
Ac.
Yr.
I
Treats fields Ile',' 1116, Ive, Vle
3-o..
1961
Grassland (512)
3.
'512 - Pasture and Hayland Planting'
Establish'and/or maintain perermal gras ses
'en6iose'd-
legumes -grass Mixture'. See .Iriiorrrrztion Sheet,
WAGING COOL SEASON FORAGE PLANTS, .NC-190-103,:'or' :
MANAGING HYBRID,BURMUDAGRASS', NC-190-108 for arlclitinn;;l
establishment and maintenance details.*
L11
(Ile"901-302101)
'(Ille-901-304001)'
'(IVe-901-307903)
�q.q
q .q
ute-901-.309903.)
IL fir! I
gy
/0
yao
A-11
p
• --------------------- compliance wit
4 jiln application and maintannnoo of mia iftlxNa practims is 'iequired" 90'r'
rtW4 1jet-.uvity Act of 3 D05 alld Wjo Vbod Agricultural Consorvation Trade AcL Of 1990.

NORTH CAROLINA DEPARTMENT OF
ENVIRONMENT AND NATURAL RESOURCES
RAL.EIGH REGIONAL OFFICE
�10;� 06).
--F,O : L'D (1k
DIVISION OF WATER QUALITY
GROUNDWATER SECTION
June 30, 1998
Mr. Martin Engel
North Carolina Farm Partnership
Rt. 1 Box 105
Norlina, North Carolina 27563
Subject: Well Construction Permit
No. WR 05000091
Warren County
Dear Mr. Engel :
In accordance with the application received on June 19, 1998 we are
forwarding herewith Well Construction Permit No. WR05000091 dated June 30,
1998 issued for the construction of a recovery well system.
This Permit will be effective from the date of its issuance and shall be
subject to the conditions and limitations as specified therein. Please note the
addition of stipulation #3 to the permit enclosed.
Sincerely,
Ke 4eSchuster, P.E.
0
Regional Supervisor
Raleigh Regional Office
KS:JWG
Enclosure
cc: Groundwater Files
Warren County Health Department
Bob Cheek
3800 BARRETT DRIVE, SUITE 101, RALEIaH, NORTH CAROLINA 27609
PHONE [phone] FAX D I D-571 -471 8
AN EQUAL OPPORTUNITY / AFFIRMATIVE ACTION EMPLOYER - 50% RECYCLED/10% POST -CONSUMER PAPER

NORTH CAROLINA
ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT COMMISSION
DEPARTMENT OF ENVIRONMENT AND NATURAL RESOURCES
RALEIGH, NORTH CAROLINA
PERMIT FOR THE CONSTRUCTION OF A WELL
In accordance with the provisions of Article 7, Chapter 87, North Carolina General Statutes, and other applicable Laws,
Rules and Regulations.
PERMISSION IS HEREBY GRANTED TO
North Carolina Farm Partnership
FOR THE CONSTRUCTION OF A RECOVERY WELL SYSTEM on property owned byMartin Engel and located at
S.R. 1311, Wise, North Carolina, Warren County. This permit is issued in accordance with the application received on June
19, 1998 and in conformity with specifications and supporting data, all of which are filed with the Department of Environment
and Natural Resources and are considered a part of this permit.
This Permit is for well construction only and does not waive any provision or requirement of any other applicable
law or regulation.
Construction of a well under this Permit shall be in compliance with the North Carolina Well Construction Regulations
and Standards (15A NCAC 2C .0108), other State and Local laws and regulations pertaining to recovery well construction.
This permit will be effective from the date of its issuance until June 30, 1999 and shall be subject to other specified
conditions, limitations, or exceptions as follows:
1. Issuance of this permit does not obligate reimbursement from state trust funds, if these wells are being
installed as part of an investigation for contamination from an underground storage tank.
2. Issuance of this permit does not supersede any other agreement, permit, or requirement.
3. In the event that additional recovery wells are to be constructed on the subject property, this permit shall be
valid for said well construction upon receipt of the following documentation:
a) Proof of notification to the appropriate property owner(s) stating intention to construct
additional wells, the number of wells to be constructed, and signatures by the property
owner(s) and subject applicant(s) or their agent(s).
b) Revised site map with information as required by the original well construction application.
c) Well construction diagram for additional wells with information as required by the original
well construction application.
Permit issued this the 30 th day of June 1998
FOR THE NORTH CAROLINA ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT COMMISSION
--9. 4.-f
Kenne Sc uster, P.E., Regional Supery or
Division of Water Quality
By Authority of the Environmental Management Commission
Permit No. WR05000091

L MR09 ' 62 22: 43 F. e2
APPLICAT3i N FM PZIMW TO QUNB tV' Ct A4 �
Date: i , 19 a l County
to EI=nj WIL'i to prOvWgrz Of A** 7. QhMPW W, General BMW= d MOM Calm &W FOPAatlOrm puns wi
t'se M, =Okl won is i amW MW9 ibr a permit W monit *9 weft.
,� 1
I Nmn� of A rtk ( 6lephone. - ')
ApprcrtYs LWrvV Addmevz 2S 6F
a,, rime of Prnpsrry owner (I ditferert tram awcant)-
ClmWs Al a&V Addrew:
3. COMM A(son- __H_I_
4. t:acation of Pam: _I!I2,� n �e- QC: Ica. : A ll , _L
s. NaeUn W Remyesy YvdKS):
(ex; Wmxhvd4 awdamrt=n mmuWaian.
Tyw -of Urrty or sibe for which a recovery wail its nomad: -
�- &T -. '
7. Type of ooar*20om drip mommred (it epp ): LIJ-9.4..._._.w�
F
S. Are arty emisrlrg rnar*x weals essodmd Mh Bw proposes recovery wetEcs?'�.P�'a Yam, how mom. ---
Wnitariirtg Well GmuMmSm Permit Ito.
S. Ohkw ce bo a kn wn waam or po@uftn source: � . _ fees
10. Are any water aWy welts beaded less mart 500 tram me proposed MMvery stalls? � Q
N N ym pure dietartoe• t ,
17.
1. TM Manber of Weir by be amstTucted, . w
No. ovmptered. in bedrock? .�. .. _.-...T._
No. ot9rr>p in UnWmdbAW SWWOM? ,rn�
2, d depM of twneti(s)_ . %►"• _ lair
._._. �ROUi+�nra1'� ti.mr st'Rr�s i
ACi'iVMES
_ NOTKOE or-rao RT
UNFqBwnFa NO ��1A
2A. lrs>frnMd ween instvW (Feet below Wnd su:fwe).s3,a .. W to
3. vvI ar &vW packs be a se4? q Q
}
GWQ2R (7Mti)
(Continued an M%*rae)
2 ; Wd90':2T Eb wrtr

� Icy
(mac WC. Sftlr%i= 61-38I, galvWMed SfDel.
txam r Of frig: inches _.
6. Ttroda ew of c2*19'.
B Esdm4wd pxvkv rate: ��.. GPM �
a. ESSnt&ded beginning wort date:
10. Saftaied Completion data:.
. (REOt.3IHED _ NEMM� TIQW
(APPUCATION CANNOT BE PROCESSED V1 M40UT THIS INFORMATICS
1. ATTACH A Sri>= MAP SFONNO THE LOCATIONS Cr- THE 11CILCAMN -1.
P19OPMED RECOVERY VVEL (S)
2 - ALL DQSnNG MONMORIAIG AND RI500VWY v*LLS CR 'TEST ` M VMH THE. PROPERTY
BOUNDARY
3 - ALL WATIER SUPPLY WELLS WITH N 5o FEET CP THE WASTE. SOURCES
4 - AT LEAV TYO RWEREt+10E FOIWS WABERW ROADS: KMPSECTXM �p ;I" Q)
2. PROVIDE A WELL O WS'rAUCT;Ot+t 6?tptGf AM OF EACH WELL. 5fOWttJG I7i+4AA -7r-.R E571h+ M DEPTH, Xar=E.hi ' INTERM S, SANDGRAVEL. PACKS, TYPE OF CASH MATERIAL. CASM WALLS TrMM , WELL .H CC3MPLS
TICK DETAILS, ETC.) i
i
The Appf► wg hereby agrees the propassd well(s) YA be c4nsh4d In a=ordance with .
Ppproved spe cEdltms and c onditiom of the Well Corsbudon Pem A as regutaM under the well
Co 'cm Standards (Tide 16A North Camfiina Administ a9ve Cot-, SUbduVtw 20) aW &=pts
full r �abk for w7ptnce witty fuse rules.
SigneWm of Applicant or Agent
Tile (it a *wile)
If " property is o wled by soy vone ct' than the applicant, the property awner: tleraeby
oonsents to allow the applicam tv 4m strucg recovery wells as- "fined in Us applicagon and that
it sha11 be tfte msponsibiffty of the applicant to ensure that these reavaq welts conform to tt WeR
C,oratrtiction Stands ale 15A North Carolina Admhsmm Code, SuftapWr 20)..
S7gnsAjre - of Properly Own (if oftrom f ern Qp*an`*)
6 * d

I M S N n N a A, I N n o D
n o
v I. N I !D s I

V I R G I N I A
B U R G a C O U N T Y B R
IAN
• f �»n
` � . i � �• �211 j.n � i II '.
II
c
,p, �4
�'"a' �' `i it L r� % 5' � ' w�"°""o" � �' a''•� 9.
Site Location
North GRAPHIC SCALE
SCALE: 1 inch = 2 mi. Site Location
Warren County, JL'J fo rth Caron � na
NC Farm Partnership
County Road htap
Figure 1: County Road Map
2

1
SiLe map
Daubht c ry Nlu-C,Ie -.S S �.
Warren Cou.ni i c
7-71
.mil•'`' �. �. -
1
4.:
: '•
.:.:.
3
1.
1
GRAPHIC
Figure 3 CPS Map
4

1]
0
Table 1: GPS Point Description Table
Point
Number
Latitude
Longitude
Description
3
36.4832497
78,2307814
1-85 and Oine Road Intersection
(Not Shown)
4
36,4918113
78.1570333
Main Lagoon Corner
5
36.4921904
78.1561589
Main Lagoon Corner
6
36.4926249
78.1559211
Monitoring Well in Bern
7
36.4925910
78.1559943
Monitoring Well in Berm
8
36.4927769
78.15568870
Recovery Ditch (Center)
9
36,4929647
78,15493910
Sample Point
10
36.4925909
78,15499660
Surface Water (Small intermittent
creek)
11
36.4929700
78.15599080
Lagoon Corner
12
36.4929531
78.15678650
Crossover pipe between two
lagoons.
13
36.4935315
78.1569010
Second lagoon corner (closest to
buildings)
14
36.4931605
78.157I2270
Second lagoon corner (closest to
main lagoon)
15
36.4939178
78.15677940
Second lagoon comer
16
36,4937568
78.15793270
Second lagoon corner
17
36.4922101
78.15758580
Main lagoon, corner
18
36.4931444
78.15754290
Outermost building corner
19
36.4910612
78.15724960
Outermost building corner

•
L.8—A
W1.1d
Rain Water Deive-
rsion Htrrii
— ' 7— --
The rain water diversion berm will
he a pproximate ly Z* in height.
eight. A
0' PVC pipe will be plotted through
the diver-doii berm to allow water to
flow from behind the berm U; the other
side of the recovery trench. This pipe
will be placed at the lamest point so
that no water will be reLain,od behind
the diversion berm.
NC
Warren
Recovery Wells
A,"-A-Aort 1"k--mi
Farm Part,nersfi.lj)
County, NorLh Cat-ohma
liquid b pumped from well
. t. th.
Pump
FI­
Ili
32-34 ft
Notes
Soil Added in 6" Compacted Lifts
Cross —Section View
Bieqovcj:y Dj(cjj
The recovery trench will vary in depth
to ensure that there is adequate slope
to predent SedifIlelit3ti011 in the pipe.
Width of dilull is clependent, on the
equipment Used.
R_ecoV_erY__W!0Ig
Titere will be a recovery wells with depths
approximately :12' deep. Each well will
have a dedicated pump on a level switch.
The wells will be spaced at approximately 25',
Rain AvElter Diversion Dike
'Poe -of -Slope
CrevCIJ
Recover v Ditch
[]rills 1.1L.
end In
then Pumped perlodtcally
Lack L. tte
2 - 3 W
Caution: Cave in protection must be irsed
during the rnnstritotion of the recovvrx,
ditch if workers intist go into the ditch.
TIII* `NC Farn-i PartnershlL)
tMi. _7
Mirre), County Site Plan
L__WG. -I
Warren Comity, NC
AV",i. t4C "3
R.iOlh.
e Aga k.,taol Lt
4010) en-R 4
EM]
wup

N C
Facility Map
Daughter Niicleus Site
Warren County, NC
Intercepter Del -eh SUMP
(Note: Not to Scale
pip,
Second
Lagoon Flow\ Pipe through diversion be
Lo the bDtLOM of the slope.
-,�
Crossover Pip
(To be
Flow Rain Water Diversion Berm
Additional Recovery Woll
Existing Recovery Wells
�Additional Recovery Well
U U III nFlow
MaLn Flow
Lagoon
U1 111111 ou 11 11[111111 111
-Interception Ditch
\Approximate Toe of Slope
Note: This drawings is mean. to show
a general concept of the components
GRAPHIC
of the proposed corrective action plan.
SCALE The location of the components will
determined mt willtned in the field tc best utilize
200 0 50 100 200 400 the existing grade and topography.
Le end (IN FEET)
Road/Highway 1 INCH = 200 FT.
Stream
Property Line
N
lid Production Building au. 1:
Lagoon Wind Rose
North Carolina Farm Paj,Lnei-slii
1:
N..n Pc"eQL of tim, Daughter Nucleus Site
imalroM Lho
jadicat.d c n. W
�.d i. bi
D-.0 Warren Countv. NC cu— � C--
C. -411 MC, I
-IN3
I +--. 11 . ALjL&jlllllllllllll Agn-Mast. TectwOogy, 1j..JU
Figure 5: Plan View of the Proposed Clizinges
8

to
.. ... ......
CD
N

BING'S WELL DRILLING, INC.
6032 US 1 Bypass South
Kittrell, NC 27544
PHONE (919) 430 - 7181
FAX COVER SHEET
TO. M r
COMPANY: lU C. D E N
FAX NUMBER: �� l q }
FROM:
-.� / - clja�u d e 4,
COMPANY: BING'S WELL DRILLING, INC
FAX NUMBER: 919 430 -1771
MESSAGE: 'Sei �
.0 '— � c.,
CA-'Ll
NUMBER OF PAGES INCLUDING COVER SHEET
4
a:
�4

Awr"
Agri-WasteTechnology, Inc.
700-108 Blue Ridge Road
Raleigh, North Carolina 2 7606
Phone: [phone]
Fax: [phone]
nn��1j�r t
�` 1J
JAN 51998 i
4
January 5, 1998
Mr. Kenneth Schuster, P.E.
Ms. Judy Garett
Ms. Terri Hollingsworth
North Carolina Department of Natural Resources
Raleigh Regional Office
3800 Barett Drive, Suite 101
Raleigh, NC 27609
RE: Proposed Corrective Action Plan for the Seepage Problem at the NC Farm
Partnership Facility in Warren County, NC (Facility #93-1)
Dear Sir or Madam:
The NC Farm Partnership's Warren County Daughter Nucleus site is a 1,000 sow farrow to
finish site. It is located east of Wise, NC on County Road 1311. The general location of the
site is marked on Figure 1, the County Road Map. The site property boundary, lagoons, and
production buildings are shown on Figure 2, the USGS topographical map. Figure 3 is a map
showing the location of GPS points that were taken by Agri -Waste Technology, Inc. on
December 17, 1997. A written description of each of the points follows this map (Table 1).
This letter describes the proposed solution for the seepage problem on the eastern side of the
main lagoon at the NC Farm Partnership's Warren County site. This corrective action plan
can be divided into three main sections: (1) Collect any liquid that has the potential to seep
from the lagoon and pump it back into the main lagoon, (2) Remove the crossover pipe
between the two lagoons and close the second smaller lagoon, and (3) Repair areas with
erosion and maintain the lagoon with vegetation/mowing, etc. This letter, along with the
attachments, will describe the proposed changes and repairs to the lagoon to end the seepage
problem and the violation of the "no -discharge permit".
"Concepts in Agricultural Byproduct Utilization"

a,
g _ �
V I R G I N I A
I
B U R G a C O U N i Y 8 R
t_ a `
-- •.:, c,�. ter^ _ -- 11 i '.�; � * � � i 5 ! 1 i
Ow. IM
}yam — r i _7 �., + �min1� n'� 'Y'e ��� _'��}• �� � ._
1 �11
I au` L56
P. Lia
a ah l y '.`Ilk
U —
114 j o his �. .I
} ..A .pg
S
Site Location
North GRAPHIC SCALE
L0 o as l.o 2,0 4.0 J"�' y•.
`u
SCALE: 1 Inch _ 2 mi, Site Location
Warren County, Nforth Carofina
NC Farm Partnership
County Road ,Map
Figure 1: County Road Map
2

NC Farm PclratnershL�
Site Ma
Dau��hLe_� Nuefeus Site
Warren County, IBC
1
Sto-te �'
0*11
�6 �♦ I f9
A
%NMM
!
0
4%46�
GRAPHIC SCALE
400 0 200 400 800 1600
Legend
(IN FEET)
--- Road/Highway 1 INCH = 800 FT.
— •— — Stream
Property Line
�J Application Field N
® Production Building Wind Rose rss
North Carolina Farm Partnership
n , :;
® ueen . bi—1 o! time ia�
rind lA bl0n! from the
Lagoon indlcaud direction. W E
n Daughter Nucleus Site
•r.: 1/z�sx 9c.le:
onRinN _-
oer. rr.m A.ueou Qe M, 0— cents:
cae«red ,< 1r�n Hc.
urwn: sce,-I
—
Warren Count NC ae n,,on r-. A0o
Y ---
lA CPS Point
ore.m by
AVffAgri-i/eete Pechne . [r lac x, �,
706-108 Blue R-too Road Reseed by.
Raleigh. RC 27906
(919) M9_0014 prelnnq Numbs,
©® FAX (9iel M-1bul
NCFF'—SM2
Figure 3: GPS Map

Table 1: GPS Point Description Table
Point
Number
Latitude
Longitude
Description
3
36.4832497
78.2307814
I-85 and Oine Road Intersection
(Not Shown)
4
36.49181 13
78.1570333
Main Lagoon Corner
5
36,4921904
78.1561589
Main Lagoon Corner
6
36.4926249
78.1559211
Monitoring Well in Berm
7
36,4925910
78,1559943
Monitoring Well in Berm
8
36.4927769
78.15568870
Recovery Ditch (Center)
9
36.4929647
78.15493910
Sample Point
10
36.4925909
78.15499660
Surface Water (Small intermittent
creek)
11
36.4929700
78.15599080
Lagoon Corner
12
36.4929531
78.15678650
Crossover pipe between two
lagoons.
13
36.4935315
78.1569010
Second lagoon comer (closest to
buildings)
14
36.4931605
78.15712270
Second lagoon comer (closest to
main lagoon)
15
36.4939178
78.15677940
Second lagoon comer
I6
36.4937568
78.15793270
Second lagoon corner
17
36.4922101
78.15758580
Main lagoon comer
18
36.4931444
78.15754290
Outermost building comer
19
36.4910612
78.15724960
Outermost building comer

1.0 Lagoon Seepage Collection System
All potential seeping lagoon liquid will be collected at one of two points; the recovery wells
and the recovery ditch. These can be seen on Figures 4 and 5 which show a cross-section
and a plan view of the proposed changes to the Warren County site's waste system,
respectively.
,Eirst,_there_are_two"observation holes"in the_notth sae tern corner_of the_main_lagoon. These
two"observation holes"will=be converted_to-recovery_wells_and_two_additional wells will=b'e
installed�to the north -and south=of the e�cisting rvells_as_sho own g1le
_schematic ' CPFMl". Currentlythese"observation holes"_are_32-34_feet_dee additional wells will be
of similar depth. The purpose of these wells will be to reduce the level of the saturation zone
in the lagoon berm during wet conditions. This will help ensure that the saturation zone
remains below ground level and can be collected in the recovery ditch. Each well will have a
dedicated pump that will be controlled by a float switch.
The second point where liquid will be collected will be the recovery ditch which will be
constructed at the locations shown on the drawing "NCFP-FM1". The recovery ditch will be
constructed approximately 10-15 feet downslope from the toe of the slope of the berm. Once
liquid enters the recovery ditch, it will flow down the line to a concrete sump. Liquid from
the sump will be pumped back into the main lagoon. The pump will utilize a float control
which automatically turns the pump on and off according to the level in the sump. Because
of the local topography, it may be necessary to have two sumps for the recovery ditches to
drain into.
Prior to the excavation of the recovery ditch, the vegetation and top 6-8 inches of soil along
the bottom 5' of the outside slope should be removed (See drawing "NCFPCAPS").
Additionally, the top 6-8 inches of the area which is 30' downslope from the toe -of -the -slope
of the berm should be removed. This disturbed area will then need to be scarified and
compacted using a sheepsfoot roller. Soil will then be added in compacted lifts of 6" (prior
to compaction - 9" thick). The added soil should be compacted to 95% of the Maximum Dry
Density (MDD) at +/- 2% of Optimum Moisture Content (OMC). A small berm will be
created on top of the added soil and upslope from the recovery ditch so that any precipitation
will be diverted away from the ditch. A PVC pipe will be installed through the diversion
berm which empties downslope of the recovery ditch. This pipe will be positioned so that
rain water will not be allowed to pool behind the diversion berm. The schematic
"NCFPCAPS" shows the ditch and the added soil in relation to the existing berm and slope.
Please note, it may be necessary to clear additional areas of vegetation and soil to
accommodate the natural grade beyond the toe of the slope.
The recovery ditch will be constructed as shown in the schematic, "NCFPCAPS". The ditch
will be excavated with a back -hoe or trenching equipment and will be sloped towards the
concrete sump in order to ensure adequate flow. A 6" perforated drainage pipe will be placed
in the bottom of the ditch and will be sloped toward the concrete sump.
1.1

Liquid
Stchema he of
NC
Warren
the Cor°rech.ve A,,--tioti Pk-A.n
Farm Partnership
County, North Carolina
Recovery Wells
liquid 13 pumped from well
back info the lagoon,
Pump
Flow /
32-34 U.
Soil Added in 6' Compacted Lifts
Cross —Section View
Notes _
-
Recovery Dilc
Rain Water Deiv-ersion Berm
The recovery trench will vary in depth
The rain water diversion berm will
to ensure that there is adequate slope
be approximately 2' in height. A
to prevent sedimentation in the pipe.
6' PVC pipe will be placed through
Width of ditch is dependent on the
the diversion berm to allow water to
equipment used.
flow from behind the berm to the other
Recovery Wells
side of the recovery trench. This pipe
There will be 3 recovery wells with depths
will be placed at the lowest point so
approximately 32' deep. Each well will
that no hater will be retained behind
have a dedicated pump on a level switch.
the diversion berm.
The wells will be spaced at approximately 25'.
Rain Water Diversion Dike
Toe -of -Slope
rca.dJ
Recovery Ditch
Dra s into cancretc basin
and le Lheu pumped periodically
back La the layoan.
s
Caution: Cave in protection must be used
during the construction of the recovery
ditch if workers must go into the ditch.

NC F-arm _P ,-_-irtner
Facility Map
Daugh.t.er Nucleus Site
WC-r,en Co-��n NC Ar
j
Intercepter Ditch Sump
(Nol-e: Not 1.o Sceilc)
Pipe
Second
\
Lagoon
.Pipe
Flow Pipe through diversion b� rm
\
the bottom of the slope.
Crossover Pipes
f
i(To be reinovedJ \''
l
�r
-_-•'""
Flow Rain water Diversion Berm
i
Additional Recovery Well
Existing Recover% Wells
Additional Recovery Well
•
4 QFtow
Main
Flow
Lagoon
Interception Ditch
\ Approximate Toe Slope
of e P
Note: This drawings is meant to show
a general concept of the components
GRAPHIC SCALE
of the proposed corrective action plan.
The exact location of the components will
be determined in the field to best utilize
200 0 50 too 200
400 the existing grade and topography.
Le end
(IN FEET)
Road/Highway 1 INCH = 200 FT.
Stream
Property Line
N
4tC®® Production Building
Wind Rose
nu. i —
North Carolina Farm Partnership
Lagaan
A(eea parceat of time So-.
Ej
Daughter Nucleus Site
wind in blowtng from the $X
5V
in Jieeted direcnan.!))
• a, 1�•,� Ye•leo
E e
a.. l..• . �s.., Cus•�• a+.
/
cWOe
4Yarren County, NC
.�Ifp'a
tl' S➢G.1-19YJ.
urs.a ny�
AV Agri—Va➢te re, Rldg' R fn�� %. L"we e! ,ch_
roe- ol.. Rldge Rosa
ge Sib
Relel h, NC 27e08
I,,
(➢Ip) e2➢-➢61Or —, NuP1Eer:
NCFP-Ful
Figure 5: Plan View of the Proposed Changes

The ditch will then be backfilled with gravel. Care will be taken to ensure that the gravel
does not crush or otherwise damage the perforated pipe during installation.
The disturbed areas will be seeded with an appropriate type of vegetation. if it is necessary,
the area will also be fertilized and limed to ensure a good stand of grass.
2.0 Closing the Smaller Lagoon
The crossover pipe between the main lagoon and the lagoon to the north should be removed
and the berm should be repaired at this location. The berm will be repaired by adding soil in
6" lifts and compacting with a sheepsfoot roller. The lifts should be compacted to 95% of the
Maximum Dry Density (MDD) at +1- 2% Optimum Moisture Content (OMC).
The second, smaller lagoon will then be closed by land applying all lagoon liquid and sludge.
Liquid and sludge samples will be taken from this lagoon to determine the nutrient content.
After the nutrient content is established, the liquid and sludge will be applied at proper
agronomic rates as determined by the crop grown and MRCS Standards 590 and 633. The
empty lagoon will then either be filled with soil or a principal and an emergency spillway
will be added as per NRCS Conservation Practice Standard 378. The area will then be re -
vegetated in accordance with MRCS Technical Guide Standard 342.
3.0 General Repairs and Maintenance
The following repairs will be made to the main lagoon to prevent erosion and increase the
stability of the structure:
1. The small gullies and rills on the back slope of berm will be filled with clay and
compacted using a sheepsfoot roller. Appropriate seeding will be used to ensure that
adequate vegetation will be established.
2. Repair all erosion damage to the berm at the inflow pipes from the barns. This
will be done by compacting clay in 6" lifts with a sheepsfoot roller. The lifts should be
compacted so that they are at 95% Maximum Dry Density (MDD) at +1- 2% Optimum
Moisture Content (OMC). An erosion control mechanism will be constructed to ensure that
the inflow pipes do not erode the banks further. Figures 6 and 7 show options that will
protect the berm of the lagoon from erosion caused by the inflow pipes.
3. All trees and brush will be removed from the lagoon berms and the berms will be
re -seeded using an appropriate grass type.
4. The lagoon berms will be mowed regularly and inspected weekly for erosion and to
prevent brush and trees from growing on the lagoon berms.
5. All pumps and piping will be inspected every 2 weeks to ensure that they are in
proper repair.
0

I Top of 13
Cross Section A —A
6.00'
Rip —rap —
6.0" Inflow Pipe 120'
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
000000000000000 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Non —woven
Geotextile
10,
/Z � A — Inflow\ Pipe
cow � V
NoLe:
Inflow Pipe constructed by cutting
10 foot long slots in the top of the
pipe. The slot should be a 120° are
as shown in Section A —A. The slots $
should be separated by 6" long uncut
Sections as shown in Section B—B,
Non —woven
Geotextile
i'
Clevai.ion View
2.0"
6.0"
NC Farm pa f- tr ership
Inflow Pipe Protection
Warren Courity, \C
Cross Section B—B ..
6.00,
Rip —rap
0-0-0`0'0'0`0-ON
040°0°0°0°0°0°0
Non —woven
Geotextile
Inflow Pipe `\

Top of Berm
Minimum Inflow P
slope = 0.3 7.
NC Farm Partnership
DN Site
Rip -Rap Inlet Protection Details
(Revised 1/03/98)
A
g" -12'' dia. Rip -rap
HDPE secured by burial
Pipe protr des through HDPE
sealed w/ caulk.
Cross Section
g'-!2' die. Rip -Rap
Lagoon Floor
d
Ulgoon Floor
Detail of
Cross Section a- a
aFcgwvalent
Inlet Channel Construction Notes:
1. Inlet channel is constructed by forming
2' high compacted earthen berms 5.7'
apart along the slope of the lagoon
and draping a 22' wide roll of 30 mil
HDPE over the berms. The HDPE is then
secured by 8"-12" diameter Rip -rap on
the outside slopes of the earthen berms
and the edges of the HDPE are buried.
2. Inlet channel (sluice trench) is lined
with 30 mil HDPE material. Rip -rap
is used to secure the HDPE material.
The edges of the HDPE are buried.
The HDPE material lining the inside
of the inlet channel is exposed from
the inlet pipe to the last 5' of the
channel in the lagoon floor.

0
None of the work outlined in -this plan will begin until we have written approval from DENR
Once an acceptable plan is in place, we will contact your office to let you know when the
work is scheduled to begin. This will allow your office to inspect the construction if this is
desired.
Thank you for allowing the extension for this corrective action plan. If you have any
questions about this plan, please contact either me or Hal Langenbach at [phone].
CC: Mr. Martin Engel
PICNC6
12
Sincerely,
OV jqn/. jqt�4' 'J�- (9)
L. M. Safley, Jr., Ph. D., P.E.
President

,State.of:North,Carolina
::Department of Environment
and Natural ;Resources
-- Rale>igh"Regional Office
James B. Hunt, Jr., Governor
Wayne McDevitt, Secretary
CERTIFIED MAIL
RETURN RECEIPT REQUESTED
Mr. Martin Engel
Route 1 Box 105
Nolina, North Carolina 27563
Ao.
fflAM
RCDENR
t4caTH C^,Rouw► rDBP""miE T op
epwiRoPIr eNT Arlo NArvRAL Rmsounc"
DIVISION OF WATER QUALITY
November 26, 1997
Subject: Notice of Violation
Facility # 93-1
NC Farm Partnership
Warren County
Dear Mr. Engel:
On September 16, 1997, Terri Hollingsworth from the Raleigh Regional Office conducted a compliance
inspection of the subject animal facility. This inspection is part of the Division's efforts to determine compliance
with the State's animal waste nondischarge rules.
The inspection and laboratory analyses indicate that your swine waste lagoon #1 is experiencing waste -
contaminated seepage on the backside. I understand that you have consulted a professional engineer and met with
the groundwater staff of DWQ concerning a plan to correct this problem and dctennine possible groundwater
contamination. Please be aware that the seepage constituents an illegal discharge of wastewater which is a
violation of your pernvt AWS 930001 and subject to civil penalties of up to $10,000 per day, per violation. The
DWQ is, at this time, withholding a recommendation for the assessment of civil penalties pending the approval
of the remediation plan and detennination of the extent of contamination. Please respond in writing to this office,
within 14 days of receipt of this letter, outlining your specific plans to correct the seepage problem.
In addition, the inspection has determined that waste lagoon #2 also requires maintenance and improvement. The
lagoon should be cleared of overgrowth and appropriately vegetated to allow for regular inspections to ensure
the integrity of the structure.
The Raleigh Regional Office appreciates your cooperation in this matter. If you have any questions regarding
this inspection please call Terri Hollingsworth at [phone].
Sincerely�
Kenneth Schuster, P.E.
Regional Supervisor
cc: Warren County Health Department
David Little, Warren Soil and Water Conservation District
Margaret O'Keefe, DSWC-RRO
DWQ Compliance Group
RRO Files
3800 Barrett Drive, Suite 101, Raleigh, NC 27609 Telephone [phone] FAX [phone]
An Equal Opportunity Affirmative Action Employer 50% recycled110% post -consumer paper

State of North Carolina
Department of Environment
and Natural Resources
Division of Water Quality
James B. Hunt, Jr., Governor
Wayne McDevitt, Secretary
A. Preston Howard, Jr., P.E., Director
Martin Engel
NC Farm Partnership
Rt. 1, Box 105
Norlina, NC 27563
Dear Mr. Engel;
1 � •
NCDENR
NORTH CAROLINA DEPARTMENT OF
ENVIRONMENT AND NATURAL RESOURCES
August 5, 1998
Subject: Facility Number 93-01
NC Farm Partnership
Proposed Corrective Action Plan
The Division of Water Quality (Division) has received a Proposed Corrective Action Plan
submitted for the above reference facility. The Division has some concerns about the stability of
the lagoon embankments because of the identified seepage. Please have a professional engineer
evaluate the current lagoon stability, as well as the effect the corrective action plan will have on
the stability and submit a report to the Division. Once this information is received, the Division
will review it with the previously submitted Corrective Action Plan.
If you have any questions or concerns don't hesitate to contact me at 919-733-5083 extension
502.
Si erely,
Sue Homewood
Cc: Raleigh Regional Office, Water Quality Section
Permit File
P.O. Box 29535, Raleigh, North Carolina 27626-0535 Telephone [phone] Fax [phone]
An Equal Opportunity Affirmative Action Employer 50% recycled110% post -consumer paper

` RALEIGH REGIONAL OFFICE
3800 Barrett Drive, Suite 101
NCDE14R Roleigh, NC 27(509
"M Phone: "/57f-4700 FAX "/571-4718
oftwmmmw &W mffum . Feet
FACSIMILE
You should be receiving _.� pages (including cover sheet).
If you do not receive all pages, please contact sender at 919/5714700.
T0:.Su e FROM: .
ORGANIZATION: 06-t) C� SUBJECT: e V6— r-, g-,n—
FAX NUMBER: 9 - '7 33 - 9 Ll DATE: 9 Z ZZ-
AMSSAGE:
1�7-h f1A
i4//
6"y
�9 r L1 L25-)' W a e -/ !J b6 d --e
01,7
—�

r State of North Carolina
w Department of Environment and Natural Re9OU2"8 LL
$,sleigh Regional Office
DIVISION OF LAND RESOURCES
Wayne McDevitt, 5acrezasy
mimes B. Hint, Jr., GonKrnrrr July 9, 19 9 8
N.C. Farm
RT 1, Box 125-C
Warrenton, NC 27589
Attn: Martin Engel
RE: NC Farm Lagoon
Warren County
WARRE-002-L
Dear Mr. Engel:
An inspection of the subject low hazard dam located SR 1300
was performed on June 2, 1998 pursuant to the North Carolina Dam
Safety Law of 1967.
The Dam Safety Law of 1967 provides for the certification and
inspection of dams, in the interest of public health, safety, and
welfare, in order to prevent injuries to persons: damage to
property: and to ensure the maintenance of stream flows.
According to the above mentioned visual .inspection, the dam
appears to be in a stable condition at this time.
Although no specific problems were observed, we recommend the
following items pertinent to maintenance and operation of all dams:
(1) Maintain a ground cover sufficient to restrain
accelerated erosion on all earthen portions of the
structure. This -will enhance the stability of the
structure, should these portions become exposed to
overflow or other forms of concentrated flow.
(2) Remove all thick undergrowth from the slopes and crest of
the dam. This will serve to (A) prevent the formation of
an root -system which could ultimately result in failure
of the structure, (B) reduce the possibility of damage to
the dam due to the uprooting of trees by wind or other
natural causes, and 0 facilitate the inspection and
W°bamtg y(9 #)5609
714700 • PAX (939>57] 18
�,
Y ZqW openwoft Affimatkft Aetfa K&Ph"r
W%+ leb r 19% P", "Wooer /MM+

,e 2
mr. Engel
July 91 1998
increase the likelihood of early detection of more
serious problems connected with the dam.
r (3) Periodically monitor the dam and appurtenant works with
respect to elements affecting their safety. This is in
light of the legal duties, obligations, and liabilities
arising from the ownership and/or operation of a dam.
Although the inspections by our staff are relatively
infrequent and offer no safety guarantees, we hope you will use the
information provided in this letter as you fulfill your obligation
to safely maintain and operate your dam. In order to help us keep
our records up• -to -date and therefore serve you better, please
notify us concerning any changes in address or ownership. Your
cooperation in this effort is greatly appreciated.
If there are any questions or if we can be of any assistance,
please do not hesitate to contact us.
Sincerely,
Ahmad Al-Sharawneh
Environmental Technician
Land Quality Section
Raleigh Regional Office
cc: Mr. Jim Leumas, P.E.
AA

r
ws
0 14�
Agri -Waste Technology, Inc.
700-108 Blue Ridge Road
Raleigh, North Carolina 27606
Phone: [phone]
Fax: [phone]
January 16, 1998
Ms. Terri Hollingsworth
Mr. Buster Towell
N.C. Department of Natural Resources
Raleigh Regional Office
3800 Barett Drive, Suite 101
Raleigh, NC 27609
RE: Additional information regarding samples taken at the NC Farm Partnership Facility in
Warren County, NC (Facility #93-1).
Dear Ms. Hollingsworth and Mr. Towell:
This letter is a response to the additional information request that you had regarding the
samples taken at the North Carolina Farm Partnership swine facility in Warren County, NC.
The following information will be provided in this letter:
1. A description of each of the sample locations. Both a written description and a
sample point location map are provided.
2. The "as -constructed" capacity of the lagoon. A spreadsheet which shows the
volume of the lagoon at various depths is included. Mr. Martin Engel provided
AWT with all dimensions used in the volume calculation.
3. Records from the installation and sampling of the "observation holes". A letter
from GMA is included as well as hand written records of boring logs from the
installation of the two observation holes on the top of the berm.
1.0 Sam le Locations
There were 5 samples taken on the northeast side of the main lagoon at this facility. The
drawing, "NCFP-SAM" shows the five sample points as they relate to the lagoon and
buildings at the facility. The first two sample points, "MW 1" and "MW2" are two
"observation holes" located at the top of the berm on the northeast side of the lagoon.
"MW 1" is the southern -most "observation holes" while "MW2" is located approximately 25'
to the north of the first "observation hole". The next sample, "PIT", was taken from the
"Concepts in Agricultural Byproduct Utilization"

Sample Loca h.o n kl,�t
Dauo-hte.r Nucleus
Warren County, NC
GRAPHIC
SCALE
200 0 50 100
200 400
i
Legend 7
(IN FEET)
Road/Highway
1 INCH =
200 FT.
Stream
property Line
N
MCCUM
Production Building
�sr.
Lagoon
Wind Rose
Me m percent o! Lima
for.
Mud Is Mowing from the
indicated direction. W
Oat. Irem N.flen.! M..d. n.0 C..Iar'
E
Carp— Ias4-lac
urpors:
\
S
nple Point 5-1
e Point 2 \ti
�Samole Point 4
\Sample Point 3
le Point l
amp a Point Location of Sample Description
1
Southern boat -ahaervetian hole" im harm. ("61W1')l
2
North.- mod "ahae—tin. hole" in heron. CMWZ'l
3
Recovery Ditah (-Pi1)
4
9empie take. from seepage area. ('Spri nq')
5
Tamporary "observation ho;c' ('TW't')
In- I:
North Carolina Farm Partner'shi
Daughter Nucleus Site
x ..on I 2/ae �a�le
Warren County. NC OR- ' -� --
Y Re•�_ 1 ' -
Drawn br:
p4r1-Mesta Technology, inn
700- IOB Di ,I Ridge Rand x..sd r.y.,
©®® Raleigh, NL 018
(919)N28-.-7 oren+na number
PAX (01a) SZO-1507 NCF'P-3,i,1
Fi¢ure l: Sample Collection Points Mao for the North Curolina Form Partnership Fncilitv

trench near the toe -of -the -slope of the lagoon berm on the northeast corner. The fourth
sample was taken east of the trench where a small amount of surface water was encountered.
This sample was identified as "Spring". Finally, the last sample was taken from a temporary
"observation hole" installed further to the east and is identified as "TW I". GPS points were
taken at all but one of the sample locations to help locate them on a map. The sample point
"Spring" was not established by GPS and was placed on the.map as an approximation from
the sample point "Pit" and the sample point "TW 1 ".
There was an attempt to install two other temporary "observation holes" in this area.
However all other places where borings were attempted ended when hand -auger refusal
occurred between 4 to 7 feet and no water was encountered (See GMA letter from January 8,
1998 in Attachment 1). The location of each of these attempted borings is marked on the
map that is included with the letter from GMA.
2.0 "As -Constructed" Volume of the Main Lagoon
Agri -Waste Technology, Inc. has calculated the volume of the main lagoon based on
measurements provided by Mr. Martin Engel. The lagoon dimensions that Mr. Engel
provided are shown on the drawing, "NCFP-LD 1 ". Using these dimensions, the capacity of
the lagoon at various liquid depths was calculated. These volumes are shown on Spreadsheet
1. The volume at the top of the berm is 1,936,707 ft3 (44.46 ac-ft).
According to Mr. Engel, the maximum berm height, as measured from the toe -of -the -slope to
the top of the berm is approximately 32.3 feet.
3.0 "Observation Hole" Installation Records
The boring logs from the "observation holes" that were installed by Bings Well Drilling at the
top of the berm on the eastern side of the lagoon are enclosed as Attachment 2. These logs
show clay overlying bedrock at a depth of 32-34 feet from the top of the berm. The
saturation zone ranged from 22-32 feet for "NMI" and 24-34 feet for "MW2" (as measured
from the top of the berm).
If you need any additional information or have questions regarding this facility please contact
Agri -Waste Technology, Inc. at [phone].
Sin cerely,
L. M. Safley, Ph. D., P.E.
President
3

NC Farm Pats t, r.i. e r sh1j) �.
Lagoon DI.m.e n_-_-, Io Tn. Sc Sze rn(--9 t.i.c
Wair-ren Courit.y, North Carokria
Notes:
1. All dimensions provided by Mr. Mai -tin Engel.
Dimensions shown are at the top —inside —berm.
3. Average side slope 2.5:1.
4. Total lagoon depth is 17.0'.
5. Highest total berm height is 32.3' (toe of
sloe to top of berm.
Figure 4: NC Farm Partnership Main Lagoon Dimensions
4

OM
Ln
�-1
(D
w
a
[D
(D
C
[D
5
A�
{aq
C
d
P
[D
C/1
K
1p
A�
Ln
0
O
0
z
b
b
5,
r
a
0
0
Lagoon Volume
Determination
Lagoon Name:
PIC-NC DN Site (ENGEL)
Remaining
Storage
Feet of
Lagoon Liquid
Storage
Cubic Feet
Gallons
Depth (ft)
(Pumpdown)
of Storage
of Storage
17.00
.00
.00
.00
16.00
1.00
141,945.19
1,061,750.04
15.00
2.00
280,136.18
2,095,418.64
14.00
3.00
414,623.51
3,101,283.87
13.00
4.00
545,457.25
4,080,020.20
12.00
5.00
672,687.77
5,031,704.52
11.00
6.00
796,365.37
5,956,012.96
10.00
7.00
916,540.26
6,855,721.16
9.00
8.00
1,033,262.89
7,728,806.40
8.00
9.00
1,146,583.39
8,576,443.73
7.00
10.00
1,256,552.11
9,399,009.78
6.00
11.00
1,363,219.30
10,196,880.39
5.00
12.00
1,466,635.34
10,970,432.34
4.00
13.00
1,566,850.43
11,720,041.25
3.00
14.00
1,663,914.92
12,446,063.60
2.00
15.00
1,757,879.03
13,148,935.16
1.00
16.00
1,848,793.11
13,828,972.45
.00
17.00
1,936,707.42
14,486,571.47
Volume
Acre -in
of Storage
Percent of
Total Volume
Cubic Feet
in Lagoon
Gallons
in Lagoon
Acre -in.
in Lagoon
Percent of
Total Volume
.00
.00
1,936,707
14,486,571
533.56
1.00
39.11
.07
1,794,762
13,424,821
494.45
.93
77.18
.14
1,656,571
12,391,153
456.38
_B6
114.23
.21
1,522,084
11,385,1BB
419.33
_79
150.27
.28
1,391,250
10,406,551
383.29
.72
185.32
.35
1,264,020
9,454,667
348.24
.65
219.40
.41
1,140,342
8,529,759
314.16
.59
252.51
.47
1,020,167
7,630,850
281.05
.53
284.66
.53
903,445
6,757,765
248.90
.47
315.88
.59
790,124
5,910,128
217.68
.41
346.18
.65
680,155
5,087,562
187.38
.35
375.56
.70
573,488
4,289,691
157.99
.30
404.06
.76
470,072
3,516,139
129.50
.24
431.66
.Sl
369,857
2,766,530
101.89
.19
458.41
.86
272,792
2,040,408
75.15
.14
4B4.29
.91
178,820
1,337,636
49.27
.09
509.34
.95
87,914
657,599
24.22
_05
533.56
1.00
0
0
.00
.00

CONSUL,TLNG SCLENUSTS AND ENGIMURS
January 8, 1998
Mr. Martin Engel
North Carolina Farm Parmership
Route 1, Box 105
Norlina, North Carolina 27563
RE: Site Work
North Carolina Farm Partnership
Daughter Nucleus Site ' "
Warren County
Dear Mr. Engel:
101-E Woodwinds industrial Couri
Cary, North Carolina 27511
Telephone: 919.481,2631
.Cox: 919.481,3219
222-C Cotanche Street
Greenville, North Carolina 27858
Telephone: 919.75 8.3 310
Fax-. 919.758.88835
All Onglnee•ing is performed Amtigh rho Cary cirM
GMA visited your Warren County site on Secondary Road 1305 on November 20, 1997,
to install temporary monitoring wells and to sample the temporary wells for nitrates and
fecal coliform. One temporary well was installed (Figure 1). Well TW1 (which
correlates to your GPS point 9) was installed east of the toe of the main lagoon. The
well was installed to a depth of 7.5 feet. The soil at well TWl was describers as a brown
fine sand to a depth of 3.5 feet followed by a white -yellow coarse to medium sand to a
depth of 7.5 feet. Hand -auger refusal occurred at a depth of 7.5 feet. Well TW 1 was
screened from 3.5 to 7.5 feet with 2" PVC and completed with a 2" PVC riser.
Groundwater was estimated to be within 3 feet of land surface at this location.
Several additional soil borings were performed in order to attempt to install two more
temporary wells (Figure 1). Hand -auger refusal occurred at these borings at depths
ranging from 4 to 7 feet from land surface. No water entered these boreholes.
During this visit at your request, GMA collected groundwater samples from existing
monitoring wells MWl and MW2, the temporary collection trench at the toe of the
lagoon, and from a shallow boring at the head of a spring downgradient from the
collection trench. All water samples were analyzed for nitrates and fecal coliform.
Analytical results are attached.
Providing Expert Guidance on the Use, Resrororion, Protection, and Monogament of Our Water Resources
Hydrogeologists • Geologism - Civil Engineers • Environmental Engineers • Regulatory specialism

Please call if you have any questions.
Sincerely yours,
GAGA,
Chad Leinbach, P.G.
H[ydrogeologist
enclosures

F�
a
i • a f • r 1 1 •
.a a it r 1 1 r r � • t f ! 1 1 1
a � s ! • i a I � Q • 0 � i !
� f 1 I / r � A • � � • 1 1 1
0 a 1 r y 1 r f r • �e •
1 f 1 1 i • 1 tt • � • *II 1 � 1 i
a • v a � a • • l 1 i 1 � r
/ 1 V I ♦ 1 r A r / ( 1 /
[ a 4 1 t 1 a
r:• 1 t► 1 r r j
• ♦ � 1 Al
1 • r
� ' •�" !a 1{ � � I a �l
e7— x r^ o a
s 1
• 4
r 9 1 a a y
• / 1 f 1 1 • f
r � � Y • f � 0 ti � +1
/ i f 4 1 � 1 1 • t 1
�a [ a . a C0 4 a t
1 r � v a o a r �• al ti
r Y a? / r 9 ♦ P �

CHEMICAL & ENVIRONMENTAL TECHNOLOGY, Ifs'.
ENVIRONMENTAL ANALM AL SERVICES
FINAL REPORT OF AkrLYSES
DROLMDWATBR MANAGENHUT ASSOC.
102-3 WOOD$gXWLS nM. CI. REPORT DATE: 12/04/97
MY, Nc 27511
3cc-mil
SAMPLE brat SRR- 13855S ampiR In- mW 1 SXMPLE MATRIX- GOT
DATE a MPLLL'- IZ/70/97 T7MII SAMPLED- 1200
DATE RECEIVED- 11/20/97 SAMPLER- CHAD LE31gEACE R$CEIVM BY- CI.H
TDM RECEIVED- IS20 DELIVERED BY- CHhD LEINBACA
Page 1 Of 1 PROJECT HME 39401
AXAT.YSIS
ANALYSIS mrMOD RATE BY RESULT UNITS POL
PEC.P.L COLIFORM 9221 C 12/2D/97 VBR 2 MPN/IOOm2 1
NITRATE 353/354.1 12/04/97 JTC 1.0 mg/L 0.1
PQL + Prmctical Quaatitation Liolt
Results followed by the letter J are catimatCd cc.,vvntrations.
PNC Emm CERTIFICATIONS; MQ - a5 ; PUBLIC WATSR SUPPLY - 37724
r
LABORATORY DIRBi:'*pFt
P.O. Dcx 1],Z98 - FIsaeorch Tricngls Pori, NC 27709 Ship e%W 102 A Wwq+.-r d* 1nd..sxr:el Court - C�wrY. NC 27G1 1
TOLOPh e 1919) 46732W Cox 1919) 497-351 6

CHEMICAL. & ENvIRONM.EN AL TECHNOLOGY, INC.
ENVIRONMENTAL ANALYTICAL SEAVIrES
FINAL P.EPQRT CF ANALYSES
GRDMMWATER MANAGEMENT ASSOC.
101- 8 NOCDMI=QDS IND - CT.
CARY, NC 27511
RRPORT DATe: 1-2/04/97
394-02
SPAPL6 NUMBER- 138596
SAMPLE ID- MW 2
SAMPLE MATRIX- GW
nAT8 SAMPLED- 21/20/97
TIME SAMPLE_ 1205
RATS RE--R VED- 11/20/57
SAMPLER- CH= LMMACH
RECEIVED BY- CLH
TIME IZZCEYVBD- 1520
D$TriVERED BY- C%aD LEINHAICR
Page 1 of 1
P'te WECT NAME -. 39491
ANALYSIS
ANALYSIS
ME'=H+QD DATE BY
RESULT UNITS PST-,
FECAL COLIPORM
9221 C 11/20/97 VBR
170 MPS/100ml 1
MITFU4TB
353/354.1 12/04/97 CFTC
0.0 mg/L 0.1
PQL a Practical Quanti.tat,ion
LimiL
Remuite followed by the
letter J axe estimated concentrations.
NC DEMM CBRT:rXC:lTx0H8 -
DWQ - 96, PUBLIC WATER SLTPPLY
- 37724
LA O ATCRY DIRECTOR
L-L.A aj
PAL 0" 122%9 - %smerch Triangle Part. NC 27709
7aiwonom (B19) e97.30W
$hippie@- lo2-A Woadwinda Indumtr;nl Cowt - Corv. MC 27611
Flrt (91 a) a67-46 � 9

CHOMCAL & ENvIRoNmEN7 A L TECHNOLOGY> INC.
ENMONMENTAL ANALYTICAL SERVTr.F-R
FIXAL REPORT OP ANALYSES
GR0'OTMWATER MAKAGESBN-1 ASSOC.
a01-R WOODWINDS = . CT.
CARY, NC 27511
394-01
REPOT DATE. 12/0-1/97
SAMPLE NLTN BR- - 13e593 SAMPLE ID- PIT SA14PLE NLATRIX- WW
DATE SAMPLED- 11/20/97 TIME S MPLED- 1200
DATE RECEIVED- 21/20/97 SAMPLER- CKAD LEIN5ACH RECEIVED BY- CLH
T' M RECEIVED- IS20 DELIVZM 9Y- CF= LEILMNACH
Rage 1 Cf 1 PROJECT XANE : 39401
ANALYSIS
AF ALYS=S F4BTA0D =ATE • BY SEILT MTS POL
FECAL COLITORM BY MEMM.iPTLTFR 9222D 11/20/97 VBR 30 ac1/100 mL -
SITRA:B 353/354.1 12/04/97 JTC I -I Tng/L o.1
PQL = Practical Quantitati= Limit
RCeultp followed by the Letter J are eetimar-ad caacentratioas.
W. ITEMn CE T1FXCATICw3: DWQ - 96, PMLIC KA M SUPPLY - 37724
P.O. 9oa 12298 • Aeseartn Trisnpla Aark NC I77W 5hrpping: 102'A Waedw Inds kfdWwb, Goer[ • C 0r. NC 27sT 1
*r*Wpbons (aTel 4G7.3090 Fak 1919)4417-3515

CR£MICAL & ENVMONMENTAL TECHNOLOGY. INC
ENVIRONMENTAL ANALVICAL SERVI;r:ES
FINAL REPORT OF ANALYSES
GROUNDWATER MAIQAGEMMrr ASSOC.
lUl-E '+0=wTsns xND. CT. REPORT L'ATF- 12/04/97
CARY, RC 27511
394-01
SAMpLB XUKBER- 133594 SAMPLE ID- SPRZXG SAMPLE Vn. ZX- WW
DATE SAMPLED- 11/20/97 TIME SAMPLED- 1210
DATE RZCEiV=- I1I20/97 SAMPLER- CAAD I.SIAM=j RECEIVED BY- cLx
Tn4E REC1ErZtD- 1520 DELIVERED BY- CHAD LSID-SjU=
Page a 0: 1 PROJECT NAME . 3 9t 41
AI4ALYSI$
ANAT YSIS MMOD DATE BY RESLiLT UNITS POL
FECAL COLIPORM SY K MBR.PILTER 9222E 17./20I97 VER <2 cra2/100 m'L -
NITRATE 353/354.1 12/04/97 JTC 2.7 mg/L 0.1
PM - Pracriaal Quantitation Limit
� + ReSUIL9 followed by the lett»ax J are eatimated corcentraeiorxs.
HC 13EIM CE rIrICATI NS, DWQ - 96; PUBLIC WATER SIIPPLY - 37724
P.O.8" 122 S • PAmmmoch Triangle Parr NC 27709 SModno: 102-A Woodwinds lnduffUU1 Court • Gary. 1NC 2761 7
Takwhorm (81 1p) "7.9000 f'n (919) 4874d, G

CHEMICAL & ENVIRONmENTAL TECtLNOLOGY, INC.
ENVIRONMENTAL AfVALYTICAL SERVICES
FIIQAL REPORT OF ANALYSES
(MCQNDWATER [UDTA1; SKEW-' ASSOC _
x01-E WOODWINDS IND. CT.
MY, DEC 27511
394-01
REPORT DATE. 12/04/97
SAMPLE L1L'Q ER- 136597 SAMPLE ID- Tw I SAKPLa MATRIX- [.W
DATE SAM;LED- 11/20/97 TIME SM1PLED- 1210
n xe RECEIVED- 11/20/97 SAZdPLEP.- CHAD LEINBXU RECET_VED BY- CLH
TIM RECRIVED- 152C DELIVERED BY- CHAD LEINHACH
Pago I of 1 PROJECT SAME . 39401
ANALYSIS
ANALYSIS METHOD DATE BY RESULT UNiTJ POL
FECAL CDLIFORK 9221 C 11/20/97 VPR <2 MEW/10OM2 1
NITRAT33 353/354.1 12/04/97 JTC 9.2 tng/L 0.2
PQL . Practical Quantitation Limit
Re341It3 followed by the letter J are eatimaced r==untrati—a .
NC DEEPM CXRTIF1CATION9: DWQ - 96 ; PUBLIC WATER SUPPLY - 37 724
tJ=RATaRY DIR.BCT'OR
P.O. Boa 122M - Rocnsm%hloriWe PaAi. NC 2770E S"pin9: 102-A Yloodwin%b 1nducrial Ccun - Cary, Mt 27511
7s6vho" (919)467-1= Fox (S IS; 407-3515
T07AL. P.05

0 -17 141CA
/5?�'Vos lz
140// 4s
cZ7
•
TOTAL P.05

State of North Carolina
Department of Environment
and Natural Resources
Raleigh Regional Office
James B. Hunt, Jr., Governor
Wayne McDevitt, Secretary
CERTIFIED MAIL
RETURN RECEIPT REQUESTED
Mr. Martin Engel
Route 1 Box 105
Nolina, North Carolina 27563
Dear Mr. Engel:
0
A
mm �w AwAk
IN
�.
MCDENR
ENVIRONMEW AND NAnjftAL Re9ouPtCE6
DIVISION OF WATER QUALITY
November 26, 1997
Subject: Notice of Violation
Facility # 93-1
NC Farm Partnership
Warren County
On September 16, 1997, Terri Hollingsworth from the Raleigh Regional Office conducted a compliance
inspection of the subject animal facility. This inspection is part of the Division's efforts to determine compliance
with the State's animal waste nondischarge rules.
The inspection .and laboratory analyses indicate that your swine waste lagoon #1 is experiencing waste-
contaniinated seepage on the backside, I understand that you have consulted a professional engineer and met with
the groundwater staff of DWQ concerning a plan to correct this problem and detennine possible groundwater
contamination. Please be aware that the seepage constituents an illegal discharge of wastewater which is a
violation ofyour pem1it AWS 930001 and subject to civil penalties of up to $10,000 per day, per violation. -The
DWQ is, at this. time, witfibolding a'recommcndation for the assessment of civil penalties pending the approval
of the mediation plan and determination of the extent of contamination. Please respond in writing to this office,
within 14 days of receipt of this Ietter, outlining your specific plans to correct the seepage problem.
In addition, the inspection has deternvned tl,,I waste lagoon #2 also requires maintenance and improvement. The
lagoon should be cleared of overgrovah and appropriately vegetated to allow for regular inspections to ensure
the integrity of the structure.
The Raleigh Regional Office appreciates your cooperation in this matter. If you have any questions regarding
this inspection please call Terri Hollingsworth al [phone].
Sincerely�
Kenneth Schuster, P.E.
U Regional Supervisor
cc: Warren County Health Department
David Little, Warren Soil and Water Conservation District
Margaret O'Keefe, DSWC-RRO
DWQ Compliance Group
RRO Files
3900 Barrett Drive, Suite 101, Raleigh, NC 27609 Telephone [phone] FAX [phone]
An Equal Opportunity Affirmative Action Employer 50% recycled110% post -consumer paper

Division of Soil and Water Conservation ❑ Other Agency
El-bivision of Water Quality
10 Routine O Complaint O Folliiw-Up of DWQ inspcvtion 'Follow-up of DSWC review O Other
Date of Inspection Gl �16
Facility Number
Time of Inspection �� 24 hr. (hh:mm)
0 Registered 0 Certified E3 Applied for Permit MIfermitted 10 Not Operational I Date Last Operated:
Farm Name........ t,,. F +f w1 .. County :.........0t!:`............................................
Owner Name: ....... C7 r:b 8 Phone No:..�.� .........5 .-..Z �J ....................
}................................................................... 1 , r
Facility Contact: }1', 4V5 .5W .... Title: �Yi............................ Phone No:
[4lailingAddress :.......... .:....1........T,14?.....�r7................ .........S�o.................................... ..........................
OnsikeRepresentative: .... V).Ao K' ... ! ............................... Integrator: .......... �
Certified Operator;,.r,.,�,!�... ., perator Certification Number, ................................
I.,ocation of Farm: S\`2- 1l3 t 2 Vvuxf,
............................. ............................................................................................................................................................................. I ........................................ I ............. I ........
............................................................. .... ....................... ...... .....................................
Latitude • 4 {f Longitude • ' "
r Desagn
Current �Destgn Current-' f Design Currenti�
Wine Capacity:
Papul;tron Poultry Capacity Popitlatton Cattle Capactty Poptilation�
Weanto Feeder
❑Layer ❑ Dairy
Feeder to Finish
FEI
❑Non Layer❑ Non Dairy
Farrow to Wean
e,
❑ Farrow to Feeder
❑Other 5 °
arrow [o Finish
07l-
U Total DeSign�Capaclty
❑ Gilts
[I Boars
P :s
� ro
al SSL
, g k�
3,�,;° - S'Yy NSF 5
Number of{Lawns 1 Holding"Ponds ❑Subsurface Drains Present ❑ [ agoon Area
,
ID Spray Feld Area
(' F 7 9 ❑ No Liquid Waste Management System'
General
1. Are there any buffers that need maintenance/improvement?
❑ Yes Mwo
2. Is any discharge observed from any part of the operation? M"fes ❑ No
Discharge originated at: ❑ Lagoon ❑ Spray Field (Other
a. If discharge is observed, was the conveyance man-made? , ` ❑ Yes UK)
b. If discharge is observed, dill it reach Surface Water? (If yes, notify DWQ) ❑ Yes M-go
c. If discharge is observed, what is the estimated flow in gaUmin?
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?
7/25/97
❑ Yes
0-1<o
M11&s
❑ No
❑ Yes
Mo
[v]'Sles
❑ No
❑ Yes
i<
❑ Yes
E No
Continued on back

• Facility Number:
8. Are there lagoons or storage ponds on site which need to be properly closed?
❑ Yes
9-50-
Structures (Lagoons.liolding Ponds, Flush Pits, etc.)
9. Is storage capacity (freeboard plus storm storage) less than adequate?
❑ Yes
M-N—o
Structure 1 Structure 2 Structure 3 Structure 4 Structure 5
Structure 6
Identifier:
Freeboard(ft): ......... .... ..... I .. ...........3 i"..................... ........................ ............
........................
.1,.........
10. Is seepage observed from any of the structures?
ales
❑ No
11. Is erosion, or any other threats to the integrity of any of the structures observed?
(Fires
❑ No
12. Do any of the structures need maintenance/improvement?
Ej'5es
[:]No
(If any of questions 9-12 was answered yes, and the situation poses
an immediate public health or environmental threat, notify DWQ)
13. Do any of the structures lack adequate minimum or maximum liquid level markers?
❑ Yes
R90
Waste Application
14. Is there physical evidence of over application?
❑ Yes
EI-Nb
(If in excess of WMP, or runoff entering waters of the State, notify DWQ)
S t:�i !Z
15. Crop type ....... , .....................................................................................................................................................................................................................................
16. Do the receiving crops differ with those designated in the Animal Waste Management Plan (AWMP)?
❑ Yes
[9-Nil
17. Does the facility have a lack of.adequate acreage for land application?
❑ Yes
[9'N—o
18,
Does the receiving crop need improvement?
❑ Yes
0-50
19.
Is there a lack of available waste application equipment?
❑ Yes
[}Ko-
20.
Does facility require a follow-up visit by same agency?
9-fes
❑ No
21.
Did Reviewer/Inspector fail to discuss reviewlinspection with on -site representative?
❑ Yes
R<o
22.
Does record keeping need improvement?
❑ Yes
❑ No
For Certified or Permitted Facilities Only
23.
Does the facility fail to have a copy of the Animal Waste Management Plan readily available?
❑ Yes
❑ No
24.
Were any additional problems noted which cause noncompliance of the Certified AWMP?
❑ Yes
❑ No
25.
Were any additional problems noted which cause noncompliance of the Permit?
❑ Yes
❑ No
0 No.violations-or deFtdencies were itt ted during this:visit.- :Y.ou:will receive'- t6-hirth'er- :
. • comes'pgrtdettce ab.ouf fhis:visit:- :. � . • :: . � :. • • : • .: � . � :. � :: :.. � .: � .::: . • ; - . � : � :. • :.
1i. cXuS�CM. vv�cJ�� `��1b�•] ���1'l�. 1����1�,��
Reviewer/Inspector Name l
" "
. ,�''Iti%l a . . Wit. t
Reviewer/Inspector Signature: —VV'.[ � tiV p/x. , Date: q I. l �49

z
wrw
1p
13, <-
7
VVV
J
C �
a , �
vi
d
bP
�

� .
,. ,
<<
.,�
/
r
� f
�
�
�
{
6 +
.
F
I
'.+
o
_
� ,
`
,'r
•
1
•
�
*
'
4
1
1 � • i

DIVISION OF ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT WATER QUALITY FIELD -LAB FORM (DM1)
COUNTY l.J3aV rylf l
PRIORITY
SAMPLE TYPE
!�
RIVER BASIN
❑AMBIENT
❑
❑ STREAM
REPORT TO: ARO FRO MRQVWaRO WiRO WSRO TS
AT BM
❑COMPLIANCE
QA
��'''}��
❑TAKE
Other
Lt!JOF
�ti�
❑
C
OF CU3J*
4
❑
56i d b B C I 5 If Othe
EMERGENCY
ESTUARY
ppe y. us our er, to r
COLLECTORIS): Ak�3yY,l�i._}
Estimated BOD Range- 0-5/5-25/25-65/40-130 or 100 plus
Seed: Yes [I No El Chlorinated: Yes❑ No❑
STATION LOCATION: '6C. ylG Fz�yyI' 9A' --'
te Begin (yy/mra/dd) I Time Begin I Date, End t Time EndlDepth DM DB DBM
I
BOD5 310
mg/1
COD High 340
mgA
2
3
COD Low 335
mg/I
4
Coliform: MF Fecal 31616
/loom]
5
L Coliform: MF Total 31504
/loom]
6
Coliform: Tube Fecal 31615
/100m1
7
Coliform: Fecal Strep 31673
/100ml
S
Residue: Total 500
mg/I
Volatile 505
mg/I
10
Fixed 510 mg/I
11
Residue: Suspended 530 mg/I
12
Volatile 535 mg/I
13
Fixed 540 mg/l
14
PH 403 units
is
Acidity to pH 4.5 436 mg/I
16
Acidity to pH 8.3 435 mg/1
17
Alkalinity to pH 8.3 415 mg/1
18
Alkalinity to pH 4.5 410 mg/t
19
TOC 680 mgA
Turbidity 76 NTU
Chloride 940 mg/1
Chi a: Trl 32217 ug/l
Chi a: Corr 32209 ugA
Pheophytin a 32213 ug/I
Color: True 80 Pt -Co
Color:IpH } 83 ADMI
Color: pH 7.6 82 ADMI
Cyanide 720 mg/1
Fluoride 951 mg/I
Formaldehyde 71880 mg/I
Grease and Oils 556 mg/I
Hardness Total900 mg/I
Specific Cond. 95 uMhos/cm2
MBAS 38260 mg/1
Phenols 32730 ug/i
Sulfate 945 mg/f
Sulfide, 745 mg/1
Fnr t wh rics nNI V
Lab Number-1 �� 9t
ea� Cp_ I
Date Receivedqffl)(O
1
1� Time.•
Rec'd b�t7 I From: Bua-Coari_,-Hand'D_el)
DATA ENTRY BY: ENTRY BY:
CK:
DATE REPORTED:
A H L
H3 as N 6I0 mg/1
N as N 625 mSA
1110-
02 plus NO3 as N 630 tngA
Jz
Total as P 665 mgA
PO4 as P 70507 nig/1
P: Dissolved as P 666 mg/1
Cd-Cadmium 1027 ug/l
Cr Chromlum:Total 1034 U9A
Cu-Copper 1042 ug/1
NI -Nickel 1067 ugA
Pb-Lead 1051 USA -
Zn-Ztnc 1092 ug/1
A Ilver 1077 ugA
AI -Aluminum 1105 ag/1
Be-BeryIllum 1012 ug/l
Ca-calclum 916 UMA
Co -Cobalt 1037 . usA
Fe -iron 1045 ugA
T S B I C G GNXX
Li -Lithium 1132
ug/I
Mg -Magnesium 927
mgA
Mn-Manganese 1055
ug/I
Na-Sodlum 929
mg/I
Arsenic -Total 1002
ug/I
Se -Selenium 1147
ug/1
Hg-Mercury 71900
USA
Organochlorine Pesticides
Otaanoahosvhwm Pesticides
Acid Herbicides
Base/ Neutral Extractable Organics
Acid Extractable Organics
Purgeable Organics (VOA boitle reg'd)
Phytoplankton
Sampling Point X
Conductance at 25 C
WaieT Temperature V
D.O. mgA
pH
Alkalinity
Acidity
Atr Temperature IC)
PH 8.3 pH 4.5
pH 4.5 pH 8.3
2
94
10
300 .
400 16
82244 431
82243 182242
20
Salinity X
Precipltlon (in/day)
Cloud Cover X
Wind Direction (Deg)
Stream flow Severity
Turbidity Severity
Wind Velocity M/H
[ean Stream Depth It
Stream Width ft-
480
45
32
36
1351
1350
35
14
DMI/Revlsed 10/86

DIVISION OF WATER QUALITY
Chemistry Labornlary Report / \Valur Quality
v SAMPLE TYPE
COUNTY WARREN
PRIORITY
RIVER BASIN:
AMBIENT - O'QA
STREAM
EFFLUENT
REPORTTO RRO Regional Office
COMPLIANCE CIIAINOFCUSTODY
LAKE
INFLUENT
Other
EMERGENCY
ESTUARY
COLLECTOR(5) : HOLLOJGSWORTH
Lab Number : 7 W 7261
Date Received: 9/16/97
Time Received: 4:00 AM
Received By : DS
Estimated 90D Range: Stalian Location: PIC NC FARM 93-1
Seed: Chlorinated: Remarks:
Station N Date Begin (yy/mm/dd) Date End (yy/mmldd} Time Begin Time End Depth - DAt. DR, DBNI Value Type- A, If, L Composite-T, S, Sample Type
970916 0130
BOO 310 mSfL
COD High 340 mglL
COD Low 335 mglL
X
Coliform: MF Fecal 31616 3800 /100ml
Coliform: MF Total31504 1100ml
X
Coliform: tube Fecal 31615 117.00D /IOOmI
Cvliform: Fecal Suep 31673 /IOOmI
Residue: Total 500 mg/L
Volatile 505 mglL
Fixed 510 mg/L
Residue: Suspended 530 mg/L
Volatile 535 mg/l.
Fixed 540 mglL
pH 403 units
Acidity to pH 4.5 436 mglL
Acidity to pH 8.3 435 malL
Alkalinity to pH 8.3 415 mglL
Alkalinity to pH 4.5 410 mgfl.
TOC 690 mgfL
Turbidity 76 NTU
COMMENTS:
Chloride 940 mg/L
Chi a: Tri 32217 uglL
Chl a- Carr 32209 uglL
Pheoph5tin a 32213 ug/L
Color- True 80 c,u,
Color: (pH ) 83 pH= c.u.
Color: pH 7.6 82 C.U.
Cyanide 720 mg/L
Fluoride 951 mg1L
Formaldehyde 71880 mg/L
Grease and Oils $56 mall,
Hardness Total900 mgfL
Specific Cond. 95 uhlhos/cm2
MBAS 38260 mgll,
Pheaois 32730 ug/L
Sulfate 945 mg/L
Sulfide 745 mg/L
Baron
Coliform Total Tube "/ 100 mis
X
NH3 as N 610
40
mg/L
X
TKN an N 625
51
mg/L
X
NO2 plus NO3 as N 630
0.29
mg/L
X
1P: Total as P 665
0.02
mglL
-P64 a, P 70507
mgll-
P: Dissolved as P 666
mg1L
K-Potassium
mglL
Cd� Cadmium 1027
ug/L
Cr-Chrornium:Total 1034
uglL
Cu-Copper 1042
uStL
Ni-Nickel E067
ug/L
Pb- Lead 1051
uSIL
Zn- Zinc 1092
usdL
V-Vanadium
ug1L
Ag- Silvcr 1077
ug/L
Al- Aluminum 1105
ugfL
Be- Beryllium 1012
ug/L
Ca- Calcium 916
mg/L
Co- Cobalt 1037
uglL
Fc- Iron 1045
uF/L
�- - 1-99"> /
\ d
tl

For Lab Use ONLY
DIVISION OF ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT WATER QUALITY FIELD -LAB FO DM1)
COUNTY rr PRIORITY - 'os TYPEU2_
1
RNF3t BASIN REPORT TO: ARO FRO MR RRO
Ot WaRO WiRO WSRO TS ❑AMBIENP QA ❑STREAM ❑EFFLUENT
❑COMPLIANCE CHAIN ❑ LAKE ❑ INFLUENT
Otherer OF CUSTODY
Shipped by: Bus Courier, Staff, Other ❑EMERGENCY ❑ ESTUARY
COLLECTOR(S):
Eatimated BOD Range: 0-5!-25/25.65/40-130 or 100 plus STATION LOCATION: V �Cl
Seed: Yes ❑ No❑ Chlorinated: Yes El Non REMARKS:
Station
1
2
3
4
17
5
6
SODS 310
COD High 340
COD Low 335
Coliform: MF Fecal 3
Coliform: Tube Fecal 31615
Coliform: Fecal Strep 31673
Begin �(yy/mlm/d I Time Begin I Date End t Time EndlDepth DM DB DBM
mg/1
mg/!
mg/1
/loom!
/loom[
/100ml
g
Residue: Total 500 mg/l
9
Volatile 505 mg/I
10
Fixed 510 mg/I
11
Residue: Suspended 530 mg/I
12
.Volatile 535 mg/I
13
Fixed 540 mg/1
14
pH 403 ' units
15
Acidity to pH 4.5 436 mgA
16
Acidity to pH 9.3 435 mg/l
17
Alkalinity to pH 8.3 415 m9/1
18
Alkallnity to pH 4.5 410 mg/1
19
ToC 6so mgn
20
Turbidity 76 NTU
Chloride 940 mg/I
Chi a: Tri 32217 ug/I
Chi a: Corr 32209 ng/1
Pheophytin a 32213 ug/I
Color: True 80 Pt -Co
Color:(pH ) 83 ADMI
Color: pH 7.6 82 ADM]
Cyanide 720 mg/1
Fluoride 951 mg/I
Formaldehyde 71880 mgA
Grease and Oils 556 mg/I
Hardness Total900 mg/I
Specific Cond. 95 uMhos/cm2
MBAS 38260 mg/i
Phenols 32730 ug/I
Sulfate 945 mg/I
Sulfide 745 mgA
Lab Number:_7LA_)
L�ID�
Date Recelved:
Time: WCn
Rec'd b )SIFrom:
Bus -Court r Hand De
DATA ENTRY BY:
CK:
DATE REPORTED:
A H L
H3 as N 610 mgA
KN as N 625 mgA
2 plus NO3 as N.630 ' mg/!
. Total as P 665 mg/I
PO4 as P 70507 mgA
P: Dissolved as P 666 mgA
Cd-Cadmium I027 ug/I
Cr•4Chramlum:Tota11034 USIA
Cur -Copper 1042 ug/l
NI-Mckel 1067 u4J/1
Pb-Lead 1051 ug/I
Zn-Zinc 1092 ugA
A ilver 1077 ug/l
AI -Aluminum 1105 ug/I
8e-Beryllium 1012 ug/I
CaCalctum 916 mgA
Co -Cobalt 1037 ug/1
Fe -Iron 1045 ugA
T S 8 1 C G GNXX
LI-Lithium 1132
ugn
Mg-Magneslum 927
mg/I
Mn-Manganese 1055
09/1
Na-Sodium 929
mg/I
Areenic:Total 1002
USA
Se -Selenium 1147
u9/1
Hg-Mercury 71900
ugA
Organochlorine Pesticides
Orvanodx=Avorus Pesticides
Acid Herbicides
Base/ Neutral Extractable Organics
Acid Extractable Organics
Purgeable Organics {VOA bottle reg'd)
Phytoplankton
Sampling Point><
Conductance at 25 C
Water Temperature 16
D.O. mgA .
pH
Alkalinity
Acidity
Air Temperature (C)
pH 8.3 pH 4.5
pH 4.5 pH 8.3
2
94
10
300 •
400 IV
82244 431
92243 182242
20
Salinity X
Precipition On/day)
Cloud Cover %
Wind Direction oeg)
Stream Flow Severity
Turbidity Severity
Wind Velocity M/H
can Stream Depth it
Stream Width ft.
480
45
32
36 -
1351
1350
35
64
J4
DMI/Revised 10/86

DIVISION OF WATER QUALI'l-V
Chemistry Laboratory Report / Water Quality
Lab Number :
7 W 7262
W❑ SAMPLPTYI'E
Dare Received:
9/16/97
COUNTY
WARREN
PRIORITY
Time Received:
400 AM
RIVER BASIN:
❑ AMBIENT 0 QA
STRF,Ahl
EFFLUENT
Received By
DS
REPORTTO
PRO Regional Office
COMPLIANCE X❑ CHAIN OF CUSTODY
LAKE
❑ INFLUENT
Other r
El EMERGENCY
El ESTUARY
Data Released :
AR
COLLECTOR(S) :
HOLLINGSWORTH
2
Date Reported :
10/7197
Estimated ROD Range:
Station Locution: PIC NC FARM 93.1
Seed:
Chlorinated:
Remarks:
Station M
Date Begin (yy/mm/dd)
Date End (yylmmldd)
Time Begin
1
Time End
Depth - D1%l, DB, DBNI
Value Type - A. It, L
Composite-T, S,
Sample Type
970916
0130
BOD 310 mg/L
COD High 340 mg/L
COD Low 335 mg/L
X
Coliform: MF Fecal 31616 100K 11OOm1
Coliform: MF Total 31504 IIOOml
X
Coliform: tube Fecal 31615 490 1100ml
Coliform: fecal Socp 31673 1100m1
Residue: Total 500 mg(L
Volatile 505 mg/L
Fixed 510 mg/L
Residue, Suspended 530 mglL
Volatile 53 5 mS/L
Fixed 540 mg/L
pH 403 units
Acidity to pH 43 436 mg/L
Acidity to pH 8.3 435 mg/L
Alkalinity to pH 3.3 415 mg/L
Alkalinity to pH 4.5 410 mg/L
TOC 690 mg/L
Turbidity 76 NTU
COMMENTS:
Chloride 940 mg/L
Chi a. Tri 32217 ug1L
Chia: Corr 32209 ug/L
Pheophytin a 32213 uglL.
Color True 80
COIUr (pH ) 83 pH- au.
Color pH 7.6 82 c.n.
Cyanide 720 mgfL.
Fluoride 951 mefL
Formaldehyde 71880 mg1L
Grease and Oils 556 m_v/L
Hardness Total900 mn_IL
Specific Cond. 95 uNlhos1em2
MBAS 38260 mplL,
Phenols 32730 ug/L
Sulfate 945 mg(L
Sulfide 745 mefL
Boron
Coliform Total Tube -11 Do mis
X
NH3 as N 610
40
mg/L
X
TKN an N 625
54
mg1L.
X
NO2 plus NO3 as N 630
4.0
mg/L
X
P: Total as P 665
<0.01
mg/L
PO4 as P 70507
mg/L
K Dissolved as P 666
mgrL
K-Potassium
mg/L.
Cd- Cadmium 1027
uF)L
Cr-ChromiurnJotal 1034
ug/L.
Cu- Copper 1042
ug/L
Ni-Nickel 1067
ug/L
Pb- Lead IDS
ug/L
Zn- Zinc 1092
u81L
V-Vanadium
a91L
Ag- Silver 1077
ug1L
Al- Aluminum 1105
o9fL
Be- Beryllium 1012
ugfl.
Ca- Calcium 916
mgfL
Co -Cobalt 1037
ug/L
Fc- Iron 1045
U*JL
i
C�
t 9
t9 `,
-,may 4_1 f i
Le
�/
-�

DIVISION �O,Fr ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT WATv� Q<.,I�Y,FIE LD}�-�,LAuUWy8FDM1)
COUNTY W PRIORITY �1�•1J jjjj�llr j�j;
RIVER SAM ❑AMBIENT ❑ QA ❑ STREAM ❑ EFFLUENT
REP9Irr TO: ARO FRO MRO RRO WaRO WiRO WSRO TS
AT BM
Other __ _ ❑COMPLIANCE CHAIN LAKE ❑INFLUENT
OF CUSTODY
Shipped by: Bus Courier, Stall, Other EMERGENCY El ESTUARY
Fnr I.h Ile. "M %,
Lab Number:
Date Recelved:
Tlme:
Rec'd by:
From Bus-Courie -Hand Del
DATA ENTRY BY:
CK:
DATE REPORTED:
COLLECTOR(S)- W
Estimated SOD Range: 0-5/5- 5/25-65/40-130 or 100 plua(;�r STATION LOCATION: �Qr �f�l-
r
Seed: Yes ❑ No❑ Chlorinated: Yes ❑ No ❑ REMARKS: T
Station # Date Begin (yy/mm/dd) I Time Begin Date End Time End Depth DM DO DON Value Type Composite Sample Type
Gt tb cVA k, O A H L T S B C G GNXX
1
BOD5 310
mg/I
COD High 340
mgA
2
3
COD Low 335
mg/1
4
oHform: MF Fecal 31616
/loom[
5
Collform: MF Total 31504
/loom[
6
olilorm: Tube Fecal 31615
/looml
7
Conform: Fecal Strep 31673
/IOOmi
81
Residue: Total 500
mg/I
10
`Fixed 510 mg/I
11
Residue: Suspended 530 mg/I
12
Volatile 535 mg/I
13
Fixed 540 mg/1
14
pH 403 units
15
Acidity to pH 4.5 436 mg/I
16
Acidity to pH 8.3 435 mg/I
17
Alkalinity to pH 8.3 415 mg/I
18
Alkalinity to pH 4.5 410 mg/I
19
TOC 680 mgA
20
Turbidity 76 MW
Chloride 940 mg/1
Chi a:.Trl 32217 ug/I
Chi a: Corr 32209 ug/I '
Pheophytin a 32213 ug/I
Color: True 80 Pt -Co
Calor:(pH 83 ADM[
Color: pH 7.6 82 ADMI
Cyanide 720 mg/1
Fluoride 951 mg/l
Formaldehyde 71980 mg/I
Grease and Oils 556 mg/I
Hardness Total900 mg/1
Specific Cond. 95 uMhoa/cm2
MBAS 39260 mg/1
Phenols 32730 ug/1
Sulfate 945 HMO
Sulfide 145 mg/I
NH3 as N 610 m9A
TKN as N 625 mgA
NO2 plus NO3 as N 630 mg/I
P: Total as P 665 mg/l
PO4 as P 70507 mgA
P: Dissolved as P 666 mg/1
Cd-Cadmium 1027 ug/l
CrC1romium:Tota11034 ugA
Cu-Copper 1042 ug/I
NI -Nickel 1067 ugA
Pb-Lead 1051 ugA
Zn-Zinc 1092 ugA
A Ilver 1077 USA
AI -Aluminum 1105 ug/l
Be -Beryllium 1012 ug/I
Ca Calcium 916 mg/l
Co -Cobalt 1037 ug/l
Fe -Iron 1645 ug/I'
Li -Lithium 1132 agA
Mg -Magnesium 927 mgA
Mn-Manganese 1055 ug/]
Na-Sodium 929 mg/l
Arsen[c:Total 1002 ug/I
Se -Selenium 1147 ug/I
Hg-Mercury 71900 $ ug/I
Organochlorine Pesticides
Organophosphoms Pesticides
Acid Herbicides
Base/ Neutral Extractable Organics
Acid Extractable Organics
Purgeable Organics (VOA bottle Teg'd)
Phytoplankton
Sampling Point S
Conductance at 25 C
Water Temperature V
D.Q. mg/i
pH
Alkalinity
Acidity
Air Temperature is
pH 8.3 PH 4.5
pH 4.5 pH 8.3
2
94
10
300 •
400 .
82244 431
82243 182242
20
Salinity %
Precipition On/day)
Cloud Cover X
Wind Direction O)eg)
Stream Flow Severity
Turbidity Severity
W Ind Velocity M/H
can Stream Depth ft.
Stream Width It.
480
45
32
36
1351
1350
35
64
4
DM1/Revlsed 10/86

DIVISION OF WATER QUALITY
Chemistry Laboratory Report! W'aler Quality
E SAMPLETYPE
COUNTY WARREN PRIORITY I'
RIVER BASIN : DD O AMBIENT QA STREAM El EFFLUENT
REPORT TO h 10 Regional Office ❑ COMPLIANCE X❑ CHAIN OF CUSTODY � LAKE � INFLUENT
Otter : ❑ EMERGENCY. ESTUARY
COLLECTOR(S) : HOLLINGSWORTH
Lab Number :
7W7263
Date Received:
9116l97
Time Received:
4.00 Apt
Received By
US
Data Released
AR
Data Reported:
IN6197
Estimated BOD Range: Station Location: PIC NC FARM 93-1
Seed: Chlorinated: . Remarks:
Station # Dale Begin (yylmmldd) Date End (yylmm/dd) Time Begin Time End I Depth - DM, DR, DBAI Value Type - A, 11, L Composite-T, S, Sample Type
970916 0130
BOD 310 mg(L
COD High 340 mglL
COD Low 335 mg/L
X
Coliform: MF Feral 31616 22.000 1100ml
Coliform: MF Total 31504 A00m1
X
Coliform: tube Fecal 31615 17,000 1100ml
Colifonn: Fecal Strep 31673 /100m1
Residue: Total SW --wL,
Volatile 505 mg/L
Fixed 510 mglL
Residue: Suspended 530 mg/L
Volatile 535 mglL
Fixed 540 mgfL
pH 403 units
Acidity to pH 4.5 436 mg/L
Acidity to pH 8.3 435 mg/L
Alkalinity to pH 9.3 415 in
Alkalinity to pH 4 5 410 mg/L
TOC 680 mg/L
Turbidity 76 NTU
COMMENTS:
Chloride 940 mg!L
Chi a: Tri 32217 ug/L
Chi a: Corr 32209 ug/L
Pheophytin a 32213 ug1L
Color: True 80 . c.u.
Color: (pH ) 83 pH= C.U.
Color. pH 7.6 82 C.U.
Cyanide 720 m3/1-
Fluoride 951 mg/L
Formaldehyde 71890 mg/L
Grease and Oils 556 mg/L
Hardness Total900 mg/L
Specific Cond. 95 uMhos/cm2
MBAS 38260 mg/L
Phenols 32730 UA
Sulfate 945 mg/L
Sulfide 745 mg/L
Boron
Colifwrn Total Tube '/100 mis
NH3 as N 610 mgR-
TKN an N 625 mgL
NO2 plus NO3 as N 630 mg/L
P: Total as P 665 mg/L.
PO4 as P 70507 mg/L
P: Dissolved as P 666 mgfL.
K-Potassium mgtl-
Cd- Cadmium 1027 ug/L
Cr-Chromium:Total 1034 ug(L
Cu-Copper Io42 ug/L
Ni-Nickel 1067 uglL
Pb- Lead 1051 u&(L
Zn- Zinc 1092 ug/L
V-Vanadium ug1L.
Ag- Silver 1077 ug/L
Al- Aluminum 1105 ug/L
Be- Beryllium 1012 uglL
Ca- Calcium 916 mg�L
Co- Cobalt 1037 ug(L
Fc- iron 1045 ug/1..

�f
Division of Environmental Hanagemeat SEP
I i 1
CHAIN OF CUSTODY RECORD
For Investigation of lG 1sC, VVI-
Samples collected and Ma
forms completed
by:
Lab Orily
Lab -No.
Station.
No.
Station Location
Date
Time
No. of
Bottles
k
e__ Q VVI—
Relinquish_gd by($ignature :
Tyr ri
e
ur
/ D ,L e
Gf
el
Rec
by
el
Rec
by
Ref
Rec
by (Lab)
Method of Shipment:
Security
a and Condition:
Seal b :
Lock by:
Broken by:
open b :
VAR iiSR nWi.V
Lab No.
From Through
No.
Containers
Analysis
Relin uiohed by
Received by
Date L Time
R • IL• *- DL
U4
7A262
9
I44 •.aD
i

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
Dieter Engel
Rt 1 Sox 105
Norlina NC 27563
Dear Dieter Engel:
IDEHNF11
December 8, 1997 O
Subject: Notice of Violation and Revocation for Nonpayment
NC Farm Partnership
Permit Number: AWS930001
Warren County
In accordance with North Carolina General Statute 143-215.10G, all animal operations who receive an
animal waste management system permit will be charged in each year of the term an annual permit fee. Annual
permit fees are billed following the issuance of the permit and then annually thereafter on the anniversary of that
date. Your animal waste management system permit was issued on 6/25/97.
Your annual permit fee for the period of 6/25/97 - 6/24/98 is $200.00. Your payment was due
11/13/97. Because this fee was not fully paid within 30 days after being billed, this letter initiates action to
revoke the subject permit, pursuant to 15 NCAC 2H .0205 (c) (4). and G.S. 143-215.1 (b) (3).
Effective 60 days from receipt of this notice, the subject permit is hereby revoked unless the required
Annual Animal Waste Management System Permit fee for your animal operation is received within that time.
Operation of an animal waste management system without a valid permit is a violation of North Carolina General
Statute 143-215.1 and is subject to the assessment of a civil penalty of up to $10,000 per day. Your payment
should be sent to:
N.C. Department of Environment Health and Natural Resources
Division of Water Quality
Budget Office
P.O. Box 29535
Raleigh, North Carolina 27626-0535
If you have any questions, please contact Fran McPherson at [phone] ext. 210.
Sincerely,
A. Preston'`Howard, Jr:, P:E.
cc: Supervisor, Non -Discharge Permitting Unit
Raleigh Regional Office
Warren County Health Department
P.O. Box 29535, Raleigh, North Carolina 27626-0535 Telephone [phone] FAX [phone]
An Equal Opportunity Affirmative Action Employer 50% recycled / 10% post -consumer paper

DEC-23-1997 10:33 AGRI-WASTE TECHNOLOGY,INC
919 829 1507 P.01102
r -A
AgrMaste Technology, Inc.
700-108 Blue Ridge Road
Raleigh, North Carolina 27606
Phone: [phone]
Fax: [phone] FAX
I
Fax No. 571 -iaAf3
From: dot.
Date: -23
No_ of Pages:
(including Cover sheet)
Remarks: 11 Urgent � For Your Review ❑ Reply ASAP 11 Please Comment
i
Message:
Thank You
"Concepts in Agricultural Byproduct Udlixaiion"

/ DEC-23-1997 10:33 AGRI-WASTE TECHNOLOGY,INC
AV"
AgrMasteTechnobgy, Inc.
700-106 Blue Ridge Road
Ralcigh, North Carolina 2760E
Phone. [phone]
Fax: [phone]
MEMORANDUM
TO: Mr_ Kenneth Schuster; P.E. NCDENR
Ms. Judy Garebt, NCDENR _
Ms. Terri Hollingsworth, NCDENR
FROM: Hall,angeubach
919 829 1S07 P.02/02-
December 23, 1997
SUBJECT: Extension for the Corrective Action Plan for the NC Farm Partnership
Facility in Warren County, (Facility #93-1)
This memo is to confirm that you aTe allowing an extension for the Corrective Action Plan
for the NC Farm Partnership in Warren County, NC until Monday, January 5, 1998. Thank
you for this ex tension_
.lf you have any questions or need additional information, please let me know.
PiCNC2
1
"Conceptsin 'cultural Byproduct Utilization"
YP
TOTAL P.02

h ® 1W W ■
1• -
Agn-►Nastefiechnology, Inc.
700-108 Blue Ridge Road
Raleigh, North Carolina 27606
Phone: [phone]
Fax: [phone]
Fax No .:. 57-1 - ►f_7121,
-
FAX
From : _!4^1- _�srr y���a�r.es-t
Date: l2-17-97__
No. of Pages: 2
(including
Cover sheet)
j
Remarks: ❑ Urgent For Your'Revi,ew ❑ Reply ASAP ❑ Please Comment
Message: --
Thank You
i
"Concepts in Agricultural Byproduct Utilization"

PEC--18-1997 17:17 AGRI-WASTE TECHNOLOGY,INC
i
i
Agri-WasteTechnology, Inc.
700-108 Blue Ridge Road
Raleigh, North Carolina 27606
Phone. [phone]
Fax: [phone]
TO:
FROM:
SUBJECT:
i
MEMORANDUM
I
I
Mr. Kenneth Schuster, P.E. NCDENR
Ms. Judy Garett, NCDENR
Hal I,angeobach
919 829 1507 P.02i02
December 17, 1997
Pig Improvement Company (PiC) Warren County Site
Corrective Action Plan.
This .memo'is to inform you that Agri -Waste Technology, Inc. has been retained to work with
Mr. Martin Engel in the development of a plan to correct the seepage problem at the site in
Warren County, NC (Facility #93-1). As we discussed on the phone, we will submit a plan
to you on or before January 2, 1998. Thank you for allowing us this flexibility. We are
currently collecting background information and will begin working with Mr. Engel. to
develop a plan to correct the problems with the facility.
Additionally, if there is any testing data that the State has collected please fax it to us at (919)
829-1507. If it is too much to fax, we will arrange to pick it up at your office_ Please let us
know which is more convenient for you.
If you have any questions regarding this facility or the corrective action plan that we are_
developing, please call me at (919) 829-00 4.
PICNC 1
"Concepts in Agricultural Byproduct Udti zation
TOTAL P.02

JAN— 6-98 TUE 3:42 PM Groundwater Mgt, Assoc FAX NO. 919 4613219 P. 1
FACSIMILE TRANSMITTAL
SENT TO:
Name: b b�
Fax #: _ 1--_ � 11
Company:
Location:
FROM:
DATE:
g 101-E Woodwinds Industrlal Court
Cary, North Carolina 27511
Telephone: [phone]
Fax: [phone]
❑ 222-C Cotenche Street
Greenville, North Caroline 27858
Telephone: [phone]
Fax [phone]a35
Al! &Vneering is performed &tough die Cary of k&
Confidential Communication
The information Ulowing the cover sheet is
Intended to be confldentlal to the person to whom
it is addressed. Any information fallowing is ;
subject to copyright proterbion. If you are not
able to deliver this communication to the Intended
recipient, or if you are not an agent of the intended
recipient, please do not read, copy, or use this
information in any way, but notify the sender
Immediately by telephone at the number rioted above.
Number of pages (including this transmittal page): f
If any problams are experienced with receipt of this FAX transmission, please contact us at the
appropriate number marked above.
MESSAGE:
rig
GmA
"zj -.L� L �
►J
ZL ,.✓I`l� i:sw�
Hydrogeolorists Geologists - Civil Engineers • Environmental Engineers.* Regulatdry Spedellats

PON
�Y6� tAr olet�-
Q�t-�- �-- �uS4
�� J
-�l�.SeS1A.. re� LdE.(ay-k.
Q
r �'
e-4-C)
:l � . I n f ll
of
pa�
s 1
W> E

AVIFr
Agri WasteTechnology, Inc.
700-108 Blue Ridge Road
Raleigh, North Carolina 27606
Phone: [phone]
Fax: [phone] �--- --_---
E��. j JAN 5 I99�
C DFHNR RAC��cFi
REGIDrIAf. OFFICE
Mr. Kenneth Schuster, P.E.
Ms. Judy Garett
Ms. Terri Hollingsworth
North Carolina Department of Natural Resources
Raleigh Regional Office
3800 Barett Drive, Suite 101
Raleigh, NC 27609
January 5, 1998
RE: Proposed Corrective Action Plan for the Seepage Problem at the NC Farm
Partnership Facility in Warren County, NC (Facility #93-1)
Dear Sir or Madam:
The NC Farm Partnership's Warren County Daughter Nucleus site is a 1,000 sow farrow to
finish site. It is located east of Wise, NC on County Road 1311. The general location of the
site is marked on Figure 1, the County Road Map. The site property boundary, lagoons, and
production buildings are shown on Figure 2, the USGS topographical map. Figure 3 is a map
showing the location of GPS points that were taken by Agri -Waste Technology, Inc. on
December 17, 1997. A written description of each of the points follows this map (Table 1).
This letter describes the proposed solution for the seepage problem on the eastern side of the
main lagoon at the NC Farm Partnership's Warren County site. This corrective action plan
can be divided into three main sections: (1) Collect any liquid that has the potential to seep
from the lagoon and pump it back into the main lagoon, (2) Remove the crossover pipe
between the two lagoons and close the second smaller lagoon, and (3) Repair areas with
erosion and maintain the lagoon with vegetation/mowing, etc. This letter, along with the
attachments, will describe the proposed changes and repairs to the lagoon to end the seepage
problem and the violation of the "no -discharge permit".
"Concepts in Agricultural Byproduct Utilization"

i
V I R G I N I A
B U R G C O U N i Y 9 R
Y ' ie
CSC ✓ 1 1 ,ui �7'
FQ
SHIP
Im?
a ,1,1_ r --�5 '' • rr'�; :t! 1 axe o.r.�i.''••�„ Irl p� ` ! \ �' r�
:r.4 04. 1213 V 21 l
131.
z.o •. 1225 . 1a7.e
,223
1312
Last W f i ` . • 1 ' a � + �
t jj}
1319 .' 1305 1 1 i
1224 �' v 1239 22q
'=2'S 0 I , 330
jam 1224
3,
` W_ Iris
wVl 10P. 1.007 n + rl yv 1 _ 1318 . . •
rj / 158 1 I • �aA �-_Q n.� r a ' 'Q 1
9 1507
I I z.. ♦ 1 0 -
f0
158 u..� was..` '♦.
15w ,sae
��J
wulma — 15oa
11+ ..1 nr _fl k�'J I11E tiaell�q ' a �'0 I
/ 1
Site Location
North GRAPHIC SCALE
■
i.o o as y.n z.o 4i
[N MILES ) /
SCALE: 1 inch = 2 mi. Site Location
Warren County, North Cai°®f nz
NC Farm Partnership
County Road Map
Figure 1: County Road Map
2

NC Farm Partners1���
Site Ma �
Daughter Nucleus Site
Warren County, NC
�xY •I
e
SkQi•
0)000,00
2 a
e
W
3 .'.'.' .'.'.'. V .
GRAPHIC SCALE
400 0 200 400 600 1600
Legend (IN FEET)
--� Road/Highway I INCH = 800 FT.
—- Stream
Property Line
N
Application Field
Production Building Wind Rose 16%
nu. 1:
zK.s North_ Carolina Farm Part.nersllip
Moon percent of time ray
wind is blowing from the y
lagoon indicated direaLlon. W E
Daughter Nucleus Site
. an
o0ai. 1 _0
n.tr.. Fauntl cu .u. au c..ar.
t.County,
Warren NC a�.l.ioe
ALr .,t- IN4-1BB _
D— by:
IB GPS Point
Av"Agri-waste Technology, Inc ][.
7011-108 ]lTo Ridge (toed lievi-d bF:
©®® Rnlelgh, NC 27605
(BS9) 8L9-pp14 Dro Mng Humbcr:
FAX (PI ) ezB-mB7
NCFP-SM2
Figure 3: CPS Map

Table l: GPS Point Description Table
Point
Number
Latitude
Longitude
Description
3
36.4832497
78.2307814
1-85 and Oine Road Intersection
(Not Shown)
4
36,4918113
78.1570333
Main Lagoon Corner
5
36.4921904
78.1561589
Main Lagoon Corner
6
36.4926249
78.1559211
Monitoring Well in Berm
7
36.4925910
78,1559943
Monitoring Well in Berm
8
36.4927769
78.15568870
Recovery Ditch (Center)
9
36.4929647
79.15493910
Sample Point
10
36.4925909
78.15499660
Surface Water (Small intermittent
creek)
11
36.4929700
78.15599080
Lagoon Corner
12
36.4929531
78.15678650
Crossover pipe between two
lagoons.
13
36.4935315
78.1569010
Second lagoon corner (closest to
buildings)
14
36.4931605
78.15712270
Second lagoon corner (closest to
main lagoon)
15
36.4939178
78.15677940
Second lagoon corner
16
36.4937568
78.15793270
Second lagoon corner
t7
36.4922101
78,15758580
Main lagoon corner
18
36.4931444
78.15754290
Outermost building corner
19
36.4910612
78.15724960
Outermost building corner

1.0 Lagoon Seepage Collection System
All potential seeping lagoon liquid will be collected at one of two points; the recovery wells
and the recovery ditch. These can be seen on Figures 4 and 5 which show a cross-section
and a plan view of the proposed changes to the Warren County site's waste system,
respectively.
First, there are two "observation holes" in the northeastern corner of the main lagoon. These
two "observation holes" will be converted to recovery wells and two additional wells will be
installed to the north and south of the existing wells as shown on the schematic "NCFP-
FMV. Currently these "observation holes" are 32-34 feet deep. The additional wells will be
of similar depth. The purpose of these wells will be to reduce the level of the saturation zone
in the lagoon berm during wet conditions. This will help ensure that the saturation zone
remains below ground level and can be collected in the recovery ditch. Each well will have a
dedicated pump that will be controlled by a float switch.
The second point where liquid will be collected will be the recovery ditch which will be
constructed at the locations shown on the drawing "NCFP-FM V. The recovery ditch will be
constructed approximately 10-15 feet downslope from the toe of the slope of the berm. Once
liquid enters the recovery ditch, it will flow down the line to a concrete sump. Liquid from
the sump will be pumped back into the main lagoon. The pump will utilize a float control
which automatically turns the pump on and off according to the level in the sump. Because
of the local topography, it may be necessary to have two sumps for the recovery ditches to
drain into.
Prior to the excavation of the recovery ditch, the vegetation and top 6-8 inches of soil along
the bottom 5' of the outside slope should be removed (See drawing "NCFPCAPS").
Additionally, the top 6-8 inches of the area which is 30' downslope from the toe -of -the -slope
of the berm should be removed. This disturbed area will then need to be scarified and
compacted using a sheepsfoot roller. Soil will then be added in compacted lifts of 6" (prior
to compaction --- 9" thick). The added soil should be compacted to 95% of the Maximum Dry
Density (MDD) at -+/- 2% of Optimum Moisture Content (OMC). A small berm will be
created on top of the added soil and upslope from the recovery ditch so that any precipitation
will be diverted away from the ditch. A PVC pipe will be installed through the diversion
berm which empties downslope of the recovery ditch. This pipe will be positioned so that
rain water will not be allowed to pool behind the diversion berm. The schematic
"NCFPCAPS" shows the ditch and the added soil in relation to the existing berm and slope.
Please note, it may be necessary to clear additional areas of vegetation and soil to
accommodate the natural grade beyond the toe of the slope.
The recovery ditch will be constructed as shown in the schematic, "NCFPCAPS". The ditch
will be excavated with a back -hoe or trenching equipment and will be sloped towards the
concrete sump in order to ensure adequate flow. A 6" perforated drainage pipe will be placed
in the bottom of the ditch and will be sloped toward the concrete sump.
n

Schematic of the Corrective Action Plan
Rain Water Deiversion Berm
The rain water diversion berm will
be approximately 2' in height. A
6' PVC pipe will be placed through
the diversion berm to allow water to
flow from behind the berm to the other
side of the recovery trench. Tills pipe
will be placed at the lowest point so
that no water will be retained behind
the diversion berm,
NC Farm Partnership
Warren County, North Carolina
Recovery Wells
Uquld is pumped tram well
back into the lagoon.
/Pump
Flow /
r iii
T32-34
Soil Added in 6" Compacted Lifts
CrossSection View
Notes
Recovery Ditch
The recovery trench will vary in depth
to ensure that there is adequate slope
to prevent sedimentation in the pipe.
Width of ditch is dependent on the
equipment used.
Recovery Wells
There will be 3 recovery wells with depths
approximately 32' deep. Each well will
have a dedicated pump on a level switch.
The wells will be spaced at approximately 25'.
Rain Water Diversion Dike
Toe —of —Slope
Recovery Ditch
Drains into concrete basin
and is then pumped perlodically
Dock to the lagoon
n-
Caution: Cave in protection must be used
during the construction of the recovery
ditch if workers must go into the ditch.

.NC Farm Partners���
Facility Map
Daughter Nucleus Site
Warren County, NC
Intercepter Ditch Sump
(Note: Not to Scale)
Pipe \
"11
Second
Lagoon
Flow Pipe through diversion berm
S� f to the bottom of the slope.
Crossover
(To be removedPip)
___•"'"•
Flo Rain Wnler Diversion Berni
I
3
Additional Recovery Well
Existing Recovery Wells
• Additional Recovery Well
4 4Flow
Main
Flow
Lagoon
Interception Ditch
ngy
\IApproxirnaLe Toe Slope
of
Note: This drawings is meant to show
a general concept of the components
A 7
A E
GRAPHIC SCALE
of the proposed corrective action plan.
J�j
SJ
The exact location of the components will
be determined in the field to best utilize
200 0 50 100 200
400 the existing grade and topography.
Le end (IN FEET)
Rood/Highway I INCH - 200 ITT.
Stream
Property Line
N
�® Production Building
nu.
North Carolina Farm Partnership
Lagoon Wind Rose f5�
®
wu. ¢:
2
n
Ldean per ant of Lim taz
Daughter NllC1Ell5 Site
d b1nwmg from the z
Indicated direction. W �
n.. imm N.tt...I � a. b.1 1., -
Warren County, NC e ginwi izi�
Y r- POW
c.u.vo.a o a.iK/1b, Nc.
AlrporL SGpy-14iS.
kevlst.n
arewe bp:
70a-1oa 131ue Ridge Road
A1Al'r Agzti—Rasta Iue iti ge.R
xevl.na by:
RaMsti, NC 279o8
S
(B1Bf9)8) -WL4 pY0.wlnt Numc!'. b
® RA )828-160ry
N
NCFP—FMI
Figure 5: Plan View of the Proposed Changes

The ditch will then be backfilled with gravel. Care will be taken to ensure that the gravel
does not crush or otherwise damage the perforated pipe during installation.
The disturbed areas will be seeded with an appropriate type of vegetation. If it is necessary,
the area will also be fertilized and limed to ensure a good stand of grass.
2.0 Closing the Smaller Lagoon
The crossover pipe between the main lagoon and the lagoon to the north should be removed
and the berm should be repaired at this location. The berm will be repaired by adding soil in
6" lifts and compacting with a sheepsfoot roller. The lifts should be compacted to 95% of the
Maximum Dry Density (MDD) at +1- 2% Optimum Moisture Content (OMC).
The second, smaller lagoon will then be closed by land applying all lagoon liquid and sludge.
Liquid and sludge samples will be taken from this lagoon to determine the nutrient content.
After the nutrient content is established, the liquid and sludge will be applied at proper
agronomic rates as determined by the crop grown and MRCS Standards 590 and 633. The
empty lagoon will then either be filled with soil or a principal and an emergency spillway
will be added as per MRCS Conservation Practice Standard 378. The area will then be re -
vegetated in accordance with NRCS Technical Guide Standard 342.
3.0 General Repairs and Maintenance
The following repairs will be made to the main lagoon to prevent erosion and increase the
stability of the structure:
I. The small gullies and rills on the back slope of berm will be filled with clay and
compacted using a sheepsfoot roller. Appropriate seeding will be used to ensure that
adequate vegetation will be established.
2. Repair all erosion damage to the berm at the inflow pipes from the barns. This
will be done by compacting clay in 6" lifts with a sheepsfoot roller. The lifts should be
compacted so that they are at 95% Maximum Dry Density (MDD) at +/- 2% Optimum
Moisture Content (OMC). An erosion control mechanism will be constructed to ensure that
the inflow pipes do not erode the banks further. Figures 6 and 7 show options that will
protect the berm of the lagoon from erosion caused by the inflow pipes.
3. All trees and brush will be removed from the lagoon berms and the berms will be
re -seeded using an appropriate grass type.
4. The lagoon berms will be mowed regularly and inspected weekly for erosion and to
prevent brush and trees from growing on the lagoon berms.
5. All pumps and piping will be inspected every 2 weeks to ensure that they are in
proper repair.
E

Top of
/ Cross Section AA
6.00'
Rip —rap
Inflow Pipe 120'
6.0"
�Oa06D�OC6�000 OpODODO�DDOa(
Non —woven
Geotextile
'lee.
0ZMA
• .- • -• • �"lam/�� -
Non —woven
Geotextile
Elevation View
NC Farm Partnership
Inflow Pipe Protection
Warren County, NC
2.0"
� / Cross Section B—B \
Non —woven
Geotextile
M

NC Farm Partnership
'DN Site
Rip —Rap Inlet Protection Details
(Revised 1/03/98)
4 A
1 � 6"—I2" die. Rip —rap
i
0000a000aooeaeo aooaaaoQooa00000a000asaoo - o 00 00
Exposed 30 mil HIIPE faterial
A
Lagoon Floor
HDPE secured by burial
Pipe prot des through HDPE
Top of Berm
sealed w7 caulk.
V8"—l2" die_ Rip —Rap
r z.00•
Minimum Inflow Pipe
Slope = 0.3
Cross Section
Detail of
Cross Section A —A
W-12" dia. Rip —Rap
Compacted
Earthen "Wedge'
X�
I
0
z-o•
4.55.7.
30 orequivalent
Inlet Channel Construction Notes:
Lagoon Floor
1. Inlet channel is constructed by forming
2' high compacted earthen berms 5.7'
apart along the slope of the lagoon
and draping a 22' wide roll of 30 mil
HDPE over the berms. The HDPE is then
secured by W-12" diameter Rip —rap on
the outside slopes of the earthen berms
and the edges of the HDPE are buried.
2. Inlet channel (sluice trench) is lined
with 30 mil HDPE material. Rip —rap
is used to secure the HDPE material.
The edges of the HDPE are buried.
The HDPE material lining the inside
of the inlet channel is exposed from
the inlet pipe to the last 5' of the
channel in the lagoon floor.

None of the work outlined in this plan will begin until we have written approval from DENR
Once an acceptable plan is in place, we will contact your office to let you know when the
work is scheduled to begin. This will allow your office to inspect the construction if this is
desired.
Thank you for allowing the extension for this corrective action plan. If you have any
questions about this plan, please contact either me or Hat Langenbach at (91.9) 829-0014.
CC: Mr. Martin Engel
PICNC6
12
Sincerely,
L. M. Safley, Jr., Ph. D., P.E.
President

r
Avirr
Agri-WasteTechnology, Inc.
700-108 Blue Ridge Road
Raleigh, North Carolina 27606
Phone: [phone]
Fax: [phone]
January 16, 1998
Ms. Terri Hollingsworth
Mr. Buster Towell
N.C. Department of Natural Resources
Raleigh Regional Office
3800 Barett Drive, Suite 101
Raleigh, NC 27609
RE: Additional information regarding samples taken at the NC Farm Partnership Facility in
Warren County, NC (Facility #93-1).
Dear Ms. Hollingsworth and Mr. Towell:
This letter is a response to the additional information request that you had regarding the
samples taken at the North Carolina Farm Partnership swine facility in Warren County, NC.
The following information will be provided in this letter:
1. A description of each of the sample locations. Both a written description and a
sample point location map are provided.
2. The "as -constructed" capacity of the lagoon. A spreadsheet which shows the
volume of the lagoon at various depths is included. Mr. Martin Engel provided
AWT with all dimensions used in the volume calculation.
3. Records from the installation and sampling of the "observation holes". A letter
from GMA is included as well as hand written records of boring logs from the
installation of the two observation holes on the top of the berm.
1.0 Sample Locations
There were 5 samples taken on the northeast side of the main lagoon at this facility. The
drawing, "NCFP-SAM" shows the five sample points as they relate to the lagoon and
buildings at the facility. The first two sample points, "MW 1" and "MW2" are two
"observation holes" located at the top of the berm on the northeast side of the lagoon.
"MW 1" is the southern -most "observation holes" while "MW2" is located approximately 25'
to the north of the first "observation hole". The next sample, "PIT", was taken from the
"Concepts in Agricultural Byproduct Utilization"

IBC Farm PC-kj—.,rn_er s
Sample l_,oca hon M1 7
Daughter Nucleus Site
'Warren COUIl.y, NC
Legend
Road/Highway
Stre am
/✓,// Property Line
tl Production Building
aLagoon
GRAPHIC SCALE
200 0 50 100 200 400
(IN FEET)
1 INCH = 200 FT.
N
Wind Rose � 15T
Me" percent 8! me 7 /�
sled is blowinecfrr om the (C*, Indicated dirtion. W
D. rr.m x.uw,.1 cua..u. u.1. e.ee.,
CA—k .! a.wah. xe.
111rport: 1a" lama, E
9
Sample Point 5-,
nple Point 2
\--Sample Point. 4
Sample Point 3
rnple Point l
PO1Pt Location of Sample Description
1
Southern moat 'ohae�alion hole" in berm. ("}I�'1")
2
Northern most "ahservation hale' in berm. i kw;r)
3
Ree.�erp Ditch ("Pit')
4
9amPle taken from .eep... ere.. ("Spring')
5
I
Temporary 'oh.ervdtian hold ("TW1') {
Fi,eure l: Sample Collection Points Man for the North Carolina Farm Partnershin Facility

trench near the toe -of the -slope of the lagoon berm on the northeast corner. The fourth
sample was taken east of the trench where a small amount of surface water was encountered.
This sample was identified as "Spring". Finally, the last sample was taken from a temporary
"observation hole" installed further to the east and is identified as "TW I". GPS points were
taken at all but one of the sample locations to help locate them on a map. The sample point
"Spring" was not established by GPS and was placed on the map as an approximation from
the sample point "Pit" and the sample point "TW Ill.
There was an attempt to install two other temporary "observation holes" in this area.
However all other places where borings were attempted ended when hand -auger refusal
occurred between 4 to 7 feet and no water was encountered (See GMA letter from January 8,
1998 in Attachment 1). The location of each of these attempted borings is marked on the
map that is included with the letter from GMA.
2.0 "As -Constructed" Volume of the Main Lagoon
Agri -Waste Technology, Inc. has calculated the volume of the main lagoon based on
measurements provided by Mr. Martin Engel. The lagoon dimensions that Mr. Engel
provided are shown on the drawing, "NCFP-LD1". Using these dimensions, the capacity of
the lagoon at various liquid depths was calculated. These volumes are shown on Spreadsheet
1. The volume at the top of the berm is 1,936,707 W (44.46 ac-ft).
According to Mr. Engel, the maximum berm height, as measured from the toe -of -the -slope to
the top of the berm is approximately 32.3 feet.
3.0 "Observation Hole" Installation Records
The boring logs from the "observation holes" that were installed by Bings Well Drilling at the
top of the berm on the eastern side of the lagoon are enclosed as Attachment 2. These logs
show clay overlying bedrock at a depth of 32-34 feet from the top of the berm. The
saturation zone ranged from 22-32 feet for "MW 1" and 24-34 feet for "MW2" (as measured
from the top of the berm).
If you need any additional information or have questions regarding this facility please contact
Agri -Waste Technology, Inc. at [phone].
Sincerely,
L. M. Safley, Ph. D., P.E.
President
3

NC Far i-ri. Pa i ttjership 1
Lagoon Dime n.sioii. Scheri-i.iAlc
Warren C0U1-1.i;v. Nfoiyth. CaroUP.a
3.
notes:
1. All dimensions provided by Mr. Martin Engel.
2. Dimensions shown are at the top —inside —berm.
3. Average side slope 2.5:1.
4. Total lagoon depth is 17.0'.
5. Highest total berm height is 32.3' (toe of
sloe to top of berm.
Figure 2: NC Farm Partnership Main Lagoon Dimensions
4

U
CA
Lagoon Volume Determination
"a
Lagoon Name:
PIC-NC DN Site
{ENGEL)
(G
to
Remaining
Storage Volume
Feet of
Lagoon Liquid Storage
Cubic Feet
Gallons Acre -in Percent of Cubic Feet Gallons Acre -in. Percent of
0
rn
Depth (ft) (Pnmpdown)
of Storage
of Storage of Storage Total Volume in Lagoon in Lagoon in Lagoon Total Volume
__
;4
17.00
.00
.00
.00
.00
.00
16.00
1.00
141,945.19
1, 061, 750.04
39.11
.07
15.00
2.00
2B0,136.18
2,095,418.64
77.18
.14
14.00
3.00
414,623.51
3,101,383.87
114.23
.21
13.00
4.00
545,457.25
4,080,020.20
150.27
.28
12.00
5.00
672,687.77
5,031,704.52
185.32
.35
11.00
6.00
796,365.37
5,13,16, 112, 915
219.40
.41
10.00
7.00
916,540.26
6,855,721.16
252.51
.47
9.00
8.00
1,033,262.89
7,728,006.40
284.66
.53
8.00
9.00
1,146,583.39
8,576,443.73
315.88
.59
[JQ
7.00
10.00
1,256,552.11
9,399,009.78
346.18
.65
6.00
11.00
1,363,219.30
10,196,BB0.39
375.56
.70
5.00
4.00
12.00
13.00
1,466,635.34
1,566,850.43
10,970,432.34
11,720,041.25
404.06
431.66
.76
.81
3.00
14.00
1,663,914.92
12,446,083.60
458.41
.06
2.00
15.00
1,757,879.03
13,148,935.16
4B4.29
.91
0
1.00
16.00
1, 648, -793. 11
13,828,972.45
509.34
.95
r.0
.00
17.00
1,936,707.42
14,486,571.47
533.56
1.00
[D
w
(9
(D
e-r
0
(D
z
0
ITI
b
w
Co
b
w
5,
r
w
(JQ
0
0
1,936,707
14,486,571
533.56
1.00
1,794,762
13,424,821
494.45
.93
1,656,571
12,391,153
456.38
.86
1,522,084
11,305,188
419,33
.79
1,391,250
10,406,551
383.29
.72
1,264,020
9,454,867
348.24
.65
1,140,342
8,529,759
314.16
.59
1,020,167
7,630,050
281.05
.53
903,445
6,757,765
246.90
.47
790,124
5,910,128
217.68
.41
680,155
5,OB7,562
187.28
.35
573,488
4,289,691
157.99
.30
470,072
3,516,139
129.50
.24
369,857
2,766,530
101.89
_19
272,792
2,040,480
75.15
.14
178,028
1,337,636
49.27
.09
87,914
657,599
24.22
.05
0
0
.00
.00

101-E Woodwinds Industrial Court
Cary, North Carolina 27511
Telephone: [phone]
Fax: [phone]
222-C Cotanche Street
Greenville, North Carolina 27858
Telephone. [phone]
Fax: [phone]
Ad ;s pddonrr*d ?hroagh ihs Cary Odke.
January 8,1998
Mr. Martin Engel
North Carolina Farm Partnership
Route 1, Box 105
Norlina, North Carolina 27563
RE: Site Work
North Carolina Farm Partnership
Daughter Nucleus Site
Warren County
Dear Mr. Engel:
GMA visited your Warren County site on Secondary Road 1305 on November 20, 1997,
to install temporary monitoring wells and to sample the temporary wells for nitrates and
fecal coliform. One temporary well was installed (Figure 1). Well TW1 (which
correlates to your GPS point 9) was installed east of the toe of the main lagoon. The
well was installed to a depth of 7.5 feet. The soil at well TW 1 was described as a brown
fuze sand to a depth of 3.5 feet followed by a white -yellow coarse to medium sand to a
depth of 7.5 feet. Hand -auger refusal occurred at a depth of 7.5 feet. Well TW 1 was
screened from 3.5 to 7.5 feet with 2" PVC and completed with a 2" PVC riser.
Groundwater was estimated to be within 3 feet of land surface at this location.
Several additional soil borings were performed in order to attempt to install two more
temporary wells (Figure 1). Hand -auger refusal occurred at these borings at depths
ranging from 4 to 7 feet from land surface. No water entered these boreholes.
During this visit at your request. GMA collected groundwater samples from existing
monitoring wells MW1 and KW2, the temporary collection trench at the toe of the
lagoon, and from a shallow boring at the head of a spring downgradient from the
collection trench. All water samples were analyzed for nitrates and fecal coliform.
Analytical results are attached.
Providing Expert Guidance on the Use, Restoration, Protection, and Management of Our Water Resources
Hydrogeologists - Geologists • Civil Engineers • Environmental Engineers • Regulatory Spoeiol'ests

Please cafl if you have any questions.
Sincerely yours,
GMEA,
C
Chad Leinbach, P.G.
Hydrogeologist
enclosures

r
i r
w • w
` O o p
? • A e
• r
• � r.
1 �,�� • +
of . . a e �
,J� w s a w s
.rD — C7v1J 07 � X . • r • � 4
� • r � w . .
• c . i r
sI w w, • o ♦ +
a ! A ♦ •
• 1 L +. •
e . Y A
• r A. 4L -�
O
a s a • • � 6 �
A • • • • • O
• 1 r r � � � r i
� r rr • .- r - - r
r �
k �x
a
s a • . o � i ! � .ir� � �
IL s a
•
a a
P b • ■ • dk* ro
O O i . • dL A
♦ i • i •
i • a •
• ! r i
iR
v L I 1 'W
45
T�
� w
• a ♦ d o
• & 1 dig• • A
- O i •
Ab
• r r r r a
► r �. R ` i
i e 4o • •
a s s
*AJUIROD UaIlle
Tollo TIAT Akj I,% e* T r"T
•
t • e
i
• a i
40
4b A
Yr i i •
i � • a • s
w
• s � s s �
• . _ �!

CHEMICAL & ENVIIRONMENTAL TECHNOLOGY, INC.
DWRONMEIV7AL ANAL M AL SERVICES
FINAL R GIORT OF AtZkLYSES
DR(YJNDWsiTRR =MGBKHMT AWOC.
102-3 WOODSg19M I=. CI. REPORT DAIS: L2/04/97
CARY, HC 27511
jcG-J1
r .MPLE DTUMBSR- 13B555
S,AMPLF. IM- MW I
SAMPLE MATRIX- (;w
DATE SAMPLED- 11/20/97
TIME S7lMPLED- 1200
BATS RECEIVED- 11/20197
SAMPLER- CHAD LSIIQ6AC£
RECEIVED BY- CL-d
T= RECEIVED- 1520
DELIVERED BY- CHAR LFIFBACH
Prigs I Of 1
PRC42CT X=2 s 3 94 01
A1dALY5I5
ANALYSIS
METHOD DATE BY RESULT
UNITS PQL
FB= COLIFORM
9221 C 11120/97 VBR 2
MPN/100m1 1
SITRAT3
353/354.1 12104/97 3TC 1.0
mg/L 0.1
PQL - PRACLxCBII QUantitation Limit
' Results followed by the
letter J are eatimatcd ccncentraLions.
XC zIMM CERTIFICATIONS:
DWQ - S4, PZMLIC WATER SUPPLY - 37724
LABORATORY DI'RECTOR
or
P.O. Oea 12298 - Aeaeord+ Triongl• >'a* HC 27709 50%1ponw 102-A VV�%xK.nds Induatro! Court . Cvr7. NC 27611
TelQphonv 1919) 467-SM Fex j919) 467-3$1 S

CH wcAL & ENVZROriMENTAL TECHNOLOGY, INC.
ENVIRONMENTAL ANALYTICAL SERV1rES
FINA:, REPQRT CF ANALYsES
GRDi]DT WATER MANAGMe.NT ASSOC.
101-8 wocz "ns M . CIT. REPORT DATE: 12/04/97
CARY, NC 27511
394-02
SAMPLE NMI 138596 SAMPLE ID- MW 2 SAMPLE MATRIX- ON
DAT$ Si4MPLIM- 11/20/97 TIMS SAMPLED- 1205
DATE MCRIVED- 11/20/57 SAMPLER- CH= LETREACH RSCE VED BY- CLH
TLPM itSCEIVRD- 1520 DELIVERED BY- CKA LEINEACS
Page 1 of 1 PRCSSCT NAME : 39401
ANALYSIS
AN=YSIS MLII DATE BY RESULT VNZTS PQT.,
FECAL COLIPORM R221 C 11120/97 VBR 1.70 MPS/100ml 1
NITFLATE 353/354.1 12/04/97 JTC 0.8 mg/L 0.1
POL o Practical QuAntitae9aa Limit
Renulte followed by the Letter J are estimated concentrations.
NC DRSIM CERTIFICATIONS. DWQ - 96 ; PUBLIC WATT OR SUPPLY - 37724
P,Q fta ] 22RE - Auseuroh iriOTple Park MC 27709
Telocrwne J91 9) ses.so90
Sliipping. 102-A WoodwirJu 1rauw[riv! CoI - C&III NC 27611
p4ft MI M 467-3619

C 3HEWC,AL & ENVIIRQNmENT AL TEckWOLOGY, INC.
w - ENWRONMENTAL ANALYTICAL SERVIr'FS
FINAL REPORT OR ANALYSES
ORC=WATER MAbzAomg2 -. ASSOC.
101-3 WOODWINDS =. CT. REPORT OATS: 12/04/97
CARY, NC 27511
394-01
Emma m 2aim- ' 13E593
SANFLE ID- PIT
SAMPLE )bMTRIX- WK
DATE SAMPLED- 11/20/97
TIME S,AMPLEV- 1200
DATE RECEIVED- 21/20/97
SAMPLER- Mn LEINEACE1
RECEIVED BY- CLH
T= RECEIv=- 15s0
DRLZ`4ZRBD BY- CH= LEIRBAC3
Page I cf 1
PROJ33CT HAM ; 39401
ANALYSIS
ANALYSIS
MaTHOD DATE BY
RESULT
LIUZTS PQL
FECAL COLrFORM BY MBMR.VTLT3R
92220 11/23/97 VBR
30
cc1/100 mL -
NITRATE
353/354.1 12/04/97 JTC
1.1
mg/L 0.1
Pa = Practita2 Quantitat,i= Limit
Results followed by the
letter i are eetimar-ad eancent> at:orls.
W. VMM CZRT1'FXCATZCff8;
DWO - 96; PUBLIC RATBR SUPPLY
- 37724
LAPOPMTORY DIRECTOR
,
P.O. Box 12290 - Ae9ewch Yrionyla Pant NC 277M ShipGinq; 102-A woodwind* 1ndwgr4e, Ca. et - Cory. MC 27311
Tslapnon* to t ft 4s7-9090 Fey, 1.319) 487.25 Is

CHEMICAL & ENV 0NMENTAL TEcHN(:)LOGY. INC
ENVIRONMENTAL ANALY11CAL SFRMTES
FIIQAL REPORT OF ANALYSES
GROUNDWATER MMAGEKMgT ASSOC.
101-E WOMWINDS 1=. CT.
CARY, NC 27521
RP_PnRT MATE: 12/04/97
394-01
SRMPLS NaKOEM- 13BS94 SAMPLE ID- SPRZN(; SAMFLE A'r.A."R;X- WW
DAUB SAMPLED- 11/20/97 TIME SAMPLED- 1210
DATE RECEIVED- IV20/97 SAKPLER- CrMD L&INBACIi RECEIVED BY- CLH
TIME R9CEI' =- IS20 DSLIVMMD BY- C3dAD LBINBACE
Page 1 0Z 1 PROJL= N1+,M : 39401
A14ALYS IS
AXALYSIS MMMOD DATE BY RB6'MT UNITS POL
FW-;L OCLIPORM BY MEM M.PILT©t 9222D 11/20157 VBR <2 Cal/100 ML -
171T'RATE 353/354.1 12/04/97 JTC 2.7 utg/I. 0.1
PQL •. practical Quantization Limit
Results followed by the lett9a 3 are eatimar-ed concentrations.
NC DEHNR Cr_ TIlICATIONS. D14Q - 95: PUB.TtIC KkTBR SUPPLY - 37724
LABCRAMY DIRECTOP
P,0. 8or 12228 - ResearchTriangle Park. NC 27709 Sh6tw-a: 102-A Wood. iris W4uffuU3 Court • Carv. NC 7761 7
Takwhorm t819) 467.2090 Am (91$) 4437�3515

CFmmicAL&ENVMONmENTAL TECHNOLOGY, INC.
i
ENV IRONMEN'rAL APLAL YTIGAL SERVICES
FINAL R$PORT OP ANALYSES
j GRaMWATBR MAN] 9NMr: ASSOC.
I01-$ WOOD4P7x0s IND. cr R3PORT DATE: 12/C4/97
CARY. KC 27511
3sc-n1
SAMPLE Dl[748ER- 130597 SAMPLE ID- TK I SAXPLa )"TRIX- GW
DATE SAMP'LBD- .11/20/97 TIME SAMPLED- 1210
nATs itL'CSIVED- 11/20/97 "4PLEA- CHAR LEII ACP RECEZ%so BY- CLH
TD4,9 RSCSxVED- 1S2 C DELIVERED BY- CHAD LEINBAC-mi
Page 1 of 1 PROJECT DAMS : 39401
ANALYSIS
ANML2&IS METHOD DATE BY RBSULT UNITS PQL
FECAL COLIIORM 9221 C 11/20/97 V8,R <2 k19N/100m1 1
HITRATB 353/354.1 12/04/97 JTC 9.2 rung/L 0.1
POL . Practical quantization Limit
Raau:ts followed by the letter J are estimated cw=c entrnt,ions.
NC DE$!M =TIFICATIONS! DWO - 95; PUBLIC WATER SUPPLY - 37724
LABORATORY DIRBC_'OR
i P.a am i 2288 - R.cnarch Trlanab Park NC 27VO S1Uwng: 102-A WoodwMds lndusV ial Court - Cory, NC 275 f 1
TsWhorw (9Z 9)467-3= Fax [phone]
TOTAL P.@5

all 4eI
fi�T,e.Cs= �77� 3Z'
TOTAL P.05