WQ0001086_Permit Renewal_20070510

AQUIFER. PROTECTION SECTION REGIONAL STAFF REPORT
Date: 5/10/07 County: Cumberland
To: AquiferProtectionSection Central Office Permittee:.Spring Lake, Town of
Central Office Reviewer: Ed Hardee Project Name: Spring Lake WWTP Land Ap.
Application No.: WQ0001086
Regional Login No: ??
L.' GENERAL INFORMATION
1. This application is (check all that apply): ❑ New ❑ Renewal
❑ Minor Modification ® Major Modification
❑ Surface Irrigation ❑ Reuse ❑ Recycle ❑ High Rate Infiltration ❑ Evaporation/Infiltration Lagoon
® Land Application of Residuals
❑ Attachment B included E 503 regulated ❑ 503 exempt
❑ Distribution of Residuals ❑ Surface Disposal -
❑ Closed -loop Groundwater Remediation ❑ Other Injection Wells (including in situ remediation)
Was a site visit conducted in order to prepare this report? ® Yes or ❑ No.
a. Date of site visit: 04/24/07
b. Person contacted and contact information: Daniel Gerald (Utilities Dir. Spring Lake)
c. Site visit conducted by: Jim Barber, Joel Shields and Vince Lewis(Soil Scientist/SWC/Wi1RO)
d. Inspection Report Attached: ® Yes or ❑ No.
2. Is the following, information entered into the BIMS record for this application correct?
® Yes or ❑ No. If no, please complete the following or indicate that it is correct on the current application.
For Treatment Facilities:
a. Location: WWTP: Harps Steet, Spring Lake NC.
b. Driving Directions: From the intersection of Hwy 87 and Manchester Road, proceed north on Manchester
Road approx. 1 mile and turn right onto Harps Street. Follow Harps St. until it terminates at the Spring
Lake WWTP. The land application field is adjacent to the plant.
c. USGS Quadrangle Map name and number: Manchester NC (G-23-NW)
d. Latitude: 35-11-48 N Longitude: 78-57-54 W
e. Regulated Activities / Type of Wastes- (e.g., subdivision, food processing, municipal wastewater):
Municipal wastewater plant residuals
For Disposal and Injection Sites:
(If multiple sites either indicate which sites the information applies to, copy and paste a new section into the
document for each site, or attach additional pages for each site)
a. Location(s): Spring Lake, Town of (field 1) Harps St., Spring Lake NC.
b. Driving Directions: Same as above for the WWTP
c. USGS Quadrangle Map name and number: Manchester NC/G-23-NW
d. Latitude: WWTP.Field 1: 35-11-48N Longitude: WWTP Field 1: 78-57-54W
e. Latitude: Brooks 1: 35-12-18N Longitude: Brooks 1: 78-55-51W
f. Latitude: Brooks 2: 35-12-33N Longitude: Brooks 2: 78-55-55W
g. Latitude: Brooks 3: 35-12-33N Longitude: Brooks 3: 78-56-05W
h. Latitude:. Brooks4: 35-12-21N Longitude: Brooks 4: 78-56-09W
i. Latitude: Brooks 5: 35-12-21N Longitude: Brooks 5: 78-56-14W
FORM: APSARRspringlakesludgeLAWQ0001086May2007.doc 1

AQUIFER PROTECTION SECTION REGIONAL STAFF REPORT
j. Latitude: Brooks 6: 35-12-18N
k. Latitude: Brooks 7: 35-11-29N
1. Latitude: Brooks 8: 35-11-43N
m. Latitude: Brooks 9: 35-11-42N
n.
Longitude: Brooks 6: 78-56-06W
Longitude: Brooks 7: 78-57-40W
Longitude: Brooks 8: 78-57-OOW
Longitude: Brooks 9: 78-57-10W
IL NEW AND MAJOR MODIFICATION APPLICATIONS (this section not needed for renewals or minor
modifications, skip to next section)
r
Description Of Waste(S) And Facilities
1. Please attach completed' rating sheet. Facility Classification: See attached sheet„ Land Application of Residuals
2. Are the new treatment facilities adequate for the type of waste and disposal system?
® Yes ❑ No ❑ N/A. If no, please explain:
3. Are the new site conditions (soils, topography, depth to water table, etc) consistent with what was reported by
the soil scientist and/or Professional Engineer? ® Yes ❑ No ❑ N/A. If no, please explain:
4. Does the application (maps, plans, etc.) represent the actual site. (property lines, wells, surface drainage)? ❑ .
Yes ® No ❑ N/A. If no; please explain: Buffer maps for the Tom Brooks fields, by Melanie McKinney LSS
of S&ME, are accurate based upon visual observations during the site visit on 24 April 2007.
5. Is the proposed residuals management plan adequate and/or acceptable to the Division. ['Yes ® No ❑
N/A. If no, please explain: As discussed during the site visit on 24 April 2007 with Daniel Gerald and Tom
Brooks (landowner and farmer) the operations plan needs to be specific concerning crops to be planted with
respect tothe proposed fields under. the 2T regulations. As discussed at the site meeting, a detailed operations
plan will be needed to address the application windows for residuals based upon the intended crops to be
planted. At this time Brooks Fields 7, 8 "& 9 are bare. These fields have recently been harvested of all
marketable timber and cover crops have not been established. Mr. Brooks wishes to plant sunflowers in field 8
& 9 and then follow the sunflower harvest with pearl millet." Brooks intends to plant pearl millet initially on
Field 7 and then spring/drill seed for future pasture. Brooks Fields 1 thru 6 are currently established pasture
grasses for grazing cattle and horses.
6. Are the proposed application rates for new sites (hydraulic or nutrient) acceptable?
❑ Yes ® No ❑ N/A. If no, please explain: Specific residuals application rates are not proposed in the
S&ME report with respect to that allowable in accordance with Realistic Yield Expectation consistent with the
2T regulations and as shown on the R.Y.E tables for the predominant soil type.
7. Are the new treatment facilities or any new disposal sites located in a 100-year floodplain?;
❑ Yes ® No ❑ N/A. If yes, please attach a map showing areas of 100-year floodplain, and please explain
and recommend any mitigative measures/special conditions in Part IV: See attached 100yr floodplain maps.
FORM: APSARRspringlakesludgeLAWQ0001086May2007.doc 2

AQUIFER PROTECTION SECTION REGIONAL STAFF REPORT
8. Are there any buffer conflicts (new treatment facilities or new disposal sites)? ® Yes or ❑ No. If yes, please
attach a map showing conflict areas or attach any new maps you have received from the applicant to be
incorporated into the .permit: The S&ME report indicates wet areas(field drainage ways) that are buffered on
the site buffer map. These drainage features should be flagged prior to equipment entering the field to avoid
problems with equipment becoming stuck and destroying the integrity of the established grass pasture and soil
structure.
9. Is proposed and/or existing groundwater monitoring program (number of wells, frequency of monitoring,
monitoring parameters, etc.) adequate? ❑ Yes ❑ No ® N/A. Attach map of existing monitoring well
network if applicable. Indicate the review and compliance boundaries. If No, explain and recommend any
changes to the groundwater monitoring program:
10. For residuals, will seasonal or other restrictions be required? ❑ Yes ® No ❑ N/A If yes, attach list of sites
with restrictions (Certification B?)
IIL RENEWAL AND MODIFICATIONAPPLICATIONS (use previous section for new or major modification
systems)
•
Description Of Waste(S) And Facilities
1. Are there appropriately certified ORCs for the facilities? ® Yes or ❑ No.
Operator in Charge: Michael Criscoe Certificate #:LA/15683
Backup- Operator in Charge: Danield Gerald (Spring Lake) Certificate #:LA/9'79' (awaiting test results)
2. Is the design, maintenance and operation (e.g. adequate aeration, sludge wasting, sludge storage, effluent
storage, etc) of the treatment facilities adequate for the type of waste and disposal system? ® Yes or ❑ No.
If no, please explain:'
3. Are the site conditions (soils, topography, depth to water table, etc) maintained appropriately and adequately
assimilating the waste? Z Yes or Z No. If no, please explain WWTP field 1 is only 8 acres (per NRCS
,
calculation of soil types for a specific area defined); Spring Lake has been assuming 15.84 acres in past years
for operation of the residuals program, which would appear to present a problem with over -application by
assuming a larger area of application for a specific volume of residuals applied over the years. Also, Spring
Lake uses Lime Stabilization for Pathogen and Vector Attraction . demonstrations. Therefore, prolonged
application of high pH residuals (at or above 10.50 to 11) could have negative affect on soil pH and potentially
affect the quality of the grass crop (coastal bermuda) that the nutrients are applied to.
4. Has the site changed in any way that may affect permit (drainage added, ' new wells inside the compliance
boundary, new development, etc.)? If yes, please explain: NO
5. Is the residuals management plan for the facility adequate and/or acceptable to the Division?
® Yes or ❑ No. If no, please explain: Once the Tom Brooks farm land is added to the Spring Lake program;
Spring Lake will have appropriate acreage for the amount of residuals requested to be land applied.
FORM: APSARRspringlakesludgeLAWQ0001086May2007.doc 3

AQUIFER PROTECTION SECTION REGIONAL STAFF REPORT
Contingencies should still be in place (i.e. using McGill Environmental) in the event that Tom, Brooks Farms
opts out of the Spring Lake program before the next permit renewal cycle. Additional information is needed to
address R.Y.E application rate& for specific crops on fields 7,8 & 9.
6. Are the existing applicationrates. (hydraulic or .nutrient) still acceptable? ®' Yes or Z 'No. If no, please
explain: Since fields 1 thru 6 at the Tom Brooks 'farm are currently in established pasture grasses (i.e. Fields 1,
4,5&6 Coastal bermuda and Fields 2&3 Bahia per Tom. Brooks). established' R.Y.E values can be assignned to
these fields with appropriate application rates. But as stated earlier, Fields 7,8&9 are bare due to timberingand
temporary crops (this growing season) are only know at this time based on statements from Tom Brooks
(landowner) as to what he wishes to plant this year (Fields 8&9 sunflowers, 'followed by pearl millet and Field
7 to be planted in pearl millet): No R.Y.E values exist for sunflower.at this time in the NCSU guidance.
7. Is the existing groundwater monitoring . program (number of , wells, frequency of monitoring, monitoring
parameters, etc.) adequate? ❑ Yes ❑ No ® N/A. Attach map of existing monitoring well network if
applicable. Indicate the review and compliance boundaries. If No, explain and recommend any changes to the
groundwater monitoring program:
8. Will seasonal or other restrictions be required for added sites? ❑ Yes ® No ❑ N/A If yes, attach list of sites
with restrictions (Certification B?)
9. Are there any buffer conflicts (treatment facilities or disposal sites)? ® Yes or ® No. If yes, please attach a
map showing conflict areas or attach any new:maps you have received from the applicant to be incorporated
into the permit:
10: Is the description of the facilities, type and/or volume of waste(s) as written in the existing permit correct? ❑
Yes or ❑ No. If no, please explain:
11. Were monitoring wells properly constructed and located? ❑ Yes or ❑ No Z N/A. If no, please explain:
12. Has a review of all self -monitoring data been conducted (GW, NDMR, and NDAR as applicable)? ❑. Yes or
❑ No Z N/A. Please,summarize any findings resulting fromthisreview:
13. Check all that apply: Z No compliance issues;.; ❑ Notice(s) of violation within the last permit cycle; ❑
Current enforcement action(s) ❑ Currently under SOC; ❑ Currently under JOC; ❑ Currently under
moratorium. If any 'items checked, please explain and attach any documents that may help clarify
answer/comments (such as NOV, NOD etc): Currently trying to resolve reporting data in the 2006 Land
Application Annual Report relative to Pathogen and Vector Attraction .demonstration. Once . satisfactory
information is received, copies will be forwarded to Central Office for inclusion in the Spring Lake file and to
update this staff report
14. Have all compliance dates/conditions in the existing permit, (SOC, JOC, etc.) been complied with? ❑ Yes
❑ No ❑ Not Determined .® N/A:. If no, please explain:
FORM: APSARRspringlakesludgeLAWQ0001086May2007.doc 4

{
AQUIFER PROTECTION SECTION REGIONAL STAFF REPORT
15. Are there any issues related to compliance/enforcement that should• be resolvedbefore issuing this permit? E
Yes or ❑ No ❑ N/A. If yes, please explain: Issues relating to Pathogen and. Vector Attraction demonstation
in the 2006 Annual Report for land application of residuals.
FORM: APSARRspringlakesludgeLAWQ0001086May2007.doc 5

AQUIFER PROTECTION SECTION REGIONAL STAFF. REPORT
IV. INJECTION WELL PERMIT APPLICATIONS (Complete these two sections Tor all systems that use injection
wells, including closed -loop groundwater remediation effluent injection wells, in situ remediation injection wells, and heat
pump injection wells.)
Description Of Well(S) And Facilities — New, Renewal, And Modification
1. Type of injection system:
❑ Heating/cooling water return flow (5A7)
❑ Closed -loop heat pump system (5QM/5QW)
❑ In situ remediation (5I)
❑ Closed -loop groundwater remediation effluent injection (5L/"Non-Discharge")
❑ Other (Specify:
2. Does system use same well for water source and injection? ❑ Yes ❑ No
3. Are there any potential pollution sources that may affect injection? ❑ Yes ❑ No
What is/are the pollution source(s)? . What is the distance of the injection well(s) from the pollution
source(s)? ft.
4. What is the minimum distance of proposed injection wells from the property boundary? ft.
5. Quality of drainage at site: ❑ Good ❑ Adequate ❑ Poor
6. Flooding potential of site: ❑ Low ❑ Moderate ❑ High
7. For groundwater remediation systems, is the proposed and/or existing groundwatermonitoringprogram
(number of wells, frequency of monitoring, monitoring parameters, etc.) adequate? ❑ Yes ❑ No. Attach
map of existing monitoring well network if applicable: If No, explain and recommend any changes to the
groundwater monitoring program:
8. Does the map presented represent the actual site (property lines; wells, surface drainage)? ❑ Yes or ❑ No. If
no or no map, please attach a sketch of the site. Show property boundaries, buildings, wells, potential pollution
sources, roads, approximate scale, and north arrow.
Injection Well Permit Renewal And Modification Only:
1. For heat pump systems, are there any abnormalities in heat pump or injection well operation e.g.' turbid water,
failure to assimilate injected fluid, poor heating/cooling)?
❑ Yes ❑ No. If yes, explain:
2. For closed -loop heat pump systems, has system lost pressure or required make-up fluid since permit issuance
or last inspection? ❑ Yes ❑ No. If yes, explain:
3. For renewal or modification of groundwater remediation permits (of any type), will
continued/additional/modified injections have an adverse impact on migration of the plume or management of
the contamination incident? ❑ Yes ❑ No. If yes, explain:
4. Drilling contractor: Name:
r
FORM: APSARRspringlakesludgeLAWQ0001086May2007.doc 6

AQUIFER PROTECTION SECTION REGIONAL STAFF REPORT
Address:
Certification number:
. Complete and attach Well Construction Data Sheet.
FORM: APSARRspringlakesludgeLAWQ0001086May2007.doc
7

AQUIFER PROTECTION SECTION REGIONAL STAFF REPORT
V. EVALUATION AND RECOMMENDATIONS'
1. Provide any additional narrative regarding your review of the application.:
2. Attach Well. Construction Data Sheet if needed information is available
3. Do you foresee any problems with issuance/renewal of this permit? ® Yes
® No. If yes, please explain
briefly. Operationally the Spring Lake WWTP site appears to be good. The permitmodification application
doesn't address if a residuals contractor will be utilized to land apply residuals on the Tom Brooks fields or if
Spring Lake will try and use its own equipment and manpower. If continued use of the the field at the WWTP
continues for residuals land application; the acreage of the field needs to be corrected to address the proper
application rate for field size and crop grown.. .
4. • List any items that you would like APS Central Office to obtain through an additional information request.
Make sure that you provide a reason for each item:
Item
Reason
5. List specific Permit conditions that you recommend to be removed from the permit when issued. Make sure
that you provide a reason for each condition:
Condition
Reason
. List specific special conditions or compliance schedules that you recommend to be included in the permit when
issued. Make sure that you provide a reason for eachspecial condition:
Condition
Reason
7. Recommendation: ❑ Hold, pending receipt and review of additional information by regional office; ❑ Hold,
pending review of draft permit by regional office; El Issue upon receipt of needed additional information; ❑
Issue; ❑ Deny. If deny, please stat
8. Signature of report preparer(s):
Signature of APS regional supervi
Date:
FORM: AP SARRspringlakes ludgeLAWQ000 10 8 6May20 07. doc
8

AQUIFER PROTECTION SECTION REGIONAL STAFF REPORT
ADDITIONAL REGIONAL STAFF REVIEW ITEMS
Specific application rates/site recommendations are needed in the Spring Lake application to address nutrient
loading rates for crops to be planted on Brooks fields 7,8&9, based upon the new 2T rules for Realistic Yield
Expectation.
The new, proposed fields to be added to this land application program have not been added to the BIMS system
by the Fayetteville Regional Office staff. Also, the WWTP field acreage needs to be corrected in BIMS, since it
lists the field at 15.84 acres instead of the correct acreage of 8.0 acres +/- depending on site specific buffers to
property lines measured in the field from established references.
The soil types identified by Melanie McKinney, with S&ME, in the soils report for Spring Lake addressing the
Tom Brooks farm fields is consistent with those soils identified by NRCS guidance documents. During our site
visit on 24 April 2007, Vince Lewis concurred with the information provided by Ms. McKinney in her report
on site soil conditions and soil types. With the new 2T rules allowing year round application of residuals on
fields with a seasonal high water table of 1', the soils identified more that meet this criteria and are acceptable
for land application of residuals.
FORM: APSARRspringlakesludgeLAWQ0001086May2007.doc 9

Town of Spring Lake: Proposed new Land App. fields
Subject: Town of Spring Lake: Proposed new Land App. fields
From: Jim Barber <[e-mail]>
Date: Thu, 17 May 2007 12:31:26 -0400
To: Ed Hardee <Ed.Hardee@ncmail:net>
ED;
Here are the coordinates for the proposed fields to be added to the Town of Spring
Lake land application program. The lat./long coordinates were obtained by using the
GIS database for Cumberland County. The coordinates that I provided on the cover .
page of the APSSRR were obtained from the_web-base TopoZone map program .and a copy
of each field topo is provided with the coordinates. The coordinates provided with
this email are•probably more exact.
New Fieldsowned by BGM Farms, Inc., contact person is Mr: Tom Brooks
Field #1: 35.204837N and 78.930973W
Field #2: 35.209689N and 78.931944W
Field #3: 35.210447N and 78.934722W
Field #4: 35.207675N and 78.935308W
Field #5: 35.200586N and 78.937229W
Field #6: 35.205091N and 78.934850W
Field #7: 35.193041N and 78.961335W
Field #8: 35:194439N and.78.953520W
Field *9: 35.194212N and 78.949612W
If you have any questions, give me,a call or email.
Jim Barber
1 of 1 5/17/200712:31 PM

TOWN OF .SPRING LAKE; CUMBERLAND COUNTY
WWTP AND EXISTING (CURRENT) LAND
APPLICATION FIELD
A. SITE OWNER INFORMATION
B.NRCS SOILS MAPS w/SOIL. TYPES & ACREAGE
C. PLANT PROPERTY
D. CLEARED PLANT PROPERTY
E. EXISTING LAND AP. FIELD (8.0+/- AC.)
F. AREA OF LAND AP: (APPROX. 0.70+/ AC)
G:100 YR. FLOODPLAIN
H. R.Y.E. INFO FOR SOIL TYPES
I. USGS TOPO MAP

Map Output
Page 1 of 1
ArcIMS HTML Viewer Map
'�3Y'✓Y
z�,F.�vtP,
�,}�f.j✓!�'Si4"".Y
sl V4\ �A t 5'�t�hh�f
4r r 1
a r k
i4tW�Jwtr tint iF
y., sa. ae
oCf�s(�.. r� 5�>
iF 7' Y siV
`A
4 , `^e ,
E
'f.R�
PI'
r
�
35 '`R",y'y� 'i!`
11M Y i'!'
fM} ZZ
l�.fa:iiVA e
Yi
(/i�)d�S
¢ vi<i.
�ttyr�tfl�
e x #
y 4-):
iY� .(
y\Xti 4j.
.s p
kL,Ann)),tt.}f
a}pg
a&
a "��
qY ts'°f�'��C�''�b,%,4
�.p�m,,'
A
{:•1 5'•Fj
�{�1(.P�
'IA
;✓ <
g
� f folk{ ,Vf�
N ,1 ,!'Yt ., f �
F'YYA�2'���
`GJ�} 1�
�'I (C d
�
J� sx rtatV�C
�i � � l i J' Y
'#.fr a .,;'`
,?,
dr�L
zi
i
ti l iz
A' a. �'Ji/'�ge
1 +yhy, �u
y d4Y
Y
`al� if�}✓vyyr{T„±,
}}F ,)
f y�C•d '� SN
r A 7t ':'
Q.Ry,U�'�
••• ('},,,i, �nfIYf"'di
l-7?ey.7ys{t)
v . w
RL
YR..+ !
.�,
lt'��.;
f 1 �y yf
rt4.ni
f>r s 6r1 r
.44...
d ,��-�r
s
ix 4�t�
U'"Jk
'/ FBI{'
rya r"'
yiR I�
J
} fie! v
yh
, .,,,,,
�� t 4r?'rr °.7F �4�girl
�i Gr i r' i
t" Zq�+
4 ti�'% ,�
a u if ti
))�{xCf a..
, ftt
•
.„`!p i'1�.
Y� •'
r lit A
(f� 3 qh l '1
{`r
A.?
1)i t.7n �J�'+�.
•
�"�-
�H }S i
�
iA1�.1
ll!
('� "�" 1'
.y+T<` ',S O
eOVr,���/�'f
J� .Y+a'..
S 0.1 1
}ttvt
;v
sr -0
�T °�{
+ s~
�1 nr•
xL
.
} 1
4 4
J
LSl,
vk Y
J
it
/i
''
.11
1
KIOfA
.
�Fw
t'�'�w'
.f.a
v
ry
iS CF.rrf�,
i xt %ry
u'S-
I 1
`AI
_ _ _ _
- - -
-
u s
r S
i
�r
ye+ r
. t..
avji�^' Yi
f1Bq
S
x�;O`1�oCi,_.
`
•. Parcels
Rec
AREA
NAD83_PIN
FRONTAGE
DEPTH
ACRE
TRACT_NAME
SUB_NAME
SOFT
TOT_ASMT
TOT_LVAL
TOT_BVAL
TOT_XFEATV
QUA L GRADE
FARM PGR
ELDER_EXMP
ST_NUM
ST_NAME
ST_SUFIX
.CITY
STATE
ZIP
1
1771373.2560821
1
7505321--06-
0
0 _
42.05
0001296
0
0
0
0
350
N
PO
BOX 617
SPRING LAKE
NC
28390
http :// 152.31.99.8/servlet/com.esri. esrimap.Esrimap?ServiceName=community_gis&ClientVersion=3.1 &Form=True&Encode=False
5/10/2007

USDA Natural Resources
Witt Conservation Service
SOIL SURVEY OF CUMBERLAND COUNTY, :NORTH. CAROLINA
WQ1086: plant site 42ac
Feet
45 90 180 - 0 100•290 ' '400 - 600 800.
Meters
•
Web Soil Survey 1.1
National Cooperative Soil Survey
• 5/10/2007
• Page 1 of 3

Soil Survey. of Cumberland County, North Carolina
WQ1086: plant site 42ac
Map Unit Legend Summary
Cumberland County, North Carolina
Map Unit Symbol
Map Unit Name
Acres in AOT
Percent of AOT
-
GdB
Gilead loamy sand, 2 to 8
percent slopes
r oro:iolmysand
eiCent.S1oPeS'n,
Vaucluse-Gilead loamy
sands, 15 to 25 percent
slopes
0.1
0.2
Wickham fine sandy loam, 1 2.0
to 6 percent slopes
14A. DO AC.
' 0.2
0.5
4.9
USDA Natural Resources Web Soil Survey 1.1
'0702"—Era Conservation Service National Cooperative Soil Survey
5/10/2007
Page 3 of 3

•
USDA Natural Resources
Conservation Service
SOIL SURVEY'OFCUMBERLAND COUNTY, NORTH CAROLINA
WQ1086: cleared limits=15.84ac
Meters
0 2550 100
Web Soil Survey 1.1
"National Cooperative Soil Survey
Feet
0 - 50 100 200 300 400
5/,10/2007
Page 1 of 3

Soil Survey of Cumberland County, North Carolina
WQ1086: cleared limits=15.84ac
Map Unit Legend Summary
Cumberland County, North Carolina
Map Unit Symbol
Map 'Unit Name
Acres in AOl
Percent of AO'
TaB
Tarboro loamy sand, 0 to 6
percent slopes
p4cetipSlopeS., ..„..
10.9
iS:70Ac.
69.8
USDA Natural Resources Web Soil Survey 1.1
ConQrratiou Service . National Cooperative Soil Survey
5/10/2007
Page 3 of 3 , •

SOIL SURVEY OF CUMBERLAND COUNTY, NORTHCAROLINA
• -40 80
USDA NataraiResources
Conservation Service
WQ1086: WWTP field
Meters
160
Web Soil Survey 1.1
National Cooperative Soil Survey
Feet
100 200 400. 600 800
5/10/2007
Page 1 of 3

Soil Survey of Cumberland County, North Carolina
WQ1086: WWTP field •
Map Unit Legend Summary
Cumberland=County, North Carolina
Map Unit Symbol
Map Unit Name
Acres in AOI ° Percent of AOI
TaB
ew'aela`loatii
Tarboro loamy sand, 0 to 6
percent slopes
iekham fine sand;
%percent slopes
7.2
8.00 ,a c .
• 89.2
USDA Natural Rcsourccs
Coi, ervatiu)Service
.Web Soil Survey 1.1 - 5/10/2007
-National.Cooperative Soil Survey .. Page 3 of 3

'
°
'
USDA w"mmumwncex
Conservation Service
SOIL SURVEY{JF|CUMBERLAN[} COUNTY,NORTH |AR[)LiNA
VVQ1O88,VVVVTPTie1d?7
:. Meters'— O�. 'nO` 80� 120
~
National Clooperative, Soil Survey
'
Feet
O _50 108 ` 200 300 _400 `
51�'
� Page l'f3
�

Soil Survey of Cumberland County, North Carolina
WQ1086: WWTP field??
Map Unit Legend Summary
Cumberland County, North Carolina
Map Unit Symbol Map Unit Name
Acres in AOI Percent of AOl
Ch•
TaB
Ioh
Tarboro loamy sand, 0 to 6
percent slopes
0.7
O. 70 A C
95.4
USDA Natural RGS01111.6
Conceriation Service
Web Soil Survey 1.1 5/10/2007
National Cooperative Soil Survey Page 3 of 3

Map putput:
Pagel of 1
Spring Lake WWTP: WQ0001086 Land Ap.
Thu Ma 1012:19:57 EDT 2007
_ • -""
North Carolina
perating Tegli
FEHA'S CC" PERATING
HP11.2."6.1.
N.C. Floodplain Mapping Information:System
.On -Line Mapping Application Prouide0 by the.
Noith.Carolina Floodplain Mapping Progranii
Disc -lair -her: This is not a legal& binding (FIF:M) Flood
Insurance Rite !p and should not be used as such.
•
•,"
Ie.gprid
/c/ Arime4;ald
.
Md.-At&
10.1p.!2700e1;tyg,-INtlf1372.isp:)
.16114.51.65j,,5,10.16:42:eindiV
Tral•-vetj.:6,Aoar
, 3-.0-.07.1051.11gAsi*oix.t.
1131,7 ztd-b-r:irav
• ..
http://149.168.1 01.8/servlet/com. esri. esrimai):Esrimap?S ericeName=locator&ClientVersi on=3.1 &Form... 5/10/2007

Spring Lake WWTP: WQ0001086
Thu Ma v 10 12:29:19 EDT 2007
FEHA.5 COO
North Carohna .,:..<.
erytin Tee`'
PERA.TI 76_HILC4L PPP.7F)EK
'tl.C. Floodplain Mapping•Information System
'On -Line Mapping Application Provided by the
North Carolina Floodplain Mapping Program. .
Disclain:ler: This is not a legalh. binding (FIRM) Flood
Insurance Rare Map and should not be used as such.
Lee
6.-41'i7 tip,:'
101/..
kap' ia.ivtih i`'�iilkdell' l
1� v?na. •"6=i.iSs;`-A''�iCb.Y�si :�4i� 11?
3�-
1F�r thg ei� r`
http://149.1.68.101.8/servlet/com. esri. esrimap.Esrimap?SercriceN ame=locator&ClientVersion=3.1 &Forrn... 5/10/2007

Nutrient Management in North Carolina Page 1 of 3
North Carolina Agricultural Nutrient
Assessment Tool
■ About NCANAT
■ Installing & Updating Software
■ User Manual
■ PLAT Scientific Basis &
Supporting Literature
■ Technical Support
■ Credits
•North Carolina Nutrient
Management Software
■ Software Download
Training
® 3-Day Nutrient Management Training
■ Writing a Certified Nutrient
Management Plan-RUSLE/PLAT
Session
■ Certification Training for Operators of
Animal Waste Management Systems
Additional Resources
■ NC Realistic Yields Expectations
■ Interagency Nutrient
Management Committee
■ NRCS Technical Standard.590.for•
Nutrient Management
■ NCANAT Field Site
Assessment Worksheet
■ NCANAT Field Site
Assessment Instructions
■ SoilFacts: Deep Soil Sampling for
Nutrient Management
■ Soil Management Groups
■ Surface P-Index Requiring a Deep '
Soil Sample
Nutrient Management in North Carolina
Realistic Yield Expectations
The following tables are the result of extensive data gathering'and review process' conductec
University, the Natural Resource Conservation Service, the North Carolina Department of Ag
ConsurmerServices, and. the North Carolina Division of Soil and,Water Conservation. In 199S
representatives 'of each of the above -named organizations were asked to collect yield data a
reasoned judgement of the yields for various crops on each of the soils occurring in their cot
data were collected from 87 responses, representing 93 counties. The data were then compz
available research data and intensively reviewed by a panel of field agronomists; soil scienti:
researchers familiar with the soils, crops and climatic conditions in each region. In reviewing
following assumptions were made:
1. Realistic Yield Expectations should be based on the average of the best 3 years in'a 5 yE
which could be achieved•with a high level of management (top 20% of growers)
2. For soils that may be mapped in multiple regions or in• slightly different landscapes (for
plains or stream terraces), the Realistic Yields are based on the most common prevailin!
that soil rather than the most ideal site for agricultural production.
3. For soils that are Somewhat Poorly, Poorly, or Very Poorly Drained, effective artificial dr
be in place to achieve the yields shown in the RYE tables.
4. , For tobacco production in the Piedmont physiographic, irrigation was assumed to be avE
. no irrigation was assumed in the Coastal Plain physiographic region. This -is in accordant
numerous surveys which show less than 15%-20% of tobacco in the Coastal Plain is irri!
to 80%0 of tobacco in the Piedmont receives some irrigation
Citation: North Carolina Nutrient Management Workgroup. 2003. Realistic yields and nitroge
factors for North Carolina crops. http://www.soil.ncsu.edu/nmp/ncnmwg/yields/ Nor
State University, North` Carolina Department of Agriculture and Consumer Services, North C�
Departnient of Environment and Natural Resources, Natural Resources Conservation Service
To access the database,'select a county and at least one crop. Multiple crops may be selecte
the Ctrl key when selecting crops. A report will be generated showing'a summary of current
data for the county you selected.
Select Your County Cumberland
Select Your Soil WsB: Waeram-Urban land complex, 0 to 8 sercent sloe
WmB: Wickham fine sand loam, 1 to 6 percent slopes
es
WnB: Wickham -Urban land complex, 1 to 6 percent slopes
Wo: Woodington loamy sand
io! Use Representative Slope Typicalofthe Soil Mapunit
Correct for Slope
_i. Use• my slope
Submit
Reset
0
Realistic Yields for WmB: Wickhamfine sandy loam; 1 to 6 percent slopes in
County
These gently sloping, very deep, well drained soils are on stream terraces. They formed in 1c
deposits: They have a loamy surface layer and subsoil..Permeability is moderate and shrink-
isJow. Seasonal high water table is below 6.0 feet.
Crop
Barley (Grain)
http://www.soil.ncsu.edu/nmp/yields/inclex.php
Yield
Nitrogen
Nitrogen Application
Factor Rate
(Ibs/acre)
79 1 49 118
Bushels
Crop
Phosphorus
Removal
, (Ibs/acre)
30
5/10/2007

Nutrient Management in North Carolina
127
Corn (Grain) Bushels 1.11 141 56
Corn (Silage) 25.5 10.9 278 87
Tons
85
Cotton pounds 0.081 69 25,
Sorghum (Silage) 21.7 7.6 165 65
Tons
Oats (Grain) 500. 1.13 113. 25
Bushels
Peanuts 2940_ 0. 0 16
Pounds
`Rye (Grain)59
Bushels 2.01 -118 19
Small Grain (Silage) - 9.8 Tons 11.1 109 53
Sorghurri (Grain) • 64 CWT . 1.72' 110 48
Soybeans (Double 37 0 . 0 '30
Cropped) Bushels
Soybeans (Full Season) guslels 0 0 35
-Soybeans (Double 37
Cropped - Manured) Bushels 3.89 145 30
Soybeans (Full Season - _44 • 3.89 172 35
Manured) Bushels
Tobacco (Burley),, • 0 '0.06 0 • 0
Pounds
Tobacco (Flue Cured). 2940 0.029. 85 15
Pounds ,
82
Triticale (Grain) Bushels 1.52 125 27
25.5
Tropical Corn (Silage) , Tons 6.5 , 166 87
•
59
Wheat (Grain) Bushels 2.01 118' 29
Bahiagrass (Hay) 4.8 Tons 44.4 . 213 • • 55
Caucasion/Old World 5.1 Tons'44.4' 226 61
Bluestein (Hay)
Common Bermudagrass 4.8 Tons 44'.4 213 58
(Hay)
Dallisgrass (Hay) Tons 44.4 213 63
Fescue (Hay) - 3.4 Tons 44.4 . ' .152 . 54
Hybrid Bermudagrass
(Hay)
Hybrid Bermudagrass
overseeded with 7.5 Tons'•44.4. 335 103
Rescuegrass (Hay).
Mixed,Cool Season Grass
(Hay) •
Orchardgrass (Hay) .
Pearl Millet (Hay)
Rescuegrass (Hay)
6.4 Tons 44.4 283 78
2.5 Tons 44.4 .109 35
2.5 Tons 44.4 109
5.4 Tons 49.4 266
3.4 Tons 44.4 152
Sorghum Sudan (Hay) 6.1 Tons 49.4 300
Timothy Grass (Hay) 0 Tons 44.4 0
Annual Ryegrass (Hay) 0 Tons 0 0
Annual ,Ryegrass 0 Tons 0 0
(Pasture)
Bahiagrass (Pasture) 4.8 Tons 44.4 213
Caucasion/Old World 5.1 Tons 44.4 226
Bluestem (Pasture)
Annual Rye Overseed
Hay - April 7 Harvest 0 Tons 0 ', 0
(Hay),
Annual Rye.Overseed,
36
72
39
84
0
•0
5
6
Page 2 of 3
http://www.soil.ncsu.edu/nmp/yields/index.php • 5/10/2007

Nutrient Management in North .Carolina
Page 3 of 3
Grazed - April 7 Harvest 0 Tons 0 0 0
(Hay)
Common Bermudagrass. 4.8 Tons 44.4 213 6
(Pasture).
Dallisgrass (Pasture) 4.8 Tons 44.4 213 6
Fescue (Pasture) 3.4 Tons 44.4 152 5_
Hybrid Bermudagrass
overseeded with 7.5 Tons 44.4- , 335 11
Rescuegrass (Pasture) t
Hybrid Bermudagrass 6.4 Tons 44.4 283 8
(Pasture)
Mixed Cool Season Grass 2.5 Tons 44.4 109` 3
(Pasture)
Orchardgrass (Pasture) 2.5 Tons 44.4 109 4
Pearl Millet (Pasture) 5.4 Tons 49r4 266, 7'
Rescuegrass (Pasture) 3.4 Tons 44.4 152 4
Small Grain Cover (Hay). 0 Tons 0 ' ' 0 0
Small Grain Overseed 0 Tons 0 0 0
(Hay) r
Sorghum;Sudan
(Pasture)'
6.1 Tons 49.4
Switchgrass (Hay) '0 Tons . 44.4•
Switchgrass (Pasture) 0 Tons 44.4
Timothy Grass (Pasture) 0 Tons 44.4
Other Crop 0 -'0'•
Other Pasture 0 44.4
300 - 9
0,
0
0'
0
0
0
0
This. page is developed 'and supported by Dr. David Crouse,
Copyright i✓• 2003
Thu May 10 17:01:59 2007.
http://www.soil.ncsu.edu/nmp/yields/index:php
5/10/2007

Nutrient Management in North Carolina
Pagel of 3
Nutrient Management in North Carolina
Realistic Yield Expectations
North Carolina Agricultural Nutrient
Assessment Tool
▪ About NCANAT
• Installing & Updating Software
• User Manual
■ PLAT Scientific Basis &
Supporting Literature
■ Technical Support
■ Credits
North Carolina Nutrient
Management Software
■ Software Download
Training
■ 3-Day Nutrient Management Training
■ Writing a Certified Nutrient
Management Plan—RUSLEIPLAT
Session
■ Certification Training for Operators of
Animal Waste Management Systems
Additional Resources
e NC Realistic Yields Expectations
■ Interagency Nutrient
Management Committee
■ NRCS Technical Standard 590 for
Nutrient Management
NCANAT Field Site
Assessment Worksheet
■ NCANAT Field Site
Assessment Instructions
® SoilFacts: Deep Soil Sampling for
Nutrient Management
a Soil Management Groups
o Surface P-Index Requiring a ;Deep
Soil Sample
The following tables are the result of extensive data gathering and review process conductec
University; the Natural Resource Conservation Service, the North Carolina Department of Ag.
ConsurmerServices, and the North Carolina Division of Soil and Water Conservation. In 199S
representatives'.of each of the above -named organizations were asked to collect yield data a
' reasoned judgement of the yields for various crops on each of the soils occurring in their cot
data were collected from 87 responses, representing 93 counties. The data were then comps
available research data and intensively reviewed by a panel of field agronomists, soil scientis
researchers familiar with the soils, crops and climatic conditions in each region. In reviewing
following assumptions were made:
1. Realistic Yield Expectations should be based on the average.of the best 3 years in a 5 yr
which could be achieved with a high level of management (top 20% of growers)
2. For soils that may be mapped in multiple regions or in slightly different landscapes (for
plains or. stream, terraces), the Realistic Yields are based on the most common prevailint
that soil rather than the most ideal site for agricultural production.
3. For soils that are Somewhat Poorly, Poorly, or Very Poorly Drained, effective artificial dr,
be in place 'to achieve the yields shown in the RYE tables.
4. For tobacco production in the Piedmont physiographic, irrigation was assumed to be avE
no irrigation was assumed in the Coastal .Plain physiographic region. This is in accordana
numerous surveys which show less than 15%-20% of tobacco in the Coastal Plain is irri,
to 80% of tobacco in the. Piedmont receives some irrigation
Citation: North Carolina Nutrient Management Workgroup. 2003. Realistic yields and nitroge
factors for North Carolina crops. http://www.soil.ncsu.edu/nmp/ncnmwg/yields/ Nor
State University, North Carolina Department of Agriculture and Consumer Services, North Ct
Department of Environment and Natural Resources, Natural Resources Conservation Service
To access the database, select a county and at least one crop. Multiple crops may be selecte
the Ctrl key when selecting crops. A report will be generated showing a summary of current
data for the county you selected.
Select Your County Cumberland
•
Select Your Soil
Correct for Slope
TaB: Tarboro loamy sand, 0 to 6 percent slopes
TR: Torhunta and Lynn Haven soils
VaB: Vaucluse loamy sand, 2 to 8 percent slopes
VaD: Vaucluse loamy sand, 8 to 15 percent slopes
Use Representative Slope Typical of the Soil Mapunit
Use my slope 0
Submit
Reset
Realistic Yields for TaB: Tarboro loamy sand, 0 to 6 percent slopes in Cumber
Tarboro data source for MLRA 153A: Wilson County Soil Survey. Type location: Edgecombe
Crop Yield
Barley (Grain)
Corn (Grain)
Corn (Silage)
47
Bushels
60
Bushels
0 Tons 12 0
Nitrogen
Nitrogen Application
Factor Rate
(Ibs/acre)
1.6 75
1.25 75
Crop
Phosphorus
Removal
(Ibs/acre).
18
26
0'
http://www.soil.nesu.edu/nmp/yields/index.php
5/10/2007

Nutrient Management in North Carolina..
Page 2 of 3
25
Bushels', 0
0 0.08
Pounds
Cotton. Pounds 0.12 72 17
Sorghum (Silage) .0 Tons 8.4: 0 0
Oats -(Grain) 60 1.3} , 78 15
Bushels
Peanuts 2400 0 0 13
Pounds
35
Rye (Grain) •Bushels 2.42 85 12
Srnall Grain"(Silage), ' '6 Tons 12.5 75 . 32
Sorghum (Grain) .25 CWT 2, 50 19
Soybeans (Double , 21
Cropped,) . Bushels 0
•Soybeans (Full Season
Soybeahs'(Double 21
.Cropped - Manured), Bushels ,4
Soybeans (Full Season - . 25'
Manured) Bushels. 4
Tobacco (Burley)
Tobacco (Flue Cured) 2100 0.4 840
Pounds
0 17
100,•
20
17
20
Triticale (Grain) Bushels 1.48 • 73 16
Tropical ,Corn (Silage) 0 Tons 7:2 0 0'•
Wheat (Grain) 35 2.42 85 • 18
Bushels
Bahiagrass (Hay). 3 Tons 50 150 34'
Caucasion/Old World 3.2 Tons 50 160 38
Bluestem (Hay)
Common Bermudagrass 3.Tons 50 150 36
(Hay) .
Dallisgrass (Hay) 3 Tons, 50 150.. . , " 39
Fescue '(Hay) , 0 Tons , 50' , 0 - .. 0
Hybrid Bermudagrass 4 Tons 50 200. 49
,,(Hay).
Hybrid Bermudagrass
overseeded with
Rescuegrass' (Hay)
Mixed Cool Season Grass 0 Tons 50 0
'(Hay).
Orchardgrass (Hay) . 0 Tons .50 0
Pearl Millet (Hay) 3.6 Tons 55 198
Rescuegrass (Hay) . 2 Tons 50f .100
Sorghum Sudan (Hay,) 3.2 Tons 55`• . 176
Timothy Grass.(Hay) •:. 0 Tons 50 0
Annual Ryegrass (Hay) 0 Tons 0 " 0
Annual. Ryegrass
(Pasture), "
Bahiagrass (Pasture). '
Caucasion/Old World
Bluestem (Pasture) :
Annual, Rye Overseed
Hay - April 7 Harvest 0 Tons
(Hay) .
Annual Rye Overseed,
Grazedl- April 7 Harvest 0 Tons
(Hay) .
'0 Tons 0
3 Tons 50,,
3.2 Tons 50
0.
150
160
0
Common Bermudagrass 3 Tons 50 150
(Pasture) ,
Dallisgrass (Pasture) ' 3 Tons 50 150
4.6 Tons 50 230 • 63,
0 ,.
48'
• 23
44
0
0.
.0
3
0
4
http://www.soil.ncai.eciu/nrnp/yields/index.php
5/10/2007

Nutrient Management in North Carolina Page 3 of 3
Fescue (Pasture) 0 Tons 50 0 0
Hybrid Bermudagrass
overseeded with 4.6 Tons 50 230 .6
Rescuegrass (Pasture)
Hybrid Bermudagrass
(Pasture)
Mixed Cool Season Grass 0 Tons• - 50 ' , 0 0
(Pasture)
Orchardgrass (Pasture) 0 Tons :50 0 0
Pearl Millet (Pasture) 3.6 Tons `55 198 5
Rescuegrass '(Pasture) 2 Tons 50 100 ..2
Small Grain Cover (Hay) 0 Tons 0 ' 0 0
Small Grain Overseed
(Hay)
Sorghum Sudan,
(Pasture)
Switchgrass (Hay) 0 Tons 50 0 0
Switchgrass(Pasture)0 Tons 50 0 0
Timothy Grass (Pasture) 0 Tons 50 0 0,'
Other Crop 0 0 . 0 0
Other Pasture 0 50 0 0
4 Tons 50 200 5
0 Tons
3.2 Tons 55
0 .0
176 4
This page is developed and supported by Dr. David Crouse.
Copyright (c) 2003
Thu May 10 17:00:32 2007.
1
http://ww,w.soil.ncsu.edu/nmp/yields/index.php 5/10/2007

TopoZone - USGS Manchester (NC) Topo Map
Page 1 of 2
New Product
Download every
Topo and Aerial at
this location $9.95
Get Your MapPack
Now!
Map and Photo Info
Download Topo Images
Download Photo Images
USGS Topo Maps
i:24K/25K Topo Maps
"..ii 1:100K Topo Maps
(1:250K Topo Maps
'ifo..)Automatic selection
Map Size
°Small
.( IMedium
C.) Large
View Scale
1 : 50,000
Coordinate Format
D/M/S
Map Datum
NAD83/WGS84
Show target
Email this topo map
Bookmark this topo map
Print this topo map.
Drop -in Performance for Your Car F;'
14111lion M e Warranty
Designed to tncnease Power & Torque
THE WDRL0'SPEST AIR FILTER
wd
tem
.USGS Manchester (NC) Topo Map
View TopoZone Pro topographic maps, aerial photos, street maps, coordinate and elevation
display
35° 11' 48"Nr 78° 57' 54"W (NAD83/WGS84)
-�
{p�
.11
'LI
[
1 r
-. 1 ^'7"'r-r^"
�..�:...iy
FQpa�Qne
,ic•CIN AY44•Zti!Mrsab�adF
r r
f
R
•
r J ^I-ir.
•ti ''' l �'�4r r �a:i1 IJa x,c\�
r -•1 ( J•�*p ",._'r
1 t '''` ? c. i i7t\ t; i al i.t„ Prt -✓� z7 +1 3i� J 7
.� x,9 :n.
'(rR
+ r 'V 5� t
I I'r
4f /`f { -
t:..*�• V
J.
C ,` l'
r,,...=' ^ r J..
f i r f
.r it J
' ‘l '1
t � l
+ ' --•til
j of r
lrr. n •... 1r'•
/r f.
w
f'
ss ,'
�,. ' •')
�'� 4`y r
ti >4r}>>f
f•ck r ^'
a'' ,%
71 N,/(•NN r
1. e F
`' � 1�r fir..
Jr
,r; r d. r ram:"
- N. T .
°'�} sr s�'r
+ f a' .,C p +•�.•..
1 �,r.-- •�^tra t �` �kV
17.J x � f
,r s ��• 'xt �f r
fF �• Wut Yti4 ,� 1'�7V(�
�-
K . `�` `'J air _T tf/r}
k r y. �rr� e. 4r• a,l
t 5 e 1 .ilk' �(` r! •
YJ'ra Y �t .. 1'r{ 4*li
r 1 jS Y>r _ �' •J • ), .-+,14...j. ..•
n '^7�
.---.°•` 1(`' ''
�' _! �'..'�
IT y4
fyy"^"
t r+ .yl I ''
r'r'` 9Pt°
s + '1 r + ,r +;
` r•''`r i ,• — ;... 1� I r'r
•.
}
! •'
;
IA'I
{{ it
xi
fr}
9 r't
IJ+�'
'
v
ry,,
jr" LI St e•el,,
`a•�' k
i�
r a
Bari ,.X ,:•
19 1:.
r ' :Ji,
irr
" - ]( �
f•f
rI / 9
_•'-t (..
A
0
{
y,
,%r'
w
`
y
?,t
i jP /
r
i is
c7 1'
I 1
'
t t
pi 'f �'+...
�\r
` _ l
Ill µ• �4�
f?.fi',
1,+.
ie-,-.
•f +
;
fr rpppf f
rr��,y„ «% ,•
r
.o1.ewaF£. t.s Ub 9c� l
1 .,_..•y* :Prli_3;,felrU '•�f
,,e� ✓ b;7iS`
w • f'. 4 f(
S J f r
1 l ! 4
• 4F t
1 p� ; S ..s
i �. a ' f r. 4 t
f� t ;`
.4 Yi
r•.,' l s
r .'' titt.,
, i f • �
1��� ,n' r
`r 1. .� `\
i r
. ` i /
• ,.`' i7 .+�'.� wr
T -•,
r (
!
' �=
"' t"'" r -
t
.:"`"• " ,.. ,,
,%'�tr�Itiµ
��.
�'• ' s r
�'\r {r �I r!�
� y r--FF —
;
F t:
t ti(7
t .J"' } �cw ~•.' 't
-., 4
S.l Blr` dMl
'3� 1
a 4.
titi'+�`4
:! j:t
4
{, 31AIM �laf
1 r
' Jr, r /
} r m
•f ;F`J
ti rt.
r
`
+�•
,
r.-"Lx.:^" 't
(�r`,,r--, /..it
rJ r ,+
r r / r 8! rJ •
J .r �' . /` `4•, t t'r
�Y 1 ` til}5
�fia' —� r}• o"`''^`-'},�,
�{•5l•F�ti;i
i"^��'i`•1„
r p
•.�1r• �
---'`9/
+➢IF�...i.�.�ed
S
r7 t•
, 'xr..
l
ri't
}
9�%t� ....r,l1y
]t1er •
,r� - '~
r 5I
"..t"�1-.�..'l i.�IIr c�:ii':� -.
rl �ti
---..„
/f
/jjtt
f
/
1�w�—,ya''yyC.��� JN lr�Li49'3. .�. ur.'...Cy
.V.3raa•+r.l a.L'.l.>1"c. .`. w•49/:JV/•'�•f� F.�9,rc`. C-Fise.
jp±
5.
�.9��, N,lW. �,.r�..n-M"�sA4 '`N rixoh );. LLS.f"is°L.(rVik...4 ;. �t d.^�P+: JW1.. ,..N fi
:'.a ...(
0
0.5
1
1.5
2.5 km
rj
0.6
0.9
1.2
.171
,Ads by Google
REI's iggest
Sale Is On
Save up to 30%
on Outdoor Gear
at the REI
Anniversary Sale.
Ends 5/13 -
www.rei.com
Advertise on this site
http://www.topozone. com/map. asp?1at=3 5.19667&lon=-78.96505&datum=nad83 &u=6&layer=DRG&size=m&s=50
5/11/2007

TOWN OF SPRING LAKE, CUMBERLAND COUNTY
TOM BROOKS FARM:. NEW LAND APPLICATION
FIELDS 1 ' THRU 6
A. SITE OWNER INFORMATION
B.NRCS SOILS MAPS w/SOIL TYPES & ACREAGE
C . CURRENT CROPS IN FIELDS 1 - 6
D :WETLANDS MAP
E. 100 YR. FLOODPLAIN MAP
F. R.Y.E. INFO FOR SOIL TYPES
G. USGS TOPO MAP

Map Output
Page 1 of 1
ArcIMS HTML Viewer Map •
gry.
c"#'
Fl�
Fs 4
�
s
"y✓'hd ,,,tit›.1, laq;
�hrt'raYyl1i°� 1t i� 1 ., ri {R t!
alC
M (V ..gyp7
'S p 'fro
•
tj„YYL(li�
- ? ylSay a fi�
� {kl�i•�iyA✓ Y! *�i8t4 i1-��5fFM;N.£
4.d�sJ�'fc'-a,.° ll f>t',i°' �4A
��r ZM .ft ,. l •� a 'M�k3.:F.e<����5a`�9~.
2
Parcels
Ree
AREA
NADB] PIN
FRONTAGE
DEPTH
ACRE
TRACT NAME
SUB NAME
SOFT
TOT ASMT
TOT_LVAL
TOT_BVAL
TOT XFEATV
OUAL_GRADE
FARM_PGR
ELDER_EXMP
ST_NUM
ST_NAME
ST_SUFIX
CITY
STATE
ZIP
ZJP EXT
OWNER NAME
TAX_DIST
YEAR_BUILT
1
340305.21204603
5337.02-
337
0
0
7.7
A A MCCORMICK
0001350
116314 .
23288
91808
1218
370
N
8195
MCCORMICK BRIDGE
RD
SPRING LAKE
NC
28390
D
MCCORMICK FARMS LIMITED
0111
1936
7.70 <
http://152.31.99.8/servlet/com.esri.esrimap.Esrimap?ServiceName=community gis&ClientVersion=3.1&Form=True&Encode=False 2/12/2007

687200 687300
687400'. 687500
.687400 687500--
USDA Natural Resources
WI Conservation Serviec .
SOIL SURVEY OF CUMBERLAND COUNTY, NORTH CAROLINA
687600 • 687700
687600
687700
WQ1086:Fields 1-6
687800 687900-. 688000- 688100. 688200
687800 687900
Meters.
0 50 100 200-
688000
688100
688300 688400.
688200 ' 688300
Web Soil Survey 1.1
National Cooperative Soil Survey.
688500
688600
688700'
688800
688400 688500 . 688600' ,688700 688800
688900
688900
Feet
250 ', :500 .. 1,000 1-, 500. 2,000
5/10/2007
Page 1 of 3
0
0
N
CO
M
O
_
O
rn
m
M
0
0)
0
0
n
CO
CI
0
0
m

Soil Survey of Cumberland County, North Carolina
WQ1086:Fields 1-6
aney loamy san
ercent
Acres in AOI ,•P.ercentof AOI
Blaney loamy sand, 8 to 15 ' - 1.
percent- slopes
uplm sandy loam,_
ercent slopes..?
Norfolk loamy sand, 2 to 6 20.3
percent slopes
Vaucluse Gilead loamyi`
sands, 15 to 25 percent x,
slopes
Map Unit Legend Summary
Cumberland County, North Carolina'
Map Unit Symbol Map Unit Name
BaD
NoB
19.1
USDA Natural Resources
Consenatioa.Service
Web Soil Survey 1.1
National Cooperative Soil Survey
5/10/2007
Page 3 of 3

Legend
Dwelling
♦ Structure
Well
= = = Access Road
— — Ditch/Drain
X X Fence
Road
-- Stream
*Trees
7A Buffer
Field Boundary
ET1 Pond
Property Boundary
Field 1
Field 6
l *
- _._. * -
Field i Total Acres ~Buffered Acres Net Acres
I 11 - 20.9 - — — 0.9 20.0 COAST, L RERMOPA — CvYta - -r-OVER. SEC
; _ . ._'21 26.21 9.0 17.2i . 6A14 1 A. (I/ RyE avER samo ov /2Via '7
i - 1__ 3 I - _— 36--j _ -- - 4.3 32.0 4 AN i A "' "
4 9.4 Pk. L. i3r�+v mere- E R•,>04 — RyE. Ss � o it 2 ido i
� •�-
.1.4. 8.0 C o e< o� �.
i 51 13 6• 0.3 ^- 13.3 CoAS i � G RtrlclvDA -
• "•
6114.0 1.0 13.0 COFk5.T14L (3CRPlUA4r —
Scale: 1 inch equals 600 feet
Drawn by: SDM
Reviewed by: MLM
Date: October, 2006
ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICES • ENGINEERING • TESTING
Town of Spring Lake
LAND ADDITION
Cumberland County
North Carolina
Fields 1-6 Buffer Map
JOB NO: 1588-06-086
Ry
FIGURE

USFWS NWI Wetlands
z
35-12-20 N
z
cJ
co
78-56-20 W
• = —
78-56-10 W
78-56-20 W
78-56-10 W
78-56-0 W
78-56-0 W
76:55-50 W
. 78-55-40 W
78-55-50 W 78-55-40 W
0
co
0
z
co
cr.
z
0
z
9'
z
Map center: 35° 12' 33" N, 78° 56' 3" W
• Legend
CONUS_wet scan
0
E1.
• Out of range
de Interstate
Major Roads
Other Road
or Interstate
State highway
04, US highway
Roads
Cities
r ; USGS Quad Index 24K
Lower 48 Wetland Polygons
off Eauatine and Marine DeepWater
o Estuarine and Marine Wetland , •
15 Freshwater Emergent Wetland
0 Freshwater Forested/Shrub Wetland
Faresehd water Pon Lk
Other
Rivedne
Lower 48 Available Wetland Data
Non -Digital
Digital
•; No Data
Scan
/ NHD Streams
0 Counties 100K
Urban Areas.300K
States 100K .
South America
North America
Scale: 1:18,476
This map is a user generated static oulput from an Internet mapping site and is for general reference only. Data layers that
accurate, current, or otherwise reliable. THIS MAP IS NOT TO BE USED FOR NAVIGATION.
appear on this map may or may not be

• Map Output Page 1 of 1
WQ0001086: Tom Brooks Farm -. Fields 1-6 .(new)
Thu May 10 12:36:03 EDT 2007
North Carolina
perating Tech.
FEHP.'S COO PEF,ATJ in
7E=HU3.:u. PAF,711EF,
M.C. Floodplain Mapping Information System
On -Line Mapping Application Provided by the,.
North Carolina Floodplain Flapping Program.
Disclaimer: This is not 3 I_gally binding (FIRM) Flood '
Insur3m_e Rate Map and sbould not be used 3s such.
http://149.168.101.8/servlet/com. esri. esrimap.Esrimap?8erviceName=locator&GlientVersion=3.1 &Form... . 5/1:0/2007

Nutrient Management in North Carolina
Page 1 of 3
Nutrient Management in North Carolina
Realistic Yield Expectations
North Carolina,Agricultural Nutrient
Assessment Tool
e About NCANAT
a Installing & Updating Software
n User Manual
• PLAT Scientific,Basis &
Supporting Literature
e Technical Support
a Credits
North Carolina Nutrient
Management Software
e Software Download
Training
n 3-Day Nutrient Management Training
a Writing a Certified Nutrient
Management Plan—RUSLEIPLAT
Session
• Certification Training for Operators of
Animal Waste Management Systems
Additional Resources
E. NC Realistic Yields Expectations
a Interagency Nutrient
Management Committee
• NRCS Technical Standard 590 for
Nutrient Management
NCANAT Field Site
Assessment Worksheet
NCANAT Field Site
Assessment Instructions
• SoilFacts: Deep Soil Sampling for
Nutrient Management
a Soil Management Groups
a Surface P-Index Requiring a Deep
Soil Sample
The following tables are the result of extensive data gathering and review process conduct&
University, the Natural Resource Conservation Service, the North Carolina Department of Ag
ConsurmerServices, and the North Carolina Division of Soil and Water Conservation. In 199c.
representatives of each of the above -named organizations were asked to collect yield data a
reasoned judgement of the yields for various crops on each of the soils occurring in their cot -
data were collected from 87 responses, representing 93 counties. Th'e data were then comp
available research data and intensively reviewed by a panel of field agronomists, soil scientit
researchers familiar with the soils, crops and climatic conditions in each region. In reviewing
following assumptions were made:
1. Realistic Yield Expectations should be based on the average of the best 3 years in a 5 yr
which could be achieved with a high level of management (top 20% of growers)
2. For soils that may be mapped in multiple regions or in slightly different landscapes (for
plains or stream terraces), the Realistic Yields are based on the most common prevailint
that soil rather than the most ideal site for agricultural production.
3. For soils that are Somewhat Poorly, Poorly, or Very Poorly Drained, effective artificial dr
be in place to achieve the yields shown in the RYE tables.
4. For tobacco production in the Piedmont physiographic, irrigation was assumed to be avE
no irrigation was assumed in the Coastal Plain physiographic region. This is in accordant
numerous surveys which show less than 15%-20% of tobacco in the Coastal Plain is irri.
to 80% of tobacco in the Piedmont receives some irrigation •
Citation: North Carolina Nutrient Management Workgroup. 2003. Realistic yields and nitroge
factors for North Carolina crops. http://www.soil.ncsu.edu/nmp/ncnmwg/yields/ Nor
State University, North Carolina Department of Agriculture and Consumer Services, North Ci
Department of Environment and Natural Resources, Natural Resources Conservation Service
To access the database, select a county and at least one crop. Multiple crops may be selecte
the Ctrl key when selecting crops. A report will be generated showing a summary of current
data for the county you selected.
Select Your County. Cumberland
Select Your Soil.
Correct for Slope
BaB: Blaney loamy sand, 2 to 8 percent slopes
BaD: Blaney loamy sand, 8 to 15 percent slopes
BdB: Blaney -Urban land complex, 2 to 8 percent slopes
BdD: Blaney -Urban land complex, 8 to 15 percent slopes
(o:! Use Representative Slope Typical of the Soil Mapunit
Use my slope l0
o.
Submit
Reset
Realistic Yields for BaB: Blaney loamy sand, 2 to 8 percent slopes in Cumber)
Source of yields is R.Y.E. data from Lee County, NC.
Crop Yield
Barley (Grain)
Corn (Grain)
Corn (Silage)
http://www.soil.nesu.edu/nmp/yields/index.php
45
Bushels
62
• Bushels
0 Tons 11.8 0
Nitrogen
Factor
1.58
Nitrogen
Application
Rate
(Ibs/acre)
71
1.22 75
Crop
Phosphorus
Removal
(Ibs/acre)
17
27
4/18/2007

Nutxient Management in North Carolina Page 2 of 3 •
Cotton 499 0.112 56 14
Pounds
Sorghum (Silage) 0 Tons 8.3 0 0
57
Oats (Grain) Bushels 1.27 72 14
Peanuts 1995 0 0 11
Pounds,
Rye (Grain) Bushels 2.32. 77 11 ,
Small Grain (Silage) 5.7 Tons 12.2 70. 31
Sorghum (Grain) 29 CWT 1.94 55 21
Soybeans (Double '• 20 0 0 16
Cropped) Bushels
Soybeans (Full Season) Bushels 0 0 19
Soybeans (Double 20 3 98 79 • 16
Cropped - Manured) Bushels
Soybeans (Full Season - .24 •3.98 95 19
Manured) , '. Bushels '
Tobacco' (Burley) • i pounds . 0.06' 0 0
Tobacco (Flue •Cured) 2090 0.038 79 10
Pounds
47
Triticale (Grain) . , Bushels .1.6 74 15.
Tropical Corn (Silage) 0 Tons 7.1 0 0
33
-Wheat (Grain) Bushels 2.32 77 17
Bahiagrass (Hay) 3.6 Tons 48.9' 177 41,
Caucasion/Old World 3.8 Tons 48.9 186 45
Bluestein (Hay) ,
Common Bermudagrass 3.6'Tons 48.9 177 44
(Hay)
Dallisgrass (Hay) 3.6 Tons 48.9 . 177 47
Fescue (Hay) , 1.4 Tons 48.9 ' 70 . 22
Hybrid Bermudagrass 4.8 Tons 48.9 • 232 . '58
(Hay)
Hybrid Bermudagrass
overseeded with 5 Tons 48.9 , 246 68
Rescuegrass (Hay) ,
Mined Cool Season Grass 1' Tons 48.9 • 51 15'
(Hay)
:Orchardgress (Hay) 1 Tons 48.9 ._ . 51 15
Pearl Millet (Hay) 4.3 Tons 53.9 - 230 57
Rescuegrass (Hay) 1.9 Tons 48.9 93 21
Sorghum Sudan (Hay) 3.8 Tons 53.9 205 53
TirnothyGrass (Hay) 0 Tons 48.9 • 0 0.
,Annual Ryegrass (Hay) 0 Tons 0 . 0 0
Annual Ryegrass 0 Tons 0 '0 0
'(Pasture)
Bahiagrass_(Pasture),:''' .3.6 Tons 48.9 177 , 4
Caucasion/Old World 3.8 Tons 48.9 186 5
Bluestem (Pasture)
Annual Rye Overseed
Hay - April 7 Harvest 0 Tons 0 0 0
(Hay)
Annual Rye Overseed'
Grazed - April 7 Harvest 0 Tons 0 0 0
(Hay) ,
Common Bermudagrass 3.6 Tons 48.9 177 4
(Pasture)
Dallisgrass (Pasture) '3:6 Tons 48.'9 ' 177
http://www.soil.ncsu.edu/nmp/yields/index.php - 4/18/2007

,
. . Nu.trient Management in North Carolina Page 1 of 3
' ..
North Carolina Agricultural Nutrient
Assessment Tool
,
About NCANAT
si Installing & Updating Software
vs User Manual
PLAT Scientific Basis &
Supporting Literature
Technical Support
is Credits
North Carolina Nutrient
:Management Software
se Software Download
Training .
• 3-Day Nutrient Managernent Training
ra Writing a Certified Nutrient '.
Management Plan—RUSLE/PLAT
Session
• Certification Training for Operators' of
Animal Waste Management Systems
•
, Additional Resources
s. NC Realistic Yields Expectations
interagencyNutrient
Management CoMmittee
• NRCS Technical Standard 590 fOr.
Nutrient Management '
▪ NCANAT Field Site.
Assessme,nt Worksheet
• NCANAT Field Site
• Assessment Instructions
SoilFacts: Deep,Soil Sampling for
' Nutrient Management
• Soil Managernent Groups
• Surface P-Index Requiring a Deep
Soil Sample
•
Nutrient Management in North Carolina
Realistic Yield Expectations
Thefollowing.tables are the result of extensive ,data gathering and review process conductec
University, the Natural Resource Conservation Service, the North CarolinaDepartment of Ag
ConsUrmerServices, and the North .Carolina DivisiOn of Soil and Water Conservation. In 199c
representatives of each of the above -named Organizations_ were asked to collect yield data a.
reasoned judgement of the yields for various crops on each of the soils occurring in their coi
data were collected from 87 responses, representing. 93 counties. The -data 'were then compz
available research data and intensively reviewed by a panel of field agronomists, soil scienti:
researchers farriiliar, with the soils, crops and climatic conditions in each region. In reviewing
following assumptions were Made: .
. ,
1. Realistic Yield Expectations should be based on the average of the best 3 years in a 5
which. could .be achievedwith a high level of management (top 2'0% ofgrower)
2. Fdr soils that may be "mapped in multiple regions or in slightly different landscapes (for
plains or stream terraces), the Realistic Yields are based on the most common prevailing
that soil rather than the most ideal site for agricultural production.
3. For soils that are Spmewhat.Poorly, Poorly, Or Very Poorly Drained, effective artificial dr
• be in place.to.achieve the yields shown in the RYE -table's.. ,`•
4. For tobacco production iri the Piedmont physiographic, irrigation was assumed to be avE
no irrigation- was'assumed in the Coastal Plain physiographic region. This is in accordani
numerous surveys,,which "showless than 15%-20% of tobacdd in the Coastal Plain is irri.
,tb"80% of tobacco in the Piedmont i'eceives Some irrigation .
Citation: North Carolina Nutrient Management Workgroup. 2003. Realistic yields and nitroge
factors for North Carolina crops. http://wvvvy.soil.ncsu.edu/nmp/ncnmwg/yields/ Nor
State University, North Carolina Department of Agriculture and Consumer Services, North Ci
Department of Environment and Natural Resources, Natural Resources Conservation Service
• To access the database, select a county and at least one crop. Multiple crops may be selecte
the Ctrl key When selecting crops. kreport will be generated showing a summary of current
• data for the county you selected.
•
Select Your County Cumberland
_ .
Select Your Soil
•
Correct for SlOpe
DpA: Duplin sandy loam, 0 to 3 percent slopes
ExA: Exum lOam, 0 to 2 percent slopes
FaA: Faceville loamy sand, 0 to 2 percent Slopes
FaB: Faceville loamy sand, 2 to 6 percent slopes
-Use Representative SlOpe Typical of the Soil Mapunit
Use rnj, slope LO'
Submit
'Reset
Realistic Yields for DpA: Duplin sandy loam, 0 to 3 percent slopes in Cumberl
• -These nearly level, very deep, moderately well drained soils are on uplands. They formed in
sediments. They have,a loamy surface layer and a clayey subsoil. Permeabilityis moderate!)
shrink swell Potential is moderate Seasonal high water table is within a depth Of 2.0 to 3.0
Crop
- • •
Nitrogen Crop
• Yield Nitrogen Application Phosphorus
Factor Rate • Removal
(Ibs/acre) (lbs/acre)
81 - ,Barley (Grain) ,1.44
117
Bushels ,
31
Corn (Grain)
http://www:soil.ncsu:eclu/timp/yields/index.php.: ,
115 1.06
122
51
4/18/2007

Nutrient Management'in North Carolina Page 2 of 3
Bushels
Corn (Silage) 0 Tons • 10.4 0 0
Cotton pou0nds 0.066 53 23
Sorghum (Silage) 0 Tons 7.3 0 0
1Oats (Grain) g�2
shels 1.07 109 : 26
Peanuts 3000.0 •0 17
Pounds
Rye (Grain) 60 1.86 112 20
Bushels
Small Grain (Silage) 9 Tons 10.6 95 - 49
Sorghum (Grain) 55 CWT 1.61 89 41
Soybeans (Double 38 . 0 0 30
Cropped) • Bushels
5
Soybeans (Full Season) Bushels 0 0
Soybeans (Double - 38. 3.84 146
• Cropped - Manured) Bushels
Soybeans' (Full Season - 45
Manured) Bushels. 3.84 173
Tobacco (Burley) pounds 0.06 0
Tobacco (Flue Cured) 2800 0.024 67 -
Pounds
84
Triticale (Grain) _ Bushels 1:48 124'
Tropical Corn (Silage) , •0 Tons 6.2 0
Wheat (Grain) BOusheis 1.86 112
Bahiagrass (Hay) i 4.1 Tons 42.2 173
Caucasion/Old. World 4.4 Tons 42.2 186
Bluestem (Hay)
Common Bermudagrass 4.1 Tons 42.2 173 50 .
(Hay)
Dallisgrass (Hay) 4.1 Tons 42.2 173 54 -
- Fescue (Hay) ' 3.5 Tons 42.2 148 55 .
Hybrid •Bermudagrass 5.5 Tons 42:2 232 68
(Hay) .
Hybrid Bermudagrass
overseeded with „ . •7 Tons 42.2 295 95 -
Rescuegrass (Hay)
Mixed Cool Season Grass 2.5 Tons 42.2 106, 36
(Hay)
Orchardgrass (Hay) 2.5 Tons 42:2 106 37
Pearl Millet (Hay) - 4.7 Tons 47.2 222 . 63
Rescuegrass (Hay) • 3.5 Tons 42.2 148 40
Sorghum Sudan (Hay) 5.2 Tons 47.2 245 72
Timothy Grass (Hay) . 0 Tons 42.2 0 0
Annual Ryegrass (Hay) 0 Tons 0 0 0
Annual Ryegrass 0 Tons 0 -0 0
(Pasture)
Bahiagrass (Pasture) 4.1 Tons 42.2 • 173 . 5
Caucasion/Old World 4.4 Tons 42.2 186 5
Bluestem (Pasture)'
Annual Rye Overseed
Hay - April 7 Harvest 0 Tons 0 0 0
(Hay) '
Annual. Rye Overseed,
Grazed - April 7 Harvest 0 Tons 0 0" 0
(Hay)
36
.30
36
14
28
0
30
47
52.
Common Bermudagrass
http://www.soil.nesu.edn/nmp/yields/index.php
4.1 Tons'42.2 . 173
4/18/2007

Nutrient Management in North Carolina
•
Page 1 of 3
Nutrient Management in North Carolina
Realistic Yield Expectations
North Carolina Agricultural Nutrient
Assessment Tool
n About NCANAT
e Installing & Updating Software
e User Manual •
e PLAT Scientific Basis &
Supporting Literature
e Technical Support
■ Credits
North Carolina Nutrient
Management Software
El Software Download
Training
■ 3-Day Nutrient Management Training
e Writing a Certified Nutrient
Management Plan—RUSLE/PLAT
Session
or Certification Training for Operators of
Animal Waste Management Systems
Additional Resources
e NC Realistic Yields Expectations
s Interagency Nutrient •
Management Committee
■ NRCS Technical Standard 590 for
Nutrient Management
■ NCANAT Field Site
Assessment Worksheet
✓ NCANAT Field Site
Assessment instructions
® SoilFacts: Deep Soil Sampling for
Nutrient Management
e Soil Management Groups
e Surface P-Index Requiring a Deep
Soil Sample
The following tables are the result of extensive data gathering and review process conductec
University, the Natural Resource Conservation Service, the North Carolina Department of Ag
ConsurmerServices, and the North Carolina Division of Soil and Water Conservation. In 199S
representatives of each of the above -named organizations were asked to collect yield data a
reasoned judgement of the yields for various crops on each of the soils occurring in their cot
data were collected from 87 responses, representing 93 counties. The data were themcomp<
available research data and intensively reviewed by a panel of field agronomists, soil scienti:
researchers familiar with the soils, crops and climatic conditions in each region. In reviewing
following assumptions were made:
1. Realistic Yield Expectations should be based on the average of the best 3 years in a 5 ya
which could be achieved with a high level of management (top 20% of growers)
2. For soils that may be mapped in multiple regions or in slightly different landscapes (for
plains or stream terraces), the Realistic Yields are based on the most common prevailing
that soil rather than the most ideal site for agricultural production.
3. For soils that are Somewhat Poorly, Poorly, or Very Poorly Drained, effective artificial dr
be in place to achieve the yields shown in the RYE tables.
4. For tobacco production in the Piedmont physiographic, irrigation was assumed to be avE
no irrigation was assumed in the Coastal Plain physiographic region. This is in accordant
numerous surveys which show less than 15%-20% of tobacco in the Coastal Plain is irri.
to 80% of tobacco' in the Piedmont receives some irrigation
Citation: North Carolina Nutrient Management Workgroup. 2003. Realistic yields and nitroge
factors for North Carolina crops. http://www.soil.ncsu.edu/nmp/ncnmwg/yields/ Nor
State University, North Carolina Department of Agriculture and Consumer Services, North 0
Department of Environment and Natural Resources, Natural Resources Conservation Service
To access the database, select a county and at least one crop. Multiple crops may be selecte
the Ctrl key when selecting crops. 'A report will be generated showing a summary of current
data for the county you selected.
•
Select Your County Cumberland
Select Your Soil
Correct for Slope
WaB: Wagram loamy sand, 0 to 6 percent slopes
WgB: Wagram-Urban land complex, 0 to 8 percent slopes
WmB: Wickham fine sandy loam, 1 to 6 percent slopes
WnB: Wickham -Urban land complex, 1 to 6 percent slopes
qi Use Representative Slope Typical of the Soil Mapunit
Use my slope I0
Submit
Reset
Realistic Yields for WaB: Wagram loamy sand, 0 to 6 percent slopes in Cumb
County
These nearly level to gently sloping, very deep, well drained soils are on uplands. They form
marine sediments. They have sandy surface and subsurface layers 20 to 40 inches thick. Thl
loamy. Permeability is rapid in the surface and subsurface layers and moderate in the subso
potential is low. Seasonal high water table is below 6.0 feet.
Crop Yield
Nitrogen
Nitrogen Application
Factor Rate
(Ibs/acre)
Crop
Phosphorus
Removal
(Ibs/acre)
Barley (Grain)
http://www. soil.ncsu.edu/nmp/yields/index.php
53
1.58 84
20
4/18/2007

Nuttient Management in North Carolina Page 2 of 3
Bushels
74
Corn (Grain) Bushels 1.22 90 32
Corn (Silage) • • 0 Tons 11.8 0 0
637
Cotton pounds 0.112 71 . 18
Sorghum (Silage) 0 Tons 8.3, 0 0
Oats (Grain) Bushels 1.27 . ,85: 17
Peanuts 2940 0 0 16
Pounds
Rye (Grain) 39 2.32 91 13
Bushels
Small Grairi'(Silage) 6.4 Tons 12.2 ' 78 „ ' 34
Sorghum (Grain) ' ' 34 CWT ' 1.94 6.7 26
Soybeans (Double • 23 0 0 18
Cropped) . Bushels
27
Soybeans (Full Season) Bushels, 0 0 22
Soybeans (Double 23 3.98 90 18
Cropped- Manured) . Bushels
Soybeans (Full' Season - 27 3.98 109 22
Manured) Bushels
Tobacco (Burley) 0 0.06 0 0
Pounds
Tobacco (Flue Cured) 2548,0.038 97 13
Pounds
Triticale (Grain) Bushels 1.6 88 18
Tropical Corn ;(Silage) 0 Tons 7.1 . ' 0 • 0`'
Wheat(Grain) Bushels 2.32 91 20
Bahiagrass (Hay) 4 Tons 48.9 . 196 46
Caucasion/Old World 4.3 Tons 48.9 211 51
Bluestem (Hay) ,
Common,Bermudagrass 4 Tons 48.9 196 49
(Hay)
Dallisgrass (Hay) ' 4 Tons • '48.9 196 • 53
Fescue (Hay) ' 1.5 Tons 48.9 72 23
Hybrid Bermudagrass 5.4 Tons 48.9 264 66
(Hay) ' ,
Hybrid Bermudagrass
overseeded with 5.5 Tons 48.9 . 268 75
Rescuegrass (Hay)
Mixed Cool Season Grass 1.1 Tons 48.9 53 15
(Hay) .
Orchardgrass (Hay) 1.1 Tons 48.9 53 16 ,
Pearl Millet (Hay) ' ' 4.9 Tons, 53.9 264 • 65
Rescuegrass (Hay) 2 Tons 48.9 96 22
Sorghum Sudan (Hay) 4.3 Tons 53.9 . 232 60
Timothy Grass (Hay) 0 Tons 48.9 0 • • 0
Annual Ryegrass (Hay) 0 Tons 0 - 0 0
Annual Ryegrass 0 Tons 0 0 0
(Pasture) '
Bahiagrass (Pasture) 4 Tons 48.9 196 ' 4
Caucasion/Old World 4.3 Tons 48.9 211 5
Bluestem (Pasture)
Annual Rye Overseed
Hay - April 7 Harvest • 0 Tons 0 0 0
(Hay)
Annual Rye Overseed, 0 Tons 0 . 0 0
Grazed April 7 Harvest
http://www.soil.ncsu.edulnmp/yields/index.php 4/18/2007

TopoZone.- USGS Manchester (NC) Topo Map
New Product
Download every
Topd and Aerial at
this location $9.95
Get Your MapPack.
Now!
Map and Photo Info
Download Topo Images
Download Photo Images
USGS Topo Maps'.
C)1:24K/25K Topo Maps.
Q 1:100K Topo Maps
1:250K Topo :Maps•
©Automatic selection
Map Size
C) Small
©Medium
'' Large
View Scale.
1 : 50,000
Coordinate Format
•.D/M/S
Map Datum
NAD83/WGS84
Show target
Email this topo map
Bookmark this topo map
Print this topo map
- • USGS Manchester (NC) Topo Map
View TopoZone Pro topographic maps, aerial photos, street maps, coordinate and elevation
display
35° 12' 28"N, 78° 56' 00`"W
(NAD83ta,
/W.p GS`t 84
as T. 7g757 -°aPrZiFt7C -F7t'
` )d4 1i f t
,
{
r i r
G
:rI ";F �°trfopoaane JtR>- r-�
cpJtl'S.�'!i414tY't�P,�3(r" 'x}CdItN't,� •t ��. �.`f�" � 4 l'' P 'Arl1 ,1 ~ �- � +.,ti#
r �+f t t `fir , 41. t
�� ` Yw "�. �l4fs—' 1r r�
�. R j4 ! t
u.�/r I Gdt'91 64i.. li4� Nx1C�v~ §\j'y ti ' r . �t 15 4 p. I ,,! 5 t
k (T hrGy! S 4 fi—•......./r.y
jalcChlf t :ram
. l a I
E1.9ina r f f{�,,v . " V t. f
Park.• ,I f r>'d) /r P :i �( "~ . k a� �.: 4- (r
• 1 ' r' x,{ f eQ I r �f`r'-R x �1lpp T ,. y -. 1' .. 2f ✓1•f'P'�- L...l" .
,1 f r l,. 4t 1,.,,, ,r�J -,r�l 1:j � ,•"t� �, '
.�:. f'ri ff,�''f r r 9 /r(r "a �--
-jd r. �__ JJff�� ; 1. �f ,',/rff r fi.7* �f„�� � _. ,. r f 1�'+ , t it v` •i. Y ,,•
t t� V. - 1lS %l'l-f ft%L+`?. / r{ f'z' ) ' ' •r � 7{�• 1! 1 �°• ',.l \•,Si ' ' 7 r ,"
' �y ri, i rr ,; r { `-
l' �LI�QtS.+il . } f / � fJ { ... ` II' 1 ', 4
1 f �.m--7 1/, 1 I � f t
9� .:'' •�r't{!- / 1 •-.+,-J %5 .•,•fP!`F f • 5: �,u 1'"x t I t�ytl 1 ._.: : 1 A y P'`
41a ff✓ r t.;l 0. r r,r : t , �e ,�! ;tomt �';
/ ' .".), .+, +., y4 �+.� �, �/ [. r , i I 4t1 " (, !r L 1 � , u I�� {
L•�',..r� .J "�r�1r f\v 4' . • •
rti I r�� 5 t t4 ` �1 f
:-G1'1 f' ! _/ ✓r f , •/J ` rX '
s1.,x + ,It f
,-, r ! 4.il'1Jkfi ''11
1! ��t _ b �,frd
I r f Z'. _' i l t i /'CrY P t r f f
xl f ry u: , i2., ?..., a, tri +r �t ti
• %a v, •
•,r. ,�'Ja-. d(t .rl .y�ir .`.-,`at•
+Z. a�. �i�*p" ,,,,'i-+ - G„E .v f'!, .' tJ+` I �/\9,i'�`5_ f, ( ri
f _ i f 1'f.:. t 1 .l . J �'Y{1 I t ti r .: (']�-,.',. `�y, tI'
''f �' 1 f/ ''S -} a ! ! h +�r! _. I _ %v. '` 4 't . 7.- ,l
{ _ 1 I -- 1 �:.�1 �, 1. 1 z. J 1 e �'�^.1 � Y �''%'.?'
,r-mY ) f. k"r r _ 5 -51 h- lh.��' '-• £---*w j ` f \i
o•
-0.5-
1.5
2.5 km
0
0.3 • - 0.6
0.9
1.2
1:5 mi
azr`e��r
44r,'
Free Satellite
Map:
Get a 100% free
satellite map. See
your house from
space.
Satellite.Map.Googlepac
Secret Satellite
TV On PC -
Now youcan
watch unlimited
Satellite TV on
your computer!
www.your-free-
satellite.com
Free Satellite
Map Tool
Using Earth
Software'you can
view Satellite.
Maps of
Anywhere, Free!
p la netearth.viewer.goog
Map
Street - City -
State -Country
World - Satellite -
Aerial - Travel
MapDownload.info
Page 1of2
http://www.topozone. com/map. asp?lat=3 5.20793 &lon=-78.93 342&size=m&u=6&datum=nad83 &layer=DRG
!17--E.505 .
5/10/2007

TOWN OF SPRING LAKE, CUMBERLAND COUNTY
TOM BROOKS FARM: NEW LAND APPLICATION
FIELDS 7, 8 & 9
A. SITE OWNER INFORMATION
B.NRCS SOILS MAPS w/SOIL TYPES & ACREAGE
C. CURRENT CROPS IN FIELDS 7, 8 & 9
D: WETLANDS MAP
E. 100 YR. FLOODPLAIN MAP
F. R.Y.E. INFO FOR SOIL TYPES
G. USGS TOPO MAP

Map Output
Page 1of1
ArcIMS HTML Viewer Map
'
f
N, R.+ .J'
A �, ""'b�
,Y tGk(ekk
`fir .�,�zt,.X• S�^'i6`S.F'
3, s Rh i °9• Y
... yy�
i"
M1ryt�j
r
kT AP•'A1'i
_gip
!1
1
ITV,
i s:,
I,
i FC'
Parcels
AREA
NAD83 PIN
FRONTAGE
DEPTH
ACRE
TRACT NAME
SUB NAME
SOFT
TOT_ASMT
TOT LVAL
TOT_BVAL
TOT_XFEATV
DUAL GRADE
FARM_PGR
ELDER_EXMP
ST_NUM
ST_NAME
ST_SUFIX
CITY -
STATE
ZIP
ZIP_EXT
OWNER_NAME
TAX_DIST
YEAR_BUILT
LEE
IRec
1
4160177.3409363
6119 0502.95•
0
0
100.62
GROG CREEK
0000000
92231
92231
0
0
Y
N
8195
MCCORMICK BRIDGE
RD
SPRING LAKE
NC
28390
-6103
MCCORMICKFARMS
0111
0000
100.62 ACRES
E 26B
http://152.31.99.8/servlet/com.esri.esrimap.Esrimap?ServiceName=community gis&ClientVersion=3.1&Form=True&Encode=False 2/13/2007

Map Output
Pagel of
ArcIMS HTML Viewer Map r
1 _G' �53. e ,'y —• .`�f.).i
'7.
� � )"
L
PNI
S
Ah{�� 1`�`q ,.�' }, w*
r
f}' T"'Y - '
,
q.
_ ' . Parcels
Rx
- AREA .
NAD83 PIN
FRONTAGE
DEPTH
ACRE
TRACT NAME
SUB NAME'
SOFT
TOT_ASMT
TOT_LVAL
TOT_BVAL
TOT_XFEATV
OUAL_GRADE
FARM_PGR
ELDER_EXMP
ST NUM
ST_NAME
ST_SUFIX
CITY .STATE
,ZIP'
ZIP_EXT
.OWNER NAME -
TAX_DIST
YEAR BUILT
. LE.
4000940.7638376
0512-05-
3656-
0
0
92 '
MCCORMICK LD
0000000
164220
164220
0
0
-
Y - -
N.
6195
MCCORMICK BRIDGE
RD
SPRING LAKE
NC
28390
-8103.
MCCORMICK FARMS
0111 .
0000-
92 ACRES MCC
E-269)
httn://152.31.99.8/servlet%com.esri esrimap.Esrimap?SeiviceNarne=coiilmunity .gis&ClientVersion=3.1&Form=True&Encode=False 2/12/2007

m
co
•0
m
10
.0
0
CO
O
0
O
0)
684900
684900
685000
685000
685100
685100
685200
SOIL SURVEY OF CUMBERLAND COUNTY, NORTH CAROLINA
685300
685400
685500
685200 685300 685400 685500
Meters-
0 50 100 . 200
WQ1086:Field 7
685600
685700
685600 • 685700
685800
685800'
685900
685900
686000
686000
- 686100
686100
686200
686300
686200
686400
686300
Feet
--.,0 200 400 . 800 -. 1,200 , . 1,600
686400
0)
CO•
0
0I
m▪ .
m
O
O
co
m
m
r�
0.
0
n
O▪ )
• USDA Natural Resources
aka Consecration Service
W.eb Soil Survey 1.1
National Cooperative Soil Survey
5/10/2007
Page 1. of 3

Soil Survey of Cumberland County, North Carolina - WQ1086:Field 7
Map Unit Legend Summary •
Cumberland County, North Carolina
Map Unit Symbol
Map Unit Name
Acres in AOI Percent of AOI
DhA
Dothan loamy sand, 0 to 2
percent slopes
1.5
14.1
VgE
Vaucluse-Gilead loamy
'sands, 15 to 25 percent
slopes
0.9
8.4
USDA Natural Resources Web Soil Survey 1.1
`'�— Consen'ation Sen'ice National Cooperative Soil Survey „
5/10/2007
Page 3 of 3

0
CO
0
0
m
rn
0
m
m
685400. - 685500' 685600.
-, 685400
685500
:685600 •
SOIL -SURVEY OF CUMBERLAND COUNTY, NORTH CAROLINA
WQ1086:Fields 8-9 .-
685700 '685800- 685900 686000 686100 . 686200 , .686300
686400- 686500 686600 686700 .686800 686900. 687000
685700 685800 685900- 686000 686100. 686200 686300 686400 686500 ' 686600 686700 68.6800 686900
immommom Meters -
0 50 100 200
687100 687200
687000 687100 687200 '
Feet
0.. 250 ' 500 ..-: 1,000 - 1,500 2,000
•
0
to
cr,
co
0
0
rn
co
m
;USDA Natural Resources
Conservation Service
Web Soil Survey 1.1
National Cooperative Soil Survey
5/10/2007. .
Page 1 of 3

Soil Survey of Cumberland County, North Carolina
WQ1086:Fields 8-9
Map Unit Legend Summary
Cumberland County, North Carolina
Map Unit Symbol
CaB
Map Unit Name
aney °loamy san
ercent slopes ,
• Candor sand, 1 to 8 percent
slopes
Acres in AOI
35.1
Percent of AOI
86.9
USDA Natural Resources
„ I Conservation Service
Web Soil Survey 1.1 5/10/2007
National Cooperative Soil Survey Page 3 of 3

Legend
II Dwelling
♦ Structure
• Well
_ _ = Access Road
--- Ditch/Drain
X X Fence
- Road
Stream
* *Trees
Buffer
Field Boundary
Pond
µ,r-tProperty Boundary
ISTcAvP To ea P(AJJTCb
PC-At,L_ (- ► LLl T. 1
BARE.. OM 66467
Field .7
tale R
co
•
0
Q
0
0
■
0 9 iField
7
Scale: 1 inch equals 600 feet
Drawn by: SDM
Reviewed by: MLM
ti
p
0
p
Total Acres Buffe red Acres Net Acres
11.4. 3.51 7.9
5.9
— 0.4 1----- - sJ
408
0
ri“-b S 8-07 BARE dot) ,
`l/?S'/o 7. /STCRop - SIN -
Fco ER) .a l PtMZL (\R C
Town of Spring. Lake
LAND ADDITION
Cumberland County
North Carolina
. Fields 7-9 Buffer Map
FIGURE
6
T.
Date: October, 2006
ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICES • ENGINEERING • TESTING JOB NO: 1588-06-086

USFWS NWI Wetlands
z
0
co
0
• Z
0
cJ
78-58-0 W
.78-58-0 W,
78-57-40 W
78-57-40 W -
This.map is a user generated static output from an Internet mapping site and is for,general
reference only. Data layers that appear on this map may or may not be'accurate, current, or
otherwise reliable. THIS MAP IS NOT TO BE USED FOR NAVIGATION.
. _
78-57-20 W
78-57-20 W
78-57-0 W
0
Z _
o.)
cin
z
78-57-0 W
Map center: 35° 11 38" N, 78° 5730" W
Legend
CONUS jwet Scan '
0
.0 1
• Out of range
eV Interstate
•Major Roads
Other Road.
Interstate.
State highway
US highway.
Roads •
• USES Quad Index 24K
Lower 48 Wetland Polygons
0 Estuarine and Marine Deepwater
ar Esttiarine and Marine Wetland
Freshwater Eniergent Wetland
0 Freshwater Forested/Shrub Wetland
o Freshwater Pond
Lake ;
• Other
Rikrine
Lower 48 Available Wetland Data
Non -Digital '
Digital '
'No Data
Scan
NHD Streams
E-7-, Counties 100K
M States 100K
South America
O North Ainerica
Scale: 1:19,648

Map Output
Page 1 of 1
WQ0001086: Tom Brooks Farm - Fields 7 - 9 (new)
Thu May 10 12:45:37 EDT 2007
North Carolina
+ r r erating Te
FEHA5 COO PEP.4rJN3
7E=Hilly=�.� P.' T5JEF,
N.C. Floodplain Mapping Information System
On -Line Mapping Application Provided by the
North Carolina Floodplain Mapping Program
Disclaimer: This is not a legally binding (FIRM) Flood
Insurance. Rate Map and should not be. used as such.
EF L?.,i y�.''.+iD
0
G.:isa5F-To:Xi
Pc:,-2fend an Cal -WI
Al MIS 15ki'73.-t
z3 >is w
Fie. vt iX
1-7
Legend
7kt},4i1 a1' 'ryU aIse'J '
>r.
ariftehioav
,+,fir t5 'u;aa: y
http://149.168.101.8/servlet/com.esri.esrimap.Esrimap?ServiceName=locator&ClientVersion=3.1 &Foram.. 5/10/2007

NNiittient Management in North Carolina
Page 1 of 3
Nutrient Management in NorthCarolina
Realistic Yield Expectations
North Carolina Agricultural Nutrient
Assessment Tool
is About NCANAT
• Installing & Updating Software
a User Manual
a PLAT Scientific. Basis &
Supporting Literature
a Technical Support
a Credits
North Carolina Nutrient
Management Software
e Software Download
Training
u 3-Day Nutrient Management Training
• Writing a Certified Nutrient
Management Plan—RUSLE/PLAT'
Session
® Certification Training for Operators of
Animal Waste Management Systems
Additional Resources
m NC Realistic Yields Expectations
a Interagency Nutrient
Management Committee" •
• NRCS Technical Standard 59P for
Nutrient ivlanagement
NCANAT Field Site
Assessment Worksheet
m NCANAT Field Site
Assessment Instructions
• SoilFacts: Deep Soil Sampling for
Nutrient Management
Qs Soil Management Groups
- ra Surface P-Index Requiring a Deep
Soil Sample
The following tables are the result of extensive data gathering and review process conductec
University, the Natural Resource Conservation Service, the North Carolina Department of Ag
ConsurmerServices, and the North Carolina Division of Soil and Water Conservation. In 199c
representatives of each'of the above -named organizations were asked to collect yield data a
reasoned judgement -of -the yields for various crops on each of the soils occurring in their cot
data were collected from,87 responses, representing 93 counties: The data.were then comps
available research data and intensively reviewed by a panel of field •agronomists, soil scientir
• researchers familiar with the soils, crops and climatic conditions iri each region. In reviewing
following assumptions were made:
1. Realistic Yield Expectations should be based on the average of the best 3 years in a 5 yr
which could be achieved with a high level of management (top 20% of 'growers)
2. For soils that may be mapped in rultiple regions or in slightly different landscapes (for
plains or stream terraces), the Realistic Yields are based on the most common prevailing
that soil rather than the most idealsite for agricultural production.
3. For soils that are Somewhat Poorly, Poorly, or Very Poorly Drained, effective artificial dr
be in place to achieve the yields shown in the RYE tables.
4. For tobacco production in the Piedmont physiographic, irrigation was assumed to be avE
no irrigation was assumed in the Coastal Plain physiographic region. This is in accordanr
numerous surveys which showlessthan 15%-20% of tobacco in the Coastal Plain is irri•
to.80% of tobacco in.the.Piedmont receives some irrigation
Citation: North Carolina Nutrient Management Workgroup. 2003.•Realistic yields and nitroge
factors for'North Carolina crops. http://www.soil.ncsu.edu/nmp/ncnmwg/yields/ Nor
State University, North Carolina Department of Agriculture and Consumer Services, North Cz
Department of Environment' and Natural Resources, Natural Resources Conservation Service
To access the database, select a county and at least one' crop. Multiple crops may be selecte
the Ctrl key when selecting crops. A report will be generated showing a•summary of current
data for the county you selected.
Select Your County Cumberland
Select Your Soil
Correct for Slope
CaB: Candor sand, 1 to 8 percent slopes
CaD: Candor sand, 8 to 15 percent slopes
Cf: Cape Fear loam
Ch: Chewacla loam "
•
') Use Representative Slope Typical of the Soil Mapunit
•
Use my slope 10'
Submit J
Reset
Realistic Yields for CaB: Candor sand,.1 to, 8 percent slopes in Cumberland Cc
These nearly level to gently sloping, very deep, somewhat excessively drained soils are on u
formed in sandy and 'loamy Coastal. Plain sediments. They have a sandy surface layer and St.'
The surface and subsurface layers are 20 to 40 inches thick. The subsoil is loamy. Permeabil
the surface and moderate in the subsoil. Shrink -swell potential is low. Seasonal high water t
than 6.0 feet below the surface.
Crop Yield
Barley (Grain)
45
Nitrogen
Nitrogen Application
Factor Rate
(Ibs/acre)
1.6 71
Crop
Phosphorus
Removal
(Ibs/acre)
17
http://Www,soil.ncsu.edu/nmp/yieldg/index.php
4/18/2007

Nutrient Management in North Carolina
Page 2 of 3
Bushels
52,
Corn (Grain) Bushels ' 1.25 65 23
Corn (Silage) 0 Tons .42 0 0
451
Cotton Pounds 0.12 54 ' 13 '
Sorghum (Silage) 0 Tons 8.4 0 0
57
Oats (Grain) Bushels 1.3 74 - 14
Peanuts 19000 ' 0 10
Pounds
• Rye (Grain) Bushels 2.42 80 - 11
•Small Grain (Silage) 5.7 Tons 12.5 71 31
Sorghum (Grain) - 24 CWT '2 48 18
Soybeans (Double 17 0 . 0 14
Cropped) . Bushels
` Soybean (Full Season) 21 0 0 17
Bushels
Soybeans (Double 17 4 68 14
Cropped - Manured) Bushels
' Soybeans (Full Season - 21 - 4
Manured). Bushels
Tobacco (Burley) pounds 0.08 '',0
Tobacco (Flue Cured) 1805 '0.4
Pounds
Triticale (Grain) Bushels 1.48 69
Tropical Corn (Silage) 0 Tons 7.2 .0
Wheat'(Grain) Bushels 2.42 • 80
Bahiagrass (Hay) 3.2 Tons 50 162
Caucasion/Old World 3.4 Tons 50 171
Bluestem •(Hay)
Common Bermudagrass
(Hay) •
Dallisgrass (Hay)
Fescue (Hay)
Hybrid Bermudagrass
(Hay)
Hybrid Bermudagrass
overseeded with
Rescuegrass (Hay)
84 17
722 9
15,
0
17
37
41
3.2 Tons 50 162• 39t'.
3.2 Tons 50 162 42
0 Tons 50 0 • 0
4.3 Tons 50 214 53
4.8 Tons 50 238 65
Mixed Cool Season.Grass 0 Tons '50 0 0 .
(Hay)
'Orchardgrass ,(Hay) O'Tons 50 0 0
Pearl'Millet (Hay) 3.9 Tons 55' , 214 52
Rescuegrass(Hay) 1.9 Tons 50 95. 21
Sorghum Sudan (Hay) 3.4 Tons 55 ' 188 48
Timothy. Grass (Hay) 0 Tons '50 • 0 • ' 0
Annual Ryegrass (Hay) 0 Tans 0 0 0
Annual Ryegrass 0 Tons 0 0
(Pasture) '
Bahiagrass (Pasture) 3.2 Tons 50 162
Caucasion/Old World 3.4 Tons 50 171
Bluestein (Pasture) -
Annual Rye Overseed
Hay - April 7 Harvest 0 Tons 0 0
(Hay)
0
4
4
Annual Rye Overseed, 0 Tons
Grazed - April 7 Harvest
http://www.soil.ncsu.edu/nmp/yields/index.php .4/18/2007
0 0

Nutrient Management in North Carolina
Page 1 of 3
Nutrient Management in North Carolina
Realistic Yield Expectations
North Carolina Agricultural Nutrient
Assessment Tool
m About NCANAT
$ Installing & Updating Software
m User Manual
PLAT Scientific Basis &
Supporting Literature
o Technical Support
m Credits
North Carolina Nutrient
Management Software
• Software Download
Training
n 3-Day Nutrient Management Training
e Writing a Certified Nutrient
Management Plan—RUSLE/PLAT
Session
■ Certification Training for Operators of
Animal Waste Management Systems
Additional Resources
® NC Realistic Yields Expectations
w Interagency Nutrient
Management Committee
• NRCS Technical Standard 590 for
Nutrient Management
• NCANAT Field Site
Assessment Worksheet
• NCANAT Field Site
Assessment Instructions
e SoilFacts: Deep Soil Sampling for
Nutrient Management '
Soil Management Groups
u Surface P-Index Requiring a Deep
Soil Sample
The following tables are the result of extensive data gathering and review process conductec
University, the Natural Resource Conservation Service, the North Carolina Department of Ag
ConsurmerServices, and the North Carolina Division of Soil and Water Conservation. In 199c.
representatives of each of the above -named organizations were asked to collect yield data a
reasoned judgement of the yields for various crops on each of the soils occurring in their cot
data were collected from 87 responses, representing 93 counties. The data were then compi
available research data and intensively reviewed by a panel of field agronomists, soil scienth
researchers familiar with the soils, crops and climatic conditions in each region. In reviewing
following assumptions were made:
1. Realistic Yield Expectations should be based on the average of the best 3 years in a 5 yc
which could be achieved with a high level of management (top 20% of growers)
2. -For soils that may be mapped in multiple regions or in slightly different landscapes (for
plains or stream terraces), the Realistic Yields are based on the most common prevailing
that soil rather than the most ideal site for agricultural production. '
3. For soils that are Somewhat Poorly, Poorly, or Very Poorly Drained, effective artificial dr
be in place to achieve the yields shown in the RYE tables.
4. For tobacco production in the Piedmont physiographic, irrigation was assumed to be avz
no irrigation was assumed in the Coastal Plain physiographic region. This is in accordan(
numerous surveys which show less than 15%-20% of tobacco in the Coastal Plain is irri.
tb 80% of tobacco in the Piedmont receives some irrigation
Citation: North Caroliria Nutrient Management Workgroup. 2003. Realistic yields and nitroge
factors for North Carolina crops. http://www.soil.ncsu.edu/nmp/ncnmwg/yields/ Nor
State University, North Carolina Department of Agriculture and Consumer Services, North Q
Department of Environment and Natural Resources, Natural Resources Conservation Service
To access the database, select a county and at least one crop. Multiple crops may be selecte
the Ctrl key when selecting crops. A report will be generated showing a summary of current
data for the county you selected.
Select Your County Cumberland
Select Your Soil
Correct for Slope
LaB: Lakeland sand, 1 to 8 percent slopes
LbB: Lakeland -Urban land complex, 1 to 8 percent slopes
Ld: Lenoir loam
Le: Leon sand •
® Use Representative Slope':Typical of the Soil Mapunit
Use my slope i0
Submit
Reset
Realistic Yields for LaB: Lakeland sand, 1 to 8 percent slopes in Cumberland
These nearly level to gently sloping, very deep, excessively drained soils are on uplands. The
marine, eolian, or fluvial sands. They are sandy throughout the soil profile. Permeability is v.
shrink -swell potential is low. Seasonal high water table is below a depth of 6.0 feet.
Crop Yield
Nitrogen
Nitrogen Application
Factor Rate
(Ibs/acre)
Barley (Grain) Bushels 1:6 74
Corn (Grain) • 54 1.25 67
http://www.soil.ncsu.edu/nmp/yields/index.php
Crop
Phosphorus
Removal
(Ibs/acre)
18
24
4/18/2007

Nutrient Management. in North Carolina
Page 2 of 3
Bushels
•Corn (Silage) 0 Tons 12 .0 0
515
Cotton pounds 0.12 62 15
:Sorghum, (Silage) 0 Tons 8.4 0 0,
5.9
Oats (Grain) Bushels 1.3 76 15
Peanuts 1960 0 0 1,1
Pounds
Rye (Grain) 34 2.42 83 11
Bushels .
Small Grain (Silage) ' 5.9 Tons 12.5 74 32
Sorghum (Grain) 25 CWT 2 49 18
Soybeans (Double 18 .
Cropped) Bushels 0 0 14
Soybeans (Full Season) Bushels 0 • 0 17
Soybeans (Double 18
Cropped - Manured) Bushels
Soybeans (Full Season - 22
Manured) - Bushels
0
Pounds
1666.
Pounds
Tobacco (Burley)
Tobacco (Flue Cured)
4 ' 71 14
4
0.08
0.4
86 17
0
666 8
Triticale (Grain) _ Bushels 1.48 71 16
Tropical Corn (Silage) • 0 Tons 7.2 0 0
Wheat (Grain) 'Bushels 2.42 83 17
Bahiagrass (Hay) 2.9 Tons 50 147 34
Caucasion/Old World , 3.1 Tons 50 157 37
Bluestein (Hay)
Common Bermudagrass 2.9 Tons 50 147 36
(Hay)
Dallisgrass (Hay) 2.9Tons 50 147 39.
Fescue (Hay) 0 Tons 50 0 • ' 0
Hybrid Bermudagrass 3.9 Tons 50 ' 196.. 48
(Hay)
Hybrid Bermudagrass
overseeded. with • ' 4.5 Tons 50 225 61
Rescuegrass(Hay)
Mixed Cool Season Grass 0 Tons ' 50 '0 0
(Hay)
Orchardgrass (Hay) 0 Tons 50
Pearl Millet (Hay) 3.5 Tons 55
Rescuegrass (Hay) 2 Tons 50
Sorghum Sudan (Hay) 3.1 Tons 55
Timothy Gass (Hay) 0 Tons . 50
Annual Ryegrass (Hay) 0 Tons 0
Annual Ryegrass ' 0 Tons 0 ' 0 0
(Pasture)
Bahiagrass '(Pasture) 2.9 Tons 50 147 3
• Caucasion/Old World 3.1 Tons 50 157 4
Bluestem (Pasture) -
Annual Rye Overseed
Hay - April 7 Harvest 0 Tons 0 0 ' 0
(Hay)
Annual Rye Overseed, -
Grazed - April 7 Harvest 0 Tons 0 0 0
' (Hay) •
O 0
194 47
98 22
172 44
O 0
O 0
Common Bermudagrass 2.9 Tons 50 147 4
http://www.soil.ncsu.edu/nmp/yields/index.php 4/18/2007

TopoZone - USGS Manchester (NC) Topo Map. Page1 of 2
Microsoft Survey Software
Web Survey & Form -Server Software Microsoft® Platforms Using .NET
_www.elltirnateSurvev.com/FreeTrial
Ads by Google - Advertise on this site
Ram t 'sIJJ
New Product _ USGS Manchester (NC) Topo Map.
Download every View TopoZone Pro topographic maps, aerial photos, street maps, coordinate andeleyation
Topa. and Aerial at display
this location $9.95 35° 11' 29"N, 78° 57' 40"W (NAD83/WGS84)
. Get Your MapPack o
Now!
I'
Map and Photo Info
Download Topo Images•
Download Photo Images
USGS Top° Maps
topo Maps
Topo Maps
1 : 2 5 0 K Topo Maps
seleCtion
Map Size
t?')Srnall
©Medium
0 Large
View Scale..
t 50,000
Coordinate Format
D/M/S
Map Datum
NAD83/WGS84
Show target
Email this topo map
Bookmark this topo map
• Print this topo map •
17..;",i,',..51...z:w'‘.1.: -,,..'-'4•L'sx...a.itt'int•Figl,', '"'==".,'."'"i-'',41''''''''''''.:::'''M'''.'''''4"' -1.'''''''N'',-":"?".".°47::,?-1' ''il•V,''.7,-c.',4''''&111'."J':',Yit`•MW,c1,X''.""ti‘,',,IWe.''...'.'fl,:','7,",r7x-&''',"':',A.I•t7.'"',1'''tc,F,';'...=:...1,k'Xif....'''
.
topozone --
,,,....:
'''' ' .
,./ .' r Vt. /' /
'.', • ' :.: ' • -,.' - .., -. ....
_../ ....',1;::
.., ,,,,,,,,;..- -
.
-,.,---`-
''' --Ali n, 0/, - • ;
-. .,,,,.,,-,
•• . ,f
,,,,-_-••:4;:.--..,„,
17,
. ' , '
.....- i -... ...- ,
: , -,,),Liit-I''' ."4.--;;;;?•, -_ -
f ' ' .7"-- '..,"""'• 1 " • , ' •
,...
'S ')`:-‘: "..:-,,.
• ,
.-r. 'i--•''',c
• --
....:.„-\.,
...-
i
,f,..1-,;`,.,,,
-:
.
s-,-
.•'''''
.,,:--.'":f'e,/l.„;'••':e".,'
---.•?‘N•;
‘:;•:\--7;,r..
•')-.,.1-':P(,^le•'
,
:.,ii,x,.;,,‘,,,
-'
.i-*iI'-'Ti4',k
;
'7.4'!7:,•\,,.„),,'„
l.-.,....-;-• l
Di,
:i:V.1/4'.•,4
al'
'-• '
\
....•.."—
4„,
, 1
,,,.;.,..4-,'...1,,',:-,,4,-.,, .
-:..,•. ....
;
•,.
/
,1, -V,-i:f„ r,„
,: •,--.J
,1,1
&')'-
\-,—
r RRAGGf .
:'I
:r..„
f{
-
/ (
,1' . -, RES s-,6A
,
:-r.:'
, .r,,;,2ff,,•
`.:
,,,, (') . ',.
:,'"*"'-J ,',..:;•:..;%\;
,'%,,- -'‘,.` ' ' '
k'-s'; '''
. ...,,,
. '
5C,s0
1
,, t ;
. . • . •
'‘2,,,,..,:
t(v...‘„,_4 - \ ..,:-,, e••••"'„71t , ..„, ,
. .1
' "."
\ •,...,
,
',.,,
i'
.:•:,
• 1.t. ri :
_,-:''.
•-.. : •
. - -
r"•'''', ;,
c''''..,,,-..,
...."../,';.,i,,,
, -----
:
. .c/..7-4,,,
•••: ',,-.••• 0 47, ..„,.1
t''',., '' P-'''''....''''" ;
., at 15• ii.<1‘ :. ,
„.-----,
,
- .-•
' ,
';••Y• ‘•:A6+trif"
'-;-?'
'' 7'. - ''' '•
'..• •••••, 4:,./ •,,
-; - •••C•I V,
.5..7 fli, ''"
'
("Vier-,-,'
.., •
,,,
• ,,i1
.„..,-;•‘.z.e„..e..,,,f;;° . ,, d • _ . , "...„, 4.4.,
S.
,..,
• l'",A r.
'V'
•-. ''—
jo '; -
,.//
•••'..
"' '' :' ''IANblii&? •if-hk
, • • „•• ' •• ' r- , -,/,
gi
' Prl'f'
' : '
,
•
4
'
. ' ti q"'f.'' '
• /
..f
.: 1,, I -, •:', ' '5 •'•
' 5!, 415,•!:
... • ' 'c''''7774;2:7'.-z.•
-,
': '-:'''') ' : ' : .6: ' 11
I 1. '''' •
l ,.. ...
'
''::•
4:'-'-",-.,
...5
`-','.5",,, -C'•"51%, 1- I
,,,,-..;.,4-, '.4"`N"'•k"..•
‘ '-'''''' '5.,' 4;r .4 ,......,--; ...,,,, ..- .
*
"i,dil,
1. " ,, „
I, I I
e
• :-.-.7)
. .
',--
, .
'.•,"
r.
51.
I
•• 4,•• •' ....,...d.r..-.
',.1. '..k,,,,,.. ' o. 4 i
•.,, c or,
4, .,• /
'ite ' , ' ' I ,... \I' \ t
'
1 ."
"c ‘,.
I, ' e -••••.......b i
t,'• i., •-•,
, ,
,..
-..,, .1 '..- ,7'
' '
.- ,i, ./
-./ '
.1>
,
../1„. ',;.;....
''.."....,".'„,' ",,
I:. ;''''''::
_, , • l' t-,...,k.,6-1
Is, • •„:.-,,,,;.,-,.)
.„.1.k.
tch, r'-',\•:::::, ,, -,,
".
: . " , ... ,
V. "-
-''''.
.0 • Jr
„,,
'i
;I?' \N.,
.. •-
I ,,,
c.
.11 .,..."..,;-.-.::,-__— , N
'4,- - ', --u".:1'..) I .
• ftf i
"-:77.1.-."
, .‘:;:•:_-•••'''•
" -' '
?<, .4,!,, P ',...., •?t,'tj i"*.'s p • .
,
d ', k
' ''''''',,,li,C,,N-,t.7.:NtratFt0,.41
livie -la, ,
._:-7:';',,,, :)-',,,-(45.' ,,,, , "':'!-'
-1-11!:
•2t",i•`•,";4mit4vRiAir,* ",;', V ,A.-",,,,:,.-, ,7,..''',, le-,,....,,ri..,,",;',,,,,"..,,V,V.q. o. AP,
"Acr...°P,'.w P,.,10,-,T,',N,,2,,,,Ii..?fi,3`,.rer-6',,A.6.7,:::,,,, l' i'''',Va,r:-.7.,!Vi'.,!IS '''..!,'::,.`...),rtd4i1-,';',,,,,& .:'',"•.?
%"'','"•,'"••', L ; •••?•7. e."`i•Q'••,-,.i•,4•""••• ""1"',•••••1•."'1".,,,,';',", '';
tA, {VA .1,14114,11 ,V11
0
0
. 1.5
2.5 km
0.3
• 0.6 0.9
1.2 (" 1.5 mi
riti • -
11:7-Et,-4F32
http://ww,w Aopozone.Com/map .asp?lat=3 5.1 9 13 9&lon=-7 8 .96 1 17&size=m&u=6 &datum=na.d83 &layer=DRG
1
Live Aerial Map
Satellite
See live .aerial
map satellite.
100% free- ,
download. Get it
now. - ,
satellite.map.goorglepagi
Aerial Image Map.
Software'
Use.SnapMap to
see -Linear Aerial
Photos Fitt &
MoVing-Map
wwW.rskorbital.com
Secret_Satellite
TV On PC
Now youoan
watch UnliMited
Satellite TVOn
your computer!
www.your-free-
satellite.com
Aerial Maps
View Thousands
,
of Aerial Maps
Here.
FindAerialMap.info
5/10/2007

TopoZone - USGS Manchester (NC) Topo Map Pagl.1 of 2
NewProduct-
Download every
Topo and Aerial at
this location $9.95
Get Your MapPack
Now!
Map and Photo Info
Download Topo Images
Download Photo Images
USGS Topo Maps.,
0 1:24K/25K Topo Maps
t 1:100K-Topo Maps
( > 1:250K Topo Maps
'•JAutomatic selection
Map Size
€Small .. • -
rul Medium
a Large
View Scale
1.50,000
Coordinate Format
D/M/S
Map Datum _
NAD83/WGS84
['Show target
Email this topo map
Bookmark this topo map
Print this topo map
View TopoZone
,. urs¢a ..,. , .a F .. r r r v afar s ;R�tbt , r, . ar•. ,� ESL ::.i; �F .roe"'" , r 64'
USGS Manchester (NC) Topo Map
Pro topographic,maps, aerial photos, street maps, coordinate and
display
35° 11' 42"N, 78° 57' 10"W (NAD83/WGS84)
elevation
'a.'� +i :7�.�%f df IM, t r�.M{r A�� ! .Tti iY
l 3{' ,!, .74., CF ..r�,l y G--,- + 4L F-,. �: - l (t
,i
'Air
t
ll rr
C�1 _�
,�•E.✓','.r
topozone
!S. P#7c 1 eJ
'«a�`. ?\ C $ "8 G311h, t, x !
jJO"'.��
yeti+[/
n
#fir
f..J.
.•"' rrr��1
aar
f • `
,- — `
r
,: <:„r..'•-e.b.
,•{
i , r / Y
Y'tY CA' i ' A!
Y;
Y L*. +rr•
„‘ ri'�i
,•, 4e '`
J t<
/( s.a ",a7
1
ry11.1
s,\,
�' f 1i Ar r%rt`�Y��r/•;
s
t i'e `L • �; �"•,/ r
ram /
r,;'r'`'t r f
,M �' / ✓ , r
4\ \ fc � \ .,
r
,` r l -'r'`7
!!�
J +d
, is t
,,,°rl r r ! r '
•
Ji a`! t
�, , l ,
_ .r 1F
Ark "" [ ,., 1., F- r�,� y•�,
{ r'
w' rl ,r
_ : r �.'
( r' ._1>°J
N.
y
'1i T
fat I
'v1?�
\t
1'il
.ram
, .
rJ
9jjfft((ff}
It l ; 4
'rY l r . f '
civorig£ Cii � . ydt
� VA?, A?, t
ti; 7F
ti Au
„K.,
ii ^1 rr-__
�
� 1 r 1
- s'/ / l }
\�r
r :•r' .J,,,:r'.
tls+ . �—. Vl.i 'y'+-;.
`,Z --- ti ,, .-
"e ti. 4_
J'f ✓
fF/
, `�+�
ff f [
jj (r, y rEi.
1. 1 Ir �tr`-'
I I
t;' it,
( r ..; `ti`4
1 ,
r� 1 �"
l . r
" , '.
!
t (r`
�`t� r'
+'_ tJ ry.; .}
...
J�1. `-
I° y •r
..•.." .�
r
1 r r
,, if,r`•- r
v 14.E
J'rt ,
4 i .H
il
4"wy. n.!i i
: r j .�� .i,
4, j"rl r){+nJ
t : t({ f
s r . 4p
:� ,k+�tti r %.
. -.�._
Jr •a,
~1 f .+ 5 •r '�
a k a
r�t; f n v _
l : r G.'kr
y t�. (t'!�'J
`+,
F ..r%,
y Fr ` 1+r i I ✓d^
rrt,
,�.• 1^`t
. .. 4
- :- �✓ xts
f .NTy� ?�•: . IJ�� }.:`' -r •.
r 1� r/ r t 1 \ 4 -. �J
t t y
•. �ri+�'.:.
. tE 4 S•�
1 y P .r _
`i�
*. }1" r > t art
r fr �i NF
,:. Ii 1
7 1l..
�.a:�
r M
rj ,
+rw
r
1
• 7�
Ur
•' }
• S t�yy
4 3tj 9
.' 7
1 -�. y � n n
'`•�,+'`\'-4 �j• 1-7Z, ,.I r
yi,, - Ir 11. � � - l tll
1 / '-157'b'..t, i �
y/1r 4 /
f{�Ii ] Ikr -�� S _ ��/
1 '6 •s J� .:+
i A � fi fi. 1`
f/' •j + 4
�`. I i Tv(<E�
�f �}fl fi, I�r.,,,, ��I
i';
(
YY�* f 1�`/e
fr 1 r^ K s
, d2 t! a T
\\; r. ,---, f.
�"— ��
•S
mti t f
•,,,i F: ro\
5, I I .!' J
,. f ''"t .4`t,
i. :... 1�� al r+,
•� ,t
r r• ��� r' ✓ frl \ + \ t
t rL
Jr �r r . r v"
1r
f dPr
. t pl 11 r/ r
•
�'�, t' rf+f.! i .
y - , r t'r7 / 2 + „ 'r .; ,t
P YfF (` f i: ✓ t: =
an , Y'
♦`IS
Y tl 3 Y 1 i
a la ,.•• Jr
I,� Y. , "-.r_.'+. jr9 • 1 '���
:" 4x + jrr "..">.
l f i. r 1 1 -.4, ::.
41 4.b \ tt l.t +i r ° st
A 1 f'. { . 9 t�i. f.dl� k -Y
x.P.. lY.. 1i.'.4'. ..� 1}iIF.H�..I: 1.d1;4:i.;'�w.rit.avi:.�ra��SILYr.Yv'w&,31Art�A
��,'1u2�. 1 iYt,: ... te�.�6s'�ir�•.> r;i.ill'��..A`Alvxin..'a,..,,H�'W1 vL,�l.•..'^�
1
1.5
• G.
2.5 km
0.3
6.6
1.• '1.5 rill
sl
• I4--rJ . =198.•
Free Satellite
Map:
Get a 100% free -
satellite map. See
your house from
space.
Satellite.Map.Googlepac
Aerial ImageMap.
Software
Use SnapMap to
see Linear Aerial
Photos Film &
Moving -Map
www.rskorbital.com
Secret.Sate!!ite
TV O_ n PC
Now you can
watch unlimited
Satellite -TV on
your computer!
www.your-free-
satellite.com •
Aerial Maps
View Thousands
of Aerial Maps -
Here.
FindAerlalMap.info
- http://www.topozone.coin/map.asp?1at=35.19506&lon=-78.95276&size=m&u=6&datum=nad83&layer=DRG
5/ 10/2007

TopoZone - USGS Manchester (NC) Topo Map .
torDOZ.One
New Product
Download every
Topo and'Aerial at
this location $9,95
Get Your MapPack
Now!
Map and •Photo Info
Download Topo Images
Download Photo Images
USGS Topo Maps
(. 1:24K/25K Topo Maps
01:100K Topo Maps.
0 1:250K Topo Maps
Automatic selection_
Map Size
1 Small
`a:. Medium
°j Large -
View Scale
1 : 50,000
Coordinate Format -
•
D/M/S
Map Datum.
NAD83/WGS84
El Show target
Email this topo map
,Bookmark this topo map
Print this topo map
53
MORE Uhl!
I1un red u1.
Air Is taiees.
A'vallable
•
'''. � K ..� r+�:���Fuy°P';'�A������4S8R II�L �� R;p�'ll*t„��•:,7.. �'P.Y�,� �� 'rR Y�2t� abft�vr� �'ttd(.�i��fi °'°'� �c�fis1 '. )•�i''�'t
USGS Manchester (NC) Topo Map
View TopoZone Pro .topo graphic maps, aerial photos,, street maps,- coordinate. and. elevation
display
35° 11' 43"N; 78° 57' 00"W (NAD83/WGS84)
x r,Y Sr , ,,.. AY It Ti i' l -.: y ! t'": r 1. 9 !4
F 1 " ! %'° �l y : ,,.• ne n t>t �t ,x°tt t -jr t'�',b x"f-t s4"^s F' r. u�ar� xv�ny7T
� r a':.! a,l� +�;. h! a�,�'4,1 �h t S x.p�i , .r 1 d '�„2:1 1 m t�. � � .N;.�F � 1 s,.�w'�S:'W,>�i t�
.�J, tgop�ozone
aM I.S '
1✓i
, rl
�✓ hi'r.
.,!.. `,%
't11i f,��[7J9ti
/t`¢r
tr' r1.
p,TA
..M✓' .Y '
Giflr Lt
J
-
4
.„J•rr'
+ `Z .
'' .w,,,,. ,„�
S
° �. s t` rf r tom, . , , ,
< .�kM f , r f✓/V f S \Y f 'fs ` "-'
-_; }�+p. ✓ r t rl r."•
[ Wes+,..,,+ Yf !r '' _ ,..7, ;.+C > '1 rl .�. 4 Y r
, /`1.1 , yr r r t
.r' y .Y Tn •/ X C rl '1 i •..
5 'I 2 `� /. �y,l Jy :� a �. I f l•t 5 -
-'—M1.-'-4-S".,:. V`r 'f '' J" 1 l S "! r j l:•'• �. 6 L
1% .;� „y�,,.r11 6 ` r• ., ,... rl••`ur I r I'i ( '-l` 1 tSl,
-jr .,r .ram td ry�f`f- wj.}`,tIr �iti'� .n• t '.'rrJii) 1{+ �J .•r r ir9Y k k 4•�
r
i P
,r.rX.--- %L
r111
.�
t
ttry{t�•il,:j
{!re'ty
..agDi$ 3
f lc PIA.r*
:k4 1
Ll } err/T
"
)'F
pr=tiw ,?'JJ1 4°
JJ""-1 -
fr !r f(
f r,-,,' �l{ r!
'`le` / i,,(,
1 .
•
t '
„,y+y.vflt`yy��!'1"
..._t. /`Y yt p ..t r
�'^(r1
" 1h
- ' l
•
- t r. 1 �
r I ✓' fff���ir
... J N 1
r y(
.�` ,': f.' r ,r"'
r_t_ - r I. ��r{
, `-01`; .:;
+'7!
!`
.'+. .,. �r++ '! ;R h,
''� p '.. ".
r
,
:fr•r
�.e. �'
l
is.r
ti11(
I
tvV.
t {
-T-
!! SrrC
4}Y y'
% 1
If
, x `.
y
I 1 �� r
i. 't �µ
tt '• -' X
` 1
L+•`
rT.,p Kl
ems_•-�¢
II Fr1 i` (r,!?rt
•
r
F. I •,✓f �-
l � T "
Jn 3 4f(` f( wr 1 x ti:•
>`. r!� J' r i I\r ( r ��"`l
YY11 1 Y
tt ti., + , •� 7", .• r 4
'+y ^,1'+ t rr/ 1 ; t 'ra,�,,
'} A ti d�"IfS � s1
7 S7 f '�tk a 1, I s - r
t se,. '+T i 1.pr r
{ :�w e, (iJ�].;1� J .. I'
o t J] f+iTt - [ i r iw-"3
a
'
.i - a'I
I Y:.f r
f �
' ''� (' k� ,;
1 t
� (1.,V.'
�, . !'i i
.. yy . , r'
' SS \•\'�y ',�rJ %•
1✓f Li t .1
/ ff r. A J ti k•1K t
1 t �{{ h
'S! 7 e
r fir,, tk.y
4
{ `` ..•,Y N
..
r -'i
! .
,Sr"' ' t rr t �-1t • e•
'Pti£
(at„fh �i -' r/( - _.
f
f JJff ir.--' r
14 t,• i ro �, {{ I '`_,a.�,. ?�7
h�s
¢'f1J•-` �C" (fil
rI
/tfrl.
f e
�`'s
,rrl•: ' ,rr' '` C i '•. µr {r� y,, �f_ '�S + `6 �,
r r
,
✓1, �p�
.�t
4 j,r WWat" f 7 { fh y11 }^ a rr!} " t. 4 ' 1 t !rt ' � ihFa ... .0 rr' ,d'''k "' n.s,V + , s;< F 1:>(a„ . , ''.'•
tVt`:n..:,.Ia.S..i{„u'Ci">ih..3LiU �..Y. r4afYa6Lx�.':1`v�fx'�l.i,:;1''',''
)lYvi7.+. .J:.L'Je'tYi'.^'tiu:`Cr 'P;�u,Y �'. Sys{ y.J N,4, ^ltJ:I
:� ,J�;A f �'14wi(���iJkr]-'oi'fvrYM du lsb.�+!d�.r tii�zflAM '+,rya'. .'T
FKA
x.,...
0.5.
1
1.5
2.5 kr'i
. 0.3
0.6
0.9
1.2
1.5 mi
Pagel of 2
Free Satellite
Map: -
Get a 100% free
satellite map. See
your house from
space.
Satellite.Map.Googlepage
Aerial Image Map
Software
Use SnapMap-to
see Linear Aerial
Photos Film &
Moving -Map
www.rskorbital.com
Secret Satellite TV
On PC
Now you can watch
unlimited Satellite
TV on your
computer!
www.your-free-satellite.co
Aerial Maps
View Thousands of
Aerial Maps Here.
FindAerialMap.info
•
http://www.topozone.com/map. asp?lat=3 5.19518&lon=-78.94998&datum=nad83&u=6&layer=DRG&size=m&s=50
5/14/2007

TOWN OF. SPRING LAKE, CUMBERLAND COUNTY
LAND APPLICATION MISC:, DOCUMENTS
A. RATINGS SHEET
B. FAX: TRANSMISSION PAGE
C. LETTER. DATED .19 JUNE 2006
D.E-MAIL DATED 4 APRIL 2007 ADDRESSING
2006 ANNUAL REPORT
E. E-MAIL DATED 16 APRIL 2007
F. LETTER DATED 27. MARCH 2007.FROM SPRING
LAKE
G. E-MAIL DATED 14 MAY 2007 IN 'RESPONSE TO
THE 27 MARCH 2007 LETTER FROM SPRING
LAKE
H:LETTER DATED 10 AUGUST 2006 REQUESTING
ADDITIONAL INFORMATION
I. TCLP DATA FROM. SAMPLE TAKEN ON 9
MARCH .2007, .COPY PROVIDED TO DWQ ON 24
APRIL 2007 AT SITE MEETING.

WATER POLLUTION CONTROL SYSTEM OPERATORS
CERTIFICATION COMMISSION
CLASSIFICATION
RATING SHEET FOR WATER POLLUTION CONTROL SYSTEMS
FACILITY INFORMATION:
NAME OF FACILITY: l w,u oF Ll'-e
MAILING ADDRESS: D • 3o X 6/7
COUNTY:
CONTACT PERSON: //AL NE(rwEf'�
SP R /w ; . C: 2c43.90 -
TELEPHONE: (
i0) 4/3(0- 0014/
PERMIT NO: U Q.000 /0 8 (o Check One: NC WQ HEALTH DP
ORC: :CN2)S COE TELEPHONE: (9/0) 4/3 6 - 0 2 c(
RATING INFORMATION: (Before completing this section, please refer to pages 2-4)
PERMITTED FLOW:. /. SU MGD BNR? YES NO
Gait TP - (NPDCS: NCO'O30970)
CHECK CLASSIFICATION: WASTEWATER: 1
COLLECTION:
4
SPRAY 'IRRIGATION SUBSURFACE LAND APPLICATION • V
PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL GRADE I GRADE II
RATED BY: ' � 1 � �/�J?-T� GI2'� :. REGION: P. R • b DATE:
57///0 7
REGIONAL OFFICE TELEPHONE NUMBER: (0 1 'B3 ~ 33 7 EXT: ' 33 SIC

Classification of Biological Water Pollution Control Treatment Systems:
Grade I Biological WPCS
- Septic tank/sand filter systems
- Biological lagoon systems ,
- Constructedwetlands and associated appurtenances
Grade II Biological WPCS
- Systems that utilize an activated sludge or fixed growth process with a permitted flow.
less than or equal to 0.5 million gallons per day (mgd)
Grade III Biological WPCS .
- Systems that utilize an activated sludge or fixed growth process with a permitted flow
of greater than 0.5 through 2.5 million gallons per day (mgd) ( /. SO /h GD
- Grade II systemsthatrequired to achieve biological nutrient reduction *
Grade IV Biological WPCS
- Systems that utilizing an activated sludge or fixed growth process with a permitted flow
of greater than 2.5 million gallons per day (mgd)
- Grade III systems that are required to achieve biological nutrient reduction *
* Biological Nutrient Reduction -
The reduction of total nitrogen or total phosphorous by an activated sludge or fixed growth
process as requiredby, the facilities permit.
Classification of Collection Water Pollution Control Systems:
(whichever provides lowest grade)
Same grade as biological water pollution control system. Grade of system:
VBased on population served:
1,500: or Less = Grade I
1,501 to 15;000 = Grade II C'POP 0 Chi' i (rt., l3 A-4&p c u - t ei' PA-L.
15,001 to50,000=Grade III &nu`T 6FF/Cti— ni2Ec-T fZ''I. o% B,/CO
50,001 or more = Grade IV

Classification of Spray Irrigation Water Pollution Control Systems:
Systems which utilize spray irrigation for the reuse or disposal of wasterwater.
These systems include: septic tanks, sand filter, oil/water separators, lagoons,
storage basins, screening, sedimentation: Systems other than those listed above
shall be subject to additional classification. •
Classification of Land Application of Residuals Systems:
Systems permitted and dedicated for land application of residuals that are produced by a
water pollution;control system or contaminated soils.
Classification of Physical/Chemical Water Pollution Control Treatment Systems
_ Grade I Physical/Chemical: Any water pollution control system that utilizes a primarily
physical process to,treat wastewater. This classification includes groundwater.
remediation systems. **
_ Grade II Physical/Chemical: Any water pollution control system that utilizes a primarily
chemical process to treat wastewater. This classification includes reverse osmosis,
electrodialysis, and ultrafiltration systems. **
** Any water pollution control system that utilizes a phyical/chemical process to enhance an
activated sludge or fixed growth process, shall not be subject to additional classification.
Classification. of Subsurface Water Pollution Control Systems:
Systems which utilize the soil for subsurface treatment and disposal of wastewater.
and/or are required to have a certified operator under 15A NCAC 18A.1961. ***
*** Any subsurface system that has as part of its treatment process a water pollution control
systems thatmay be classified under Rules .0302through,0307 of this section shall be
subject to addional classification.
L.

Definitions
Activated Sludge - shall mean a biological wastewater treatment process in which predominantly
biodegradable polluntants in wastewater are absorbed, or adsorbed by living aerobic organisms and
bacteria.
•
Chemical Process - shall mean a Wastewater pollution control system process consisting
exclusively of the addition of chemicals to treat wastewater.
• Collection System - shall mean a continuous connections of pipelines, conduits, pumping
stations, and other related constructions used to conduct wastewater to the water pollution
control system.
Electrodialysis System - shall mean a system utlizing a selective separation of dissolved solids
process that is based on electrical charge and diffusion through a semipermeable membrane.
Physical Process - shall mean any water pollution control system process consisting of
electrodialysis, adsorption, absorption, air stripping, gravimetric sedimentation, floation, and
filtration as a means of treatment.
Reverse Osmosis System - shall mean a system which utilizes solutions and semipermable
membranes to separate and treat wastewater.
Ultrafiltration System - shall mean a system which utilizes a membrane filter to remove
pollutants from wastewater.
Water Pollution Control System - shall mean any system for the collection, treatment, or
disposal of wastewater and is classified under the provision of G.S. 90A-37.
•
Note: Please refer to G.S. 90A-37 for additional information and definitions.
•

MEMORY TRANSMI SS,I ON REPORT
TIME : 05-14-2007 10:07
TEL NUMBER :
NAME
FILE NUMBER 096
DATE 05-14 10:06 '
TO , ..4362667
DOCUMENT PAGES 002
START TIME 05-14 10:06
END TIME. 05-14 10:07
SENT PAGES 002
STATUS OK
FILE NUMBER : 096 *.** SUCCESSFUL TX NOT I CE ***
1`1CIElNIR.
FAX TRANSMISSION
DENR
FAYETTEVILLE REGIONAL OFFICE
FAYETTEVILLE, NORTH CAROLINA 28301-5043
VOICE: 910-433-3300
Fax: • 910-486-0707
To: /4"1/ E -
Fax ##:
From: 1 / ,y ,4 _ •3
Subject:
COMMENTS:
Date: S-V;y� 7
Pages (including cover):

Michael F. Easley, Governor
William G. Ross Jr., Secretary
North Carolina Department of Environment and Natural Resources
Alan W. Klimek, P.E. Director
Division of Water Quality
June 19, 2006
Mr. Hal Hegwer, Town Manager
Town of Spring Lake
P. O. Box 617
Spring Lake, NC 28390-0617
Subject: Land Application Permit WQ0001086,
Town of Spring Lake
Dear Mr. Hegwer:
In response to your letter of June 15, 2006 the Land Application Unit does hereby
provide temporary approval for increasing the dry tons you are allowed toapply under the
subject permit from 30 dry tons per year to •80 dry tons per year. All other requirements of the
existing permit number WQ0001086 remain in effect. The Land Application unit has received a
permit modification submitted by MacConnell.& Associates, P.C. for the Town of Spring Lake.
Please be aware that nothing in this correspondence should be construed as removing the
Town of Spring Lake from the responsibility for complying with its permit in full. If you need
any additional information concerning this correspondence, please do not hesitate to contact me
by telephone at [phone] or via e-mail at [e-mail].
Sincerely,
E: D. Hardee
Land Application Unit
cc: Mr. Bill Williams, P.E., MacConnell & Associates, P.C.
Jim Barber, Aquifer Protection Section, Fayetteville Regional Office
APS Central Files
NorthCarolina
Naturally
Aquifer Protection Section , 1636 Mail Service Center , Raleigh, NC 27699-1636 Telephone: [phone]
Internet: http://h2o.enr.state.nc.us ,2728 Capital Boulevard Raleigh, NC 27604 Fax 1: [phone]
Fax 2: [phone]
An Equal Opportunity/Affirmative Action Employer— 50% Recycled/10% Post Consumer Paper • Customer Service: [phone]

Subject: Site visit 4/18/07 and 2006 annual report
From: Jim Barber <[e-mail]>
Date: Wed, 04 Apr 2007 13:16:44 -0400
To: [e-mail], Vincent Lewis <[e-mail]>, Ed Hardee
<[e-mail]>, Art Barnhardt <[e-mail]>, Joel Shields
<Joel. [e-mail]>
Daniel;
I received confirmation from Vince Lewis, soil scientist with Soil and Water in
Wilmington, this, morning that Weds. 18 April is the best day for us to meet with
you to visit the proposed land application fields that are part of the permit
modification submitted to DWQ. I would propose that we meet you at the wastewater
treatment plant on Manchester road the morning of the 18th at 9am. We need to visit
all of the proposed fields and will need to perform hand auger borings (typically 1
to 2 holes per field, unless site conditions dictate more) at each field. -I would
estimate that we will need to occupy at least to 4 hours of your time on this
day. Please email me or call 910-433-3340 to confirm that the proposed date and
time will work for your schedule.
On a second issue that we discussed Tuesday evening is the TCLP results provided in
the 2006 residuals annual report. At this time, based on the information provide in
the 2006 annual report, the Town of Spring Lake has managed a hazardous waste based
on the analytical results for "cresol" (specifically m&p cresol with a leachable
concentration reported at 456 mg/1, which is twice the haz. waste standard of 200
mg/1). Immediate attention needs to be given to this situation and additional
information needs to. be supplied to DWQ that addresses this issue. As we discussed,
if Spring Lake has additional TCLP results after the March 2006 sampling event or
can obtain additional TCLP results from McGill & Associates (contractor that
received sludge from Spring Lake for composting at its Harrells facility); then
please provide this information to DWQ by 12 April 2007 to the attention of Ed
Hardee or Joel Shields-. Along with this information a explanation needs to be
provided from MERITECH as to the validity of this sample along with a explanation
as to the regulatory limit that it report with respect to this sample. This
situation needs to be addressed as quickly as possible.
If additional TCLP results do not exist from 2006, then a new sample needs to be
taken (if Spring Lake hasn't sampled the sludge for 2007 land application events).
If. a new sample is to be taken and sent to your lab for analysis, please contact
DWQ to provide notification as such and indicate when sample results will be
available'.
Also in the 2006 residuals land application report provided by Spring Lake,
explanation as to which information in the annual report indicates how pathogen and
vector attraction requirements were meet. Two sets of information appear in the
annual report that indicates pH levels of the residuals, but it is not clear as to
which set of pH values reported correspond to the residuals that were land applied.
The annual report needs to be clearer as to which set of pH values represent
residuals land applied verses residuals that may have gone to McGill. One set of
numbers presented covers 2 Jan thru 19 Dec 2006 (Batch sampling?) verses one set of
pH values that cover the time period of Jan 2006 thru March 2006, that represent pH
meter calibration and residuals pH Check. Several of the corrected pH values
reported didn't meet the minimum value for pathogen reduction and several values
didn't meet the vector attraction requirement. Land application events, as reported
in the annual report, took place in the following months: Jan, Feb, March, August,
and Sept 2006. There are no pH calibration checks after March of 2006 for land
application events in August and September, again bringing into question whether or
not pathogen and vector attraction requirements have been met. Again, please
provide an explanation to DWQ by 12 April 2007 to the attention of Ed Hardee or
Joel Shields addressing these concerns.
You can contact myself or Joel at 910-433-3340 or 910-433-3332 or by sending a
email to the above addresses. Ed Hardee can be contacted by calling 919-715-6189 or
1 of2
5/14/2007 2:20 PM

Site,visit 4/18/07 and 2006 annual report
by email at the above address.
Thank you in advance for addressing the items above.
Jim Barber
2 of 2 5/14/2007 2:20 PM

Ke: Jite visit 4/1 6/U/ and 2UUb annual report
Subject: Re: Site visit 4/18/07 and 2006 annual report
From: Jim Barber <[e-mail]>
Date: Mon, 16 Apr 2007 09:07:07 -0400
To: Daniel Gerald <[e-mail]>, Joel Shields <[e-mail]>, Ed Hardee.
<[e-mail]>, Art Barnhardt <[e-mail]>
Daniel;
We can go over the information in the email when we meet on Weds. April 18th. The
plan, as outlined in my email of 4,April, was to. meet you at the Spring Lake wwtp
on Manchester road- at 9am before heading 'out to the proposed newOand application
fields that Spring Lake wishes to -add to the land' application program. Is the
meeting on Weds. 18 April still a go; since neither of your emails confirm our
meeting??,If the meeting needs to be rescheduled, please let ine know today or
Tuesday the 17th so I can contact Vince Lewis and cancel -his trip to Fayetteville.
Jim Barber
Daniel Gerald wrote:
Mr. Barber
You have sent a very long email concerning our land application proces,s.: I
.think.we need to have a meeting concerning the.' land application program.
Please email me back with a date. After that meeting,'then I will gladly
give to you in writing an explanation of the 2006 land application
submittal. If you have.any questions concerning this email please free to
contact me at 910-436-0241.
Daniel' Gerald
1 of 1
5/14/2007 2:20 PM

VI8 'tabu of
300 RUTH STREET, P.O. BOX 617
PHONE: [phone]
FAX: [phone]
MAYOR
ETHEL T.,CLARK
TOWN MANAGER
PHILLIP (HAL) HEGWER P.E.
TOWN CLERK
CORA M. NUNES, CMC
Mr. Joel S. Shields
Land Application • Inspector
DWQ Fayetteville Regional Office
225 Green Street Suite 714
Fayetteville,NC 28301-5043
CHARTERED IN 1951
March 27; 2007 ,
Re: Compliance Evaluation Inspection Reply
Dear Mr. Shields:
*ring
SPRING. LAKE, NORTH CAROLINA
ZIP CODE 28390-0617
WEBSITE: www.spring-lake.org
OEM
ALDERMEN
JAMES P. O'GARRA, MAYOR PRO-TEM
NAPOLEON HOGANS
RICHARD P. HIGGINS
JAMISHEPPARD
FREDRICKASUTHERLAND
NAY" I 2607
The Town of Spring Lake's position on the detection of high creosol levels is that
laboratory error must have occurred. ,The follow up testing did not show any presents of
elevated levels creosols. The following year's, sampling did not show any presents of
creosols either. The Town of Spring Lake will require the laboratory to resubmit the
corrected results to the Division of Water Quality.
As far as meeting vector reduction requirements, the Town of Spring Lake gave Mr. Jim
Barber of DWQ documents at The McCormick site which verified all of the times and
dates of the reduction events. If you have any questions concerning this correspondence
please feel free to contact me at 910-436-0241 ext. 307.
Sincerely,
Water Resources Director

Response letter to Joel Shields dated 27 march 2007
Subject: Response letter to Joel Shields dated 27 march 2007
From: Jim Barber <[e-mail]>
Date: Mon, 14 May 2007 16:15:36 -0400
To: Daniel Gerald <[e-mail]>, Joel Shields <[e-mail]>, Art
Barnhardt <[e-mail]>, Ed Hardee <[e-mail]>
Daniel;
I've been asked to respond to your letter dated 27 March 2007 (received by DWQ-FRO
on 1 May 2007) to Joel Shields that was written by you to address comments in my
initial email to you on 4 April 2007 concerning the Town of Spring Lakes' 2006
Annual Report. The two issues in the email to address were (1) TCLP results of
residuals with emphasis on "cresol" leachability and (2) information concerning
Pathogen and Vector Attraction demonstration.
After reading your 27 March response to the above mentioned issues; the following
items need to be addressed:
1. Based on the 2007 residuals sample provided to DWQ at,the 24 April meeting
indicating that the cresol numbers for the 2007 sample are satisfactory, doesn't
mean the 2006 analyticals are incorrect. To completely address the 2006 sample
results, the Town of Spring Lake needs to receive verification in writing from it's
laboratory contractor indicating the nature of the 2006 sample results and stating
that the cresol results were incorrect. Also, MERITECH INC.needs to be informed
that when sampling for total cresol or m&p cresol, the regulatory limit(s) are not
to be added together to create a new regulatory limit (i.e. adding 200mg/1 for m
cresol and 200 mg/1 for p cresol = 400 mg/1 for m&p cresol). In accordance with
rule 0106-29 of the Haz. Waste Regulations - Table 1 (Maximum Concentration of
Contaminants for Toxicity Characteristics) D023 ("o" cresol), D024 ("m" cresol) and
D025 ("p" cresol) each have a regulatory level of 200 mg/1 individually. Also, D026
("cresol" total) has a regulatory level of 200 mg/1 as stated by footnote ["If o,
m, and p-Cresol concentrations cannot be differentiated, the total cresol (D026)
concentration is used. The regulatory level of total cresol is 200 mg/1].
2. Concerning the Pathogen and Vector Attraction demonstration. The question posed
was related to the pH levels reported in the 2006 annual report with respect to the
pH calibration sheets within the annual report. Did the calibration pH numbers
represent a "batch" similar to the numbers for batches during the months of Jan.,
March, April, May, June July, Aug., Sept., Oct., Nov., and Dec. of 2006? The
calibration dates do not correspond to the dates on the "batch" sheets. Also, since
residuals were batched throughout the year; where additional pH calibration tests
performed for residuals batched during the months of April, May, June, July, Aug.,
Sept., Oct., Nov., and December 2006 since pH calibration sheets provided stop at
13 March 2006?? Based upon the assumption that the pH calibration sheets represent
a "batch" of residuals placed in the 375,000 gallon holding tank on -site; 11
samples didn't meet the minimum pH of 12 for 2 hours to meet the Pathogen reduction
standard and 3 samples didn't meet the minimum pH of 11.50 for an additional 22 hrs
to meet the Vector Attraction standard. Averaging of all the pH readings, for all
samples "batched" is not acceptable. All sample residuals must meet the minimum pH
of 12 for 2 hours and 11.50 for an additional 22 hours to meet the•Pathogen and
Vector Attraction demonstration.
Your response in the 27 March 2007 letter is not adequate in addressing the above
issue of Pathogen and Vector Attraction demonstration. By presenting the same
information to DWQ, personnel that was presented in the 2006 annual report does not
address the question and a written explanation is needed to address the
discrepancies between the pH reading in the "batch" tables and the pH readings in
the "calibration sheets".
Since the land application record sheets, in the 2006 Annual Report, indicate
residuals were land applied (472, 675 gallons) during the months of Jan., Feb.,
March, Aug., September and pH readings are not provided for the residuals prior to
land application(based on the residuals being placed in the on -site 375K tank in
1 of 2 5/14/2007 4:15 PM

Response letter to Joel Shields dated 27 march 2007
distinct batches throughout the year); the EPA manual "Control of Pathogens.and
Vector Attraction in Sewage Sludge" (aka the White House manual) on pages 48, 49
and 50 recommend that residuals should be above 10.50.pH prior to land application
to minimize odor problems, since raising the pH above 12 doesn't affect (reduce)
volatile solids. -
For future report submittals, it would be helpful if all pages. of the annual report
are numbered so reference can be made to specific pages within the document.
A copy of this email will be'submitted, with-the.staff report prepared for permit
modification, to Ed Hardee in the DWQ Central Office in Raleigh. ,If you wish, you
can -send your responses directly to Mr. Hardee and myself so the 'permit
modification process can continue. If other questions about the permit modification
package arise, please contact Mr. Hardee)at 919-715-6189 or [e-mail].
Thank you in advance for your'time•in addressing the items in the email'of 4 April
2007 and this email.
Sincerely,
Jim Barber
2 of 2
5/14/2007 4:15 PM

•
Michael F. Easley, Governor
William G. Ross Jr., Secretary
North Carolina Department of Environment and Natural Resources
Alan W. Klimek, P.E. Director
Division of Water Quality
August 10, 2006
Mr. Hal Hegwer, Town Manager
Town of Spring Lake
P. O. Box 617
Spring. Lake, NC 28390-0617
Subject: Permit Modification Application WQ0001086
Additional Information Request
Land Application of Residual Solids (503)
Town of Spring Lake
Dear Mr. Hegwer:
In the application for modification of the subject permit, received June 14, 2006; the net
acres for application on the LASCA form was 15.84 acres. The vicinity/buffer map submitted
with the application showed the disposal/application area to be 15.84 acres northeast of the
treatment plant. In a site visit to the plant on July 24, 2006, I met with Mr. Daniel Gerald and
observed the application area.
Jim Barber of the Division of Water Quality's Fayetteville Regional Office did a file
search and found a map of the Spring Lake Regional Wastewater Treatment Plant. This map was
dated 1989 and showed the land application area as being the cleared land to the northeast of the
plant and inside the fenced area of the wastewater treatment plant. The map indicated this area
to be 15.84 acres. The Land Application Unit does not believe the area inside the facility fence
should be part of the application area.
Additional information is required before we may continue our review. Please provide
the following information by September 12, 2006
1. A detailed scaled buffer map showing the application/disposal areas with the
dimensions and acres to be applied on.. The map should include all buffers,
monitoring wells and plant location.
2. An updated Land Application Site Certification Attachment.
Please be aware that you are responsible for meeting all requirements set forth in
North Carolina rules and regulations. Any oversights that occurred in the review of the
subject application package are still the responsibility of the applicant. In addition, any
omissions made in responding to the above items may result in future requests for
additional information.
Aquifer Protection Section 1636 Mail Service Center
Internet: www.ncwaterquality.org Location: 2728 Capital Boulevard
An Equal Opportunity/Affirmative Action Employer— 50% Recycled/10% Post Consumer Paper
Nor`thCarolina
Naturally
Raleigh, NC 27699-1636 Telephone: [phone]
Raleigh, NC 27604 Fax 1: [phone]
Fax 2: [phone]
Customer Service: [phone]

rvir. nai negwer
August 10, 2006
Page 2
Please reference the subject application number when providing the requested
information. Three copies of all revised and/or additional documentation should be
submitted to my attention at the address above..
If you have any questions regarding this request, please do not hesitate to contact
me at [phone]. Thank you for your cooperation.
Sincerely,
E
E. D. Hardee
Aquifer Protection Section
Land Application Unit
cc: Mr. William A. Williams, MacConnell &Associates, P.C.
Fayetteville Regional Office, Aquifer Protection Section
APS Central Files

Contact: -
Client:
Daniel Gerald
'Town of Spring Lake
300 Ruth Street
Spring Lake, NC 28390
Meritech Work Order # - 03120731
Parameters
Solids
Ammonia, Nitrogen
TKN'
Nitrate/Nitrite, Nitrogen
Cadmi'uni,. total
Chromium, total
Mercury, total
Molybdenum, total
'Meritech, Inc.
Environmental Laboratory
Laboratory Certification No.165
Sainple:'. Digester Grab
Result
1.8 %
568 mg/kg...1`%
11.4 ntg/ L = ,
568 mg/kg
1.89 mg/kg
6.75 mg/kg
0.956 mg/kg
3.61 mg/kg
Analysis Date
3/ 15/07.:
3/12/07
abJ� 3/20/07`. (13?'l
;3/14/07
3/ 16/ 07 ;'
3/16/07-
,3/16/07
3/ 16/ 07
I hea•eby certify that, have' reviewed and approve these data.,.
4/2/07
3/12/07
3/9/07,
Reporting Limit . Method
0-100%
10-mg/kg
0.20 mg/ L
:10 mg/kg
0A10 ing/ kg
0.025 rng/kg
0.0010 mg/kg
0.025 nig/kg
EPA 160:3 •
EPA 350.1 •
EPA 351;1
EPA 353.2'
' EPA200.7
EPA 200;.7
EPA 1631
EPA 200.7
Laboratory; Representative
642 Tamco Road, Reidsville, North. Carolina 27320
- t e L [phone] -fax: [phone]

MERITECK INC.
Environmental Laboratories
A Division of Water Technology and Commis, Inc.
Client: 'cown of Spring Lake
Project: TCLP
Client Sample ID: Digester
Sample Collection: 03/09/07 -
Merited) Sample ID: 03120731
Volatiles: SW-846.8260
Analysis: 03.-26/07
Analyst: FAL'
Parameter
lienzene
Carbon Tetrachloride
Cblorobentene
Chloroform
1 .2-Dichloroethane
1.1-Dichloroethene
Methyl Ethyl Ketone
Tetrachloroeihylene
Trichlor( ethene
Vinyl (.•Thloricle
Semi-Volatiles: SW-846 8270
Extraction: 03119/07
Analysis: 0.3/29/07
1311 - TCLP Organics
Result
Units Det. Limit Reg. Dilution Factor
... 0.0100 mg/L 0.0100 0.50 1
•-• 0.0 1 00 mg/L-• 0.01.00. 0.50 1
....z. 0.0100 mg/L 0.0100 I 00 1
< 0.0100 nigIL 0.0-100 6.0 1
.: 0.0100 mg/L 0.0100 0.50 1
0.0 1 00 mg/L ' 0.0100 0.70
0.414 mg/L 0100 . 200 r I
.'... () . 0 I 00 mg/L 0.0100 0.70 1
...., 0.0100. mg/L 0.01000.50 • 1
••': 0.0200 IngiL 0.020 . 0.20 1 '
Parameter ' Result , Units
I ,-1,Dichlorobenzene < 0.010 mg/L
Hexachlorohenzene -- 0.010. mg/L
Hexachloro-1,3-bouiiene • . 0.010 Ing/1_
Hexachloroethane •s' 0.010 mg/1...
o-cresol -f•-•. 0.010 , mg/L
m&p-cresol •,--. 0.020 Ing/L
Total cresols •-:. 0.030 rng/L
Nitrobenzene < 0.010 ingiL
Penlach loropheno I < 0.050 mg/L
Pyridine .-:. 0.010 IngiL
2,4,5-Triehlorophenol < 0.010 ingIL
2,4,6-Trichlorophenol < 0.010 ing/L'
2.4-Dinitrotoluene < 0.010 mg/L
Analyst: FA P
Det. Limit Re. Limit Dilaition Factor
0.010 7.5
0.010 0.13
• 0.010 0.5
0.010 3.00
0.010 200
0.07,0 400
0.030 600
0.010 2.00
. 0.050 I 00
0,010 5.0
0.010 400
0.010 2.00
0.010 0.13
1 herebycertify that I have reviewed and approve these data.
•
Laboratory Representative
64.ramcC> Rona " Fbeticlesseilleo, NC 27320
(330) afiliz-arrilit rn - (330) ..4ES}L

MERITECH, INC.
Client:
Project:
Client Sample ID:
Sample Collection:
Meritech Sample ID:
Metals - EPA 200.7
Extraction: 03/19/07
Analysis: 03/20/07
Parameter
Arsenic
Bari urn
Cadmium
Chromium
Lead
Selenium
Silver
Environmentat Laboratories
A Division of Water Technology and Controls, Inc.
Town of Spring Lake
TCLP
Digester
03/09/07
03126731
Metals - EPA 1631
Extraction: 03/20/07 .
Analysis: 03/21/07
Parameter
•
Mercury
SW-846 9045C
Analysis: 03/19/07
Parameter
PH
SW-846 9040B
Analysis: 03/19/07
Parameter
Corrosivity
1311 - TCLP Metals
Analyst: PS
)- -
Result Units Det. Limit Rea. Limit Dilution Factor
< 0.100 mg/L 0.100 5.0 , 1
0.830 mg/L 0.050 100.0 1
< 0.020 mg/L 0.020 1.0 1
< 0.050 mg/L 0,050 5.0 , 1
< 0.100 mg/L 0.100 5.0 1
< 0.100 mg/L. 0.100 .1.0 1
< 0.050 mg/L 0.050 5.0 1
Analyst: PS
Result. Units Det. Limit Reg. Limit Dilution Factor
cz 0.0001 mg/L 0.0001 0.2 1
• Result Units Det. Limit . Re. Limp. Dilution Factor
• .5.3 , su 2.0 1 2.5 1
Result
Non -Corrosive
Units Det. Limit Ree. Limit Dilution Factor
I hereby certify that I have reviewed and approve these data. Laboratoi yRepresentative
642 Tamco Road * Reidsville, NC 27320
(336) 3424740 Ph * [phone] Fax

ER1TECH, INC.
Environmental Laboratories.,
A Divisionr'of Water Technology and.Controls, Inc.
Client: Town of Spring Lake
Project: TCLP
Client Sample ID: Digester
Sample Collection: 03/09/07
Meritech 'Sample ID„ . 03120731
1311-TCLP Pesticides„ Herbicides, & Reaqtivitv
Pesticide - SW-846 8081 A
Extraction: 03/16/07
Analysis: 03/20/07
Analyst:
Parameter Result Units ' Det. Limit Reg. Limit Dilution. Factor
Linden <0.0005 mg/L. ' .0 0005 G.0 0'
Chlordane <,0:001 141 0.001 0.003
Eindrin < 0.0005 ,.. mg/L ' 0,0005. 0.002
Heptachlor <'0.0005 mg/L 0:'0005' 0,0008
Methoxychlor <0:0005,' mg/L '.0:0005�, 1.00:
Toxaphene < 0.0500 mgiL. ': _ 0.0500 •:0:05
Herbicides = SW-846 8151A
Extraction: 03/16/07
Analysis:. - 03/17/07
Parameter
2,4-D.
2,4,5 Tl' (Silvex)
Reactivity- SW-846 Cb 7.
Iiital5ility 1010
Total -Sulfide' , E.PA 335.2'
Total Cyanide EPA 376.2
Result
< 0.100
<.0.100
200
Units - Det. Limit : Re , ircii :.. Dilution Factor`
, '0.100
30.0 ' mg/L . 10,000
<0.500 mg/L > . 0.506 '
I hereby certify, that'I have reviewed; and approve these data.
laboratory Representative
642 Talmo Road * Reidsville, NC 27320
(336) 342-47418 P'h;*.[phone] Fax

Date: February 6, 2007
AQUIFER PROTECTION SECTION
APPLICATION REVIEW REQUEST FORM
To: ❑ Lydon Davidso 0-APS ❑ David May, WaROAl?5�,���E REGIONA,LOFOCE
® art B l aril FAT ©-AFC ❑ Charlie Stehman; WiRO=APS—
Andre. Pitrier, MR APS" ❑ Sherri Knight, WSRO-APS
❑ Jay Zimmerman, RRO-APS
From: Ed Hardee , Land Application Unit
Telephone: [phone] Fax: [phone]
E-Mail: [e-mail]
R7 CP117D
FEB 0 8 2007 :
A. Permit Number: WQ0001086
B. Owner: Town of Spring Lake
C. Facility/Operation: Town of Spring Lake Land Application
O. Proposed ® Existing ❑ Facility ❑ Operation
D. Application:
1. Permit Type: ❑ Animal ❑ Surface Irrigation ❑ Reuse ❑ H-R Infiltration
❑ Recycle ❑ I/E Lagoon ❑ GW Remediation (ND)
❑ UIC - (5QW) closed loop water only geothermal
For Residuals: ® Land App. ❑ D&M ❑ Surface Disposal
® 503 ❑ 503 Exempt ❑ Animal
2. Project Type: ❑ New ® Major Mod. ❑ Minor Mod. ❑ Renewal ❑ Renewal w/ Mod.
E. Comments/Other Information: ❑ I would like • to accompany you on a site visit.
Attached, you will find all information submitted in support of the above -referenced application for your
review, comment, and/or action. Within 30 calendar days, please take the following actions:
® Return a Completed Form APSSRR.
❑ Attach Well Construction Data Sheet.
® Attach Attachment B for Certification by the LAPCU.
❑ Issue an Attachment B Certification from the RO*.
* Remember that you will be responsible for coordinating site visits, reviews, as well as additional
information requests with other RO-APS representatives in order to prepare a complete Attachment B for
certification. Refer to the RPP SOP for additional detail.
When you receive this request form, please write your name and 'dates in the spaces below, make a copy
of this "sheet, and return it to the appropriate Central Office -Aquifer Protection Section contact person
listed above.
RO-APS Reviewer: - Date:
FORM: APSARR 02/06 Page 1 of 1

Michael F. Easley, Governor
William G. Ross Jr., Secretary
North Carolina Department of Environment and Natural Resources
Alan W. Klimek; P.E:;Director
Division of Water Quality
March 21, 2007
CERTIFIED MAIL # 7006 2150 0003 5466 2412
RETURN RECEIPT REQUESTED
Mr. Hal Hegwer, Town Manager
Town of Spring Lake
Post Office Box 617
Spring Lake, NC 28390-0617
Subject: Return of Fee, Application No. WQ0001086
Town of Spring Lake
Land Application of Residual Solids
Cumberland County
Dear Mr. Hegwer:
RECEIVED
MAR 2.9:2007
OENR-FAYETTEVILLE REGIONAL OFFICE
Please find enclosed your check submitted for the above referenced permit application The Division has
since received a check for the appropriate amount and is returning your check number 45543. The fee was
paid by check number 9324 issued by MacConnell & Associates, P.C.
If you have any question regarding this letter,.please feel free to contact me in the Land Application Unit
at 919-715-6189.
PLEASE REFER TO THE PROJECT NAME AND DATE SUBMITTED WHEN INQUIRING ON
ANY MATTERS IN QUESTION.
Sincerely,
E. D. Hardee
cc: rayettevi'19e■RegionalzO:ffce; Aqurfer--Pro tiont-Sectioh
APS Central File
Permit Application File WQ0001086
One
NorthCarolina
Nat!!1a/Iy
Aquifer" Protection Section 1636 Mail Service Center Raleigh, NC 27699-1636 Phone [phone] Customer Service
Internet: http://h2o.enr.state.nc.us 2728 Capital Boulevard Raleigh, NC 27604 Fax [phone]
Fax [phone]
An Equal Opportunity/Affirmative Action Employer— 50% Recycled/10% Post Consumer Paper

Qr
REFERENCE
112 - NCDENR
DATE DESCRIPTION AMOUNT DISCOUNT .NET PAID
WQ0001086 03/12/07 205.00 0.00 205.00
LAND APPLICATION MOD 60-91-7140-480-00 205.00
'S�.3
:
CHECK # ' DATE
45543
03/14/07
'GROSS 'DISCOUNT CHECK AMOUNT
205.00 J 0.00
Affi �ll �i . I1M11 .��^ � :` ^, A.` .I01w'!'.-�.Wry�APPiPtAtLE
TOWN OF SPRING LAKE •
300 RUTH STREET •
P.O. BOX 617 .
SPRING LAKE, N.C. 28390
[phone]
CENTRAL -DEPOSITORY
PAY ****205 DOLLARS AND 00 CENTS ****
PAY
TO THE
ORDER
OF
NCDENR
1636 MAIL SERVICE CENTER
AQUIFER PROTECTION SECTION
.RALEIGH, NC 27699-1636
BRANCH BANKING AND TRUST COMPANY.
FAYETTEVILLE. N.C. 23302
66-1.12
531
205.00
fbitx
045543.
SUBJECT TO ANY AND ALL TAXES AND ASSESSMENTS DUE AND OWING
DATE CHECK NO. CHECK AMOUNT
-03/14/2007-455.43' $205.00
THIS DISBURSEMENT HAS BEEN APPROVED AS REQUIRED BY
THE LOCAL GOVERNMENT BUDGET AND FISCAL CONTROL ACT.
VOID IF NOT PRESENTED FOR PAYMENT IN 60 DAYS.
7AITHORIZZE- SIGNATURE
AUTHORIZED SIGNATURE
u'04554311' 1:0S-3LOLL2L':5 LL732.5L82"