330058_PERMIT FILE_20171231

-16
(Type of Visit: •Q Com ce Inspection U Operation Review C) Structure Evaluation O Technical Assistance
Reason for Visit: OrRoutine O Complaint 0 Follow-up O Referral O Emeraency O Other O Denied Access
Date of Visit: Arrival Time: Departure Time: County:
Farm Name: Owner Email:
-1—
Owner Name:
Mailing Address:
Physical Address:
Facility Contact:
Title:
Phone:
Onsite Representative: r em 'Jerd' 'y' Integrator:
Certified Operator:
Back-up Operator:
Location of Farm:
Latitude:
Phone:
Certification Number:
Certification Number:
Longitude:
Region:
Design
Swine Capacity
W an to Finish
Current Design Current
Pop. Wet Poultry Capacity Pop.
I Layer
Design
Cattle Capacity
Dairy Cow
Current
Pop.
v
can to Feeder 7b 77—
Non -La er I El
a
Dairy Calf
Feeder to Finish 6 D
Dairy Heifer
Farrow to Wean :KvrS"
Z Design Current
D . P,oult . Ca aciP,n P.
t
Layers
D Cow
Farrow to Feeder
Farrow to Finish
Non -Dairy
Beef Stocker
Beef Feeder
Gilts
I 16A
Non -Layers
Boars b
Pullets
Beef Brood Cow
Other
Other
keys
Turkex Poults
Other
Discharges and Stream Impacts
1. Is any discharge observed from any part of the operation? ❑ Yes No ❑ NA ❑ NE
Discharge originated at: ❑ Structure ❑ Application Field ❑ Other:
a. Was the conveyance man-made? ❑ Yes [3NA ❑ NE
b. Did the discharge reach waters of the State? (if yes, notify DWR) ❑ YesV❑ NA ❑ NE
c. What is the estimated volume that reached waters of the State (gallons)?
d. Does the discharge bypass the waste management system? (If yes, notify DWR) ❑ Yes yNo
NA ❑ NE
2. Is there evidence of a past discharge from any part of the operation? El NA [3NE
3. Were there any observable adverse impacts or potential adverse impacts to the waters ❑ Yes NA ❑ NE
of the State other than from a discharge?
Page I of 3 21412015 Continued

Facility Npmber: - S Date of Ins ection: ?—
Waste Collection & 'Treatment
4. Is storage capacity (structural plus storm storage plus heavy rainfall) less than adequate? ❑ Yes N ❑ NA
a. If yes, is waste level into the structural freeboard? ❑ Yes No ❑ NA
Structure I Structure 2 Structure 3 Structure 4 Structure 5 Structure 6
Identifier: r3 r 61 ( 2' 0& — P` 0'3 SeC. ,
Spillway?:
Designed Freeboard (in):
Observed Freeboard (in):
5. Are there any immediate threats to the integrity of any of the structures observed?
(i.e., large trees, severe erosion, seepage, etc.)
6. Are there structures on -site which are not properly addressed and/or managed through a
waste management or closure plan?
❑ Yes No ❑ NA
❑ Yes /NoE] NA
❑ NE
❑ NE
❑ NE
[] NE
If any of questions 4-6 were answered yes, and the situation poses an immediate public health or environmental rest, notify DWR
7. Do any of the structures need maintenance or improvement? ❑ Yes ❑ NA ❑ NE
8. Do any of the structures lack adequate markers as required by the permit? ❑ Yes No ❑ NA ❑ NE
(not applicable to roofed pits, dry stacks, and/or wet stacks)
9. Does any part of the waste management system other than the waste structures require ❑ Yes ZNo ❑ NA ❑ NE
maintenance or improvement?
Waste Application
10. Are there any required buffers, setbacks, or compliance alternatives that need ❑ Yes ZNo.❑ NA ❑ NE
maintenance or improvement?
11. Is there evidence of incorrect land application? if yes, check the appropriate box below. ❑ Yes No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Excessive Ponding ❑ Hydraulic Overload ❑ Frozen Ground ❑ Heavy Metals (Cu, Zn, etc.)
❑ PAN ❑ PAN > 10% or 10 lbs. ❑ Total Phosphorus ❑ Failure to Incorporate Manure/Sludge into Bare Soil
❑ Outside of Acceptable Crop Win�d'ow" ❑ Evidence of Wind Drift ❑ Application Outside of Approved Area
12. Crop Type(s): GOY Y� SU,"h "-/
13. Soil Type(s):
14.
Do the receiving crops differ from those designated in the CAWMP?
❑ Yes
6 o NA
[] NE
15.
Does the receiving crop and/or land application site need improvement?
El
❑ NA
❑ NE
16.
Did the facility fail to secure and/or operate per the irrigation design or wettable
❑ Yes
No ❑ NA
❑ NE
acres determination?
17.
Does the facility lack adequate acreage for land application?
❑ Yes
❑ NA
❑ NE
18.
Is there a lack of properly operating waste application equipment?
❑ Yes
ZNo ❑ NA
❑ NE
Required
Records & Documents
19.
Did the facility fail to have the Certificate of Coverage & Permit readily available?
❑ Yes
o ❑ NA
❑ NE
20. Does the facility fail to have all components of the CAWMP readily available? If yes, check ❑ Yes No ❑ NA ❑ NE
the appropriate box.
❑WUP ❑Checklists ❑ Design ❑ Maps ❑ Lease Agreements ❑Other:
21. Does record keeping need improvement? If yes, check the appropriate box below. ❑ Yes ZNo ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Waste Application ❑ Weekly Freeboard ❑ Waste Analysis ❑ Soil Analysis ❑ Waste Transfers ❑ Weather Code
❑ Rainfall ❑ Stocking ❑ Crop Yield ❑ 120 Minute Inspections ❑ Monthly and V Rainfall Inspecti�Vo
Sludge Survey
22. Did the facility fail to install and maintain a rain gauge? ❑ Yes ❑ NA ❑ NE
23. If selected, did the facility fail to install and maintain rainbreakers on irrigation equipment? ❑ Yes ❑ No ❑ NA ❑ NE
Page 2 of 3 21412015 Continued

Facility Ntimber: Date of Inspection: r —/
24. Did the facility fail to calibrate waste application equipment as required by the permit? ❑ Yes 4NoNA ❑ NE
25. Is the facility out of compliance with permit conditions related to sludge? If yes, check ❑Yes o ❑ NA ❑ NE
the appropriate box(es) below.
❑ Failure to complete annual sludge survey ❑ Failure to develop a POA for sludge levels
❑Non -compliant sludge levels in any lagoon
List structure(s) and date of first survey indicating non-compliance:
26. Did the facility fail provide documentation of an actively certified operator in charge? ❑ Yes o NA ❑ NE
27. Did the facility fail to secure a phosphorus loss assessments (PLAT) certification? ❑ Yes o [] NA ❑ NE
Other Issues
28. Did the facility fail to properly dispose of dead animals with 24 hours and/or document
❑ Yes
❑ No
❑ NA
❑ NE
and report mortality rates that were higher than normal?
29. At the time of the inspection did the facility pose an odor or air quality concern?
❑ Yes
❑ No
❑ NA
❑ NE
If yes, contact a regional Air Quality representative immediately.
30. Did the facility fail to notify the Regional Office of emergency situations as required by the
❑ Yes
❑ No
❑ NA
❑ NE
permit? (i.e., discharge, freeboard problems, over -application)
31. Do subsurface tile drains exist at the facility? If yes, check the appropriate box below.
❑ Yes
[] No
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Application Field ❑ Lagoon/Storage Pond ❑ Other:
32. Were any additional problems noted which cause non-compliance of the permit or CAWMP?
❑ Yes
[] No
❑ NA
❑ NE
33. Did the Reviewer/Inspector fail to discuss review/inspection with an on -site representative?
❑ Yes
❑ No
❑ NA
❑ NE
34. Does the facility require a follow-up visit by the same agency?
❑ Yes
❑ No
❑ NA
❑ NE
n
VA t' i br���
']- 2 y' f
�_ p,'vJ 45
( a'VLA
lA rz n._ iS i n
!I rd5 rCff d F
C14,9113;,I)
r- tf 'r-I ..,,CIS w, f 14
Reviewer/Inspector Name:
Reviewer/Inspector Signature:
Page 3 of 3
Phone: -2 2 d b
Date: ? — 9 —
2/4M1 S

Water Resources
Environmental Quality
September 1, 2017
The Hanor Company, Inc.
Hanor Multiplier Farm
6717 NC 97 W
Battleboro, NC 27809
ROY COOPER
Governor
MICHAEL S. REGAN
Secretary
S. JAY ZIMMERMAN
Director
NC Dept of Environmental Quality
SEP - 6 2017
Raleigh Regional Office
Subject: Sludge Survey Testing Dates
Certificate of Coverage No. AWS330058
Hanor Multiplier Farm
Animal Waste Management System
Edgecombe County
Dear The Hanor Company, Inc.:
The Division of Water Resources (Division) received your sludge survey information on August
3, 2017. With the survey results, you requested an extension of the sludge survey requirement for
four lagoons at the Hanor Multiplier Farm facility. Due to the amounts of treatment volume
available, the Division agrees that a sludge survey is not needed until December 31, 2021 for the
DN Nursery, DN Finish Primary, Boar Stud, and BGF Primary lagoons.
The next sludge survey for the four lagoons at this facility should be performed before
December 31, 2021.
Please call me at [phone] if you have any questions.
Sincerely,
Miressa D. Garoma
Animal Feeding Operations Program
cc: Raleigh Regional Office, Water Quality Regional Operations Section
Permit File AWS330058
<�:>^Nothing Compares°=-.,_
State of North Carolina' Environmental Quality J Division of Water Resources
Water Quality Regional Operations Section
1636 Mail service Center I Raleigh, North Carolina 27699-1636
919-707-9129

'ti� j��.._1.:�
July 21, 2017
Mr. Wayne Barrett
The Hanor Company, Inc.
6717 Highway 97 West
Battleboro, North Carolina 27809
Subject: Notice of Deficiency
NOD-2017-PC-0209
Permit No. AWS330058
Hanor D N Fann
Edgecombe County
Mr. Barrett:
ROY COOPER
Gove•r-nor
M1CI-IAEL S. REGAN
Sec•retrrr}
S. JAY ZIMMER-MAN
Dirce for•
On July 10, 2017, Mr. Buster Towell of the Raleigh Regional Office, Division of Water Resources
conducted an annual compliance inspection at the Hanor D N Farm. The records review portion of the
inspection revealed the following: The last sludge survey recorded for this facility was dated October 9,
2015.
Permit Condition V. General Conditions "18. All facilities which are issued a Certificate of Coverage
(COC) to operate under this General Permit shall conduct a survey of the sludge accumulation in all
lagoons every year."
Please note that violations of your Certificate of Coverage and Certified Animal Waste Plan may be
subject to civil penalties of up to $25,000.00 per day. You should respond to this Notice in writing
within 30 days of your receipt. Your response should include the following Corrective Actions:
A current sludge survey using the latest form dated August 2008. Include all sketches and sludge
depth formula sheets if required.
If you have any questions regarding this Notice you may contact Buster Towel] at [phone].
Sincerely,
41
Rick Bolich, L.G. Assistant Regional Supervisor
Division of Water Resources, Water Quality
Regional Operations Section
Cc: Edgecombe County Health Department
Edgecombe Soil & Water Conservation District
DWR AFO Central Files
RRO-WQROS
Stale of North Carolina I Environmental Quality � Water Resources I Raleigh Regional Office
1628 Ntail service Center I Raleigh. North Carolina 27699-1628
919 791-4200

August 18, 2017
Mr. Rick Bolich, L.G
Division of Water Resources
Raleigh Regional Office
1628 Mail Service Center
Raleigh, NC 27699-1628
Mr. Bolich,
6717 NC 97 Wes!
Battlehoro, NC 27809
Tel:: [phone]
Fax: [phone]
NC Dept of Environmental Quality
AUG 21 2017
Raleigh Regional Office
Subject:
Notice of Deficiency
NOD-2017-PC-0209
Permit No. AWS330058
Hanor DN Farm
Edgecombe County
Upon the discovery of Mr. Buster Towell's findings that a sludge survey had not been
done for the year ending 2016, we immediately completed a sludge survey.
We submitted those to your office, along with a request for an extension to not do a
sludge survey for the duration of the permit, because the lagoon's sludge accumulation
was 50% below the maximum amount allowed for storage.
If you have any questions you may contact me at [phone] ext 229.
Sincerely,
Wayne Barrett
Operations Manager

.12
(Type of Visit: � Com iance Inspection U Operation Review Q Structure Evaluation Q Technical Assistance I
Reason for Visit: eRoutine 0 Complaint 0 Follow-up 0 Referral 0 Emergency 0 Other 0 Denied Access
Date of Visit: Arrival Time: i Departure Time: 2 8 County:
Farm Name: 17/Q tv r' ri- f-/'1— _ Owner Email:
Owner Name:
Mailing Address:
Physical Address:
Facility Contact:
Title:
Phone:
Onsite Representative: 4t Y ,�} ,� Integrator:
Certified Operator:
Back-up Operator:
Location of Farm:
Phone:
Certification Number:
Certification Number:
Latitude: Longitude:
Region:
Design Current
Design
Current
Design Current
Swine
Capacity Pop.
Wet Poultry
Capacity
Pop.
Cattle Capacity Pop.
Wean to Finish
La er
Dai Cow
Wean to Feeder
Layer
Dai Calf
Feeder to Finish
S
Dairy Heifer
Farrow to Wean
Oj,�
Design
Current
Dry Cow
Farrow to Feeder
op.
Non -Dairy
Farrow to Finish
Layers
Beef Stocker
Gilts
Non -Layers
Beef Feeder
Boars
Pullets
Beef Brood Cow
Turke s
Other
Turkey Poults
Other
Other
Discharees and Stream Impacts
1. Is any discharge observed from any part of the operation?
❑ Yes
o ❑ NA
❑ NE
Discharge originated at: ❑ Structure ❑ Application Field ❑ Other:
a. Was the conveyance man-made?
❑ Yes
N ❑ NA
❑ NE
b. Did the discharge reach waters of the State? (If yes, notify DWR)
❑ Yes
No ❑ NA
❑ NE
c. What is the estimated volume that reached waters of the State (gallons)?
d. Does the discharge bypass the waste management system? (If yes, notify DWR)
❑ Yes
NA
❑ NE
2. Is there evidence of a past discharge from any part of the operation?
❑ YesFNoo
NA
❑ NE
3. Were there any observable adverse impacts or potential adverse impacts to the waters
❑Yes
NA
❑ NE
of the State other than from a discharge?
Page l of 3 21412015 Continued

Facility Number: - Date of Inspection: — G'�
Waste Collection & Treatment
4. Is storage capacity (structural plus storm storage plus heavy rainfall) less than adequate? [—]Yes N�No
❑ NA ❑ NE
a. if yes, is waste level into the structural freeboard? ❑ Yes ❑ NA ❑ NE
Structure I Structure 2 Structure 3 Structure 4 Structure 5 Structure 6
Identifier: JOw— 10 d to ge C
Spillway?:
Designed Freeboard (in):
Observed Freeboard (in):L4
5. Are there any immediate threats to the integrity of any of the structures observed? ❑ Yes��r�No ❑ NA ❑ NE
(i.e., large trees, severe erosion, seepage, etc.)
6. Are there structures on -site which are not properly addressed and/or managed through a [:]Yes No ❑ NA ❑ NE
waste management or closure plan?
[f any of questions 4-6 were answered yes, and the situation poses an immediate public health or environmental neat, notify DWR
7. Do any of the structures need maintenance or improvement? ❑ Yes N ❑ NA ❑ NE
8. Do any of the structures lack adequate markers as required by the permit? ❑ Yes No ❑ NA ❑ NE
(not applicable to roofed pits, dry stacks, and/or wet stacks)
9. Does any part of the waste management system other than the waste structures require [:]Yes No ❑ NA ❑ NE
maintenance or improvement?
Waste Application
10. Are there any required buffers, setbacks, or compliance alternatives that need
❑ Yes
No ❑ NA
❑ NE
maintenance or improvement?
11. Is there evidence of incorrect land application? If yes, check the appropriate box below.
❑ Yes
o ❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Excessive Ponding ❑ Hydraulic Overload ❑ Frozen Ground ❑ Heavy Metals (Cu, Zn, etc.)
❑ PAN ❑ PAN > 10% or 10 lbs. ❑ Total Phosphorus ❑ Failure to Incorporate Manure/Sludge
into Bare Soil
❑ Outside of Acceptable Crop ❑ Evidence of Wind Drift ❑ Application
Outside of Approved
Area
/Window
12. Crop Type(s): L�cilr
13. Soil Type(s):
14. Do the receiving crops differ from those designated in the CAWMP?
❑ Yes
E N ❑ NA
❑ NE
15. Does the receiving crop and/or land application site need improvement?
❑ Yes
LC_ I N [] NA
❑ NE
16. Did the facility fail to secure and/or operate per the irrigation design or wettable
❑ Yes
No ❑ NA
❑ NE
acres determination?
17. Does the facility lack adequate acreage for land application?
❑ Yes
No NA
❑ NE
18. Is there a lack of properly operating waste application equipment'?
❑ Yes
No ❑ NA
❑ NE
Required Records & Documents
19. Did the facility fail to have the Certificate of Coverage & Permit readily available?
❑ Yes
❑ NA
❑ NE
20. Does the facility fail to have all components of the CAWMP readily available? If yes, check
[] YesVN
❑ NA
❑ NE
the appropriate box.
❑ WUP ❑Checklists ❑ Design ❑ Maps ❑ Lease Agreements
❑Other:
21. Does record keeping need improvement? If yes, check the appropriate box below.
❑ Yes
12<0 ❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Waste Application ❑ Weekly Freeboard ❑ Waste Analysis ❑ Soil Analysis
❑ Waste Transfers ❑ Weather Code
❑ Rainfall ❑Stocking ❑ Crop Yield ❑ 120 Minute Inspections ❑ Monthly and I" Rainfall inspections
Sludge Survey
22. Did the facility fail to install and maintain a rain gauge?
❑ Yes
❑ NA
❑ NE
23. If selected, did the facility fail to install and maintain rainbreakers on irrigation equipment?
❑ Yes
❑ No ❑ NA
❑ NE
Page 2 of 3
21412015 Continuer!

Facility Number: jDate of Inspection:
24. Did the facility fail to calibrate waste application equipment as required by the permit? ❑ Yes o NA ❑ NE
25. Is the facility out of compliance with permit conditions related to sludge? If yes, check Yes o ❑ NA ❑ NE
the ap r ate box(es) below. _
Failure to complete annual sludge survey [] Failure to develop a POA for sludge levels
❑ Non -compliant sludge levels in any lagoon
List structure(s) and date of first survey indicating non-compliance:
26. Did the facility fail provide documentation of an actively certified operator in charge? ❑ Yes o ❑ NA ❑ NE
27. Did the facility fail to secure a phosphorus loss assessments (PLAT) certification? ❑ Yes 0 NA ❑ NE
Other Issues
28. Did the facility fail to properly dispose of dead animals with 24 hours and/or document ❑ Yes [] No ❑ NA ❑ NE
and report mortality rates that were higher than normal?
29. At the time of the inspection did the facility pose an odor or air quality concern? ❑ Yes []No ❑ NA ❑ NE
If yes, contact a regional Air Quality representative immediately.
30. Did the facility fail to notify the Regional Office of emergency situations as required by the ❑ Yes ❑ No ❑ NA ❑ NE
permit? (i.e., discharge, freeboard problems, over -application)
31. Do subsurface tile drains exist at the facility? If yes, check the appropriate box below.
[] Yes
❑ No
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Application Field ❑ Lagoon/Storage Pond ❑ Other.
32. Were any additional problems noted which cause non-compliance of the permit or CAWMP?
❑ Yes
❑ No
❑ NA
❑ NE
33. Did the Reviewer/Inspector fail to discuss review/inspection with an on -site representative?
❑ Yes
❑ No
❑ NA
❑ NE
34. Does the facility require a follow-up visit by the same agency?
❑ Yes
❑ No
❑ NA
❑ NE
Comments (refer to question #): Explain any :YES answers and/or any additional recommendations or any other.comments.,
Use drawings of facility to better ex lain situations (use additional pages as:necessary).
S�ydd9eSurdey �0-?-4 6 (16
f'Vee.�.
e
� �, h f�-�• a -I p � e� s� � �o r 7
Reviewer/Inspector Name:
Reviewer/Inspector Signature: 13 t. •sue ldll�G(
Page 3 of 3
Phone: V Zdy-
Date: 1,0 `/1
21412015

(2 Ll
00-
Type of Visit Complia"e Inspection 0 Operation Review O Structure Evaluation 0 Technical Assistance
Reason for Visit outine O Complaint Q Follow up O Referral O Emergency Q Other ❑ Denied Access
Date of Visit: Arrival Time: r, Departure Time: u 3County: Region:
Farm Name: 2 Owner Email:
Owner Name: —
Mailing Address:
Physical Address:
Facility Contact:
Title:
Phone:
Onsite Representative: lVi W ( .)L)r d 'q h Integrator:
Certified Operator:
Back-up Operator:
Phone No:
Operator Certification Number:
Back-up Certification Number:
Location of Farm: Latitude: = o [ = = « Longitude: = e = , =
Design Current Design Current Design Current
Swine Capacity Population Wet Poultry Capacity Population Cattle Capacity Population
❑ Wean to Finish
❑ La er I
1
❑ Dairy Cow
❑ Dairy Calf
❑ Wean to Feeder
0 LIS
on -Layer 1
weeder to Finish
❑ Dairy Heifer
❑ Farrow to Wean Z D Dry Poultry
❑ Dry Cow
❑ Farrow to Feeder
❑ Non -Dairy
❑ Farrow to Finish q f a 2 ❑ La ers
❑ Beef Stacker
❑ Gilts ❑Non -La ers
❑ Beef Feeder
❑ Boars ❑Pullets
❑Beef Brood Cow
❑ Turkeys
Other ❑ Turkey Pouets
Number of Structures;
❑ Other ❑ Other
Discharges & Stream Impacts
1. Is any discharge observed from any part of the operation?
❑ Yes
2No ❑ NA
❑ NE
Discharge originated at: ❑ Structure ❑ Application Field ❑ Other
a. Was the conveyance man-made?
ElYes
ONo ❑ NA
❑ NE
b. Did the discharge reach waters of the State? (If yes, notify DWQ)
El Yes
No ❑ NA
❑ NE
c. What is the estimated volume that reached waters of the State (gallons)?
d. Does discharge bypass the waste management system? (If yes, notify DWQ)
❑ Yes
I No ❑ NA
❑ NE
2. Is there evidence of a past discharge from any part of the operation?
❑ Yes
No NA
❑ NE
3. Were there any adverse impacts or potential adverse impacts to the Waters of the State
El Yes
No ❑ NA
❑ NE
other than from a discharge?
Page I of 3
12128104 Continued

Facility Number: — Date of Inspection
Waste Collection & Treatment
4. Is storage capacity (structural plus storm storage plus heavy rainfall) less than adequate? ❑ Yes No NA ❑ NE
a. If yes, is waste level into the structural freeboard? ❑ Yes No ❑ NA ❑ NE
Structure 1 Structure 2 Structure 3 Structure 4 Structure 5 Structure 6
Identifier: �M_ r 11 go r 14,•:j 130 P1 s'cs�AV
a
Spillway?:
Designed Freeboard (in): Z j
Observed Freeboard (in): f c'7 �/ j Z Z
5. Are there any immediate threats to the integrity of any of the structures observed? ❑ Yes No NA ❑ NE
(ie/ large trees, severe erosion, seepage, etc.)
6. Are there structures on -site which are not properly addressed and/or managed ❑ Yes o ❑ NA ❑ NE
through a waste management or closure plan?
If any of questions 4-6 were answered yes, and the situation poses an immediate public health or environmental thre , notify DWQ
7. Do any of the structures need maintenance or improvement? ❑ Yes I No ❑ NA ❑ NE
8. Do any of the stuctures lack adequate markers as required by the permit? ❑ Yes No ❑ NA ❑ NE
(Not applicable to roofed pits, dry stacks and/or wet stacks)
4. Does any part of the waste management system other than the waste structures require ❑ Yes ;/No ❑ NA ❑ NE
maintenance or improvement?
Waste Application
10.
Are there any required buffers, setbacks, or compliance alternatives that need ❑ Yes
12<0 ❑ NA
❑ NE
maintenance/improvement?
Co❑
11.
Is there evidence of incorrect application? If yes, check the appropriate box below. ❑ Yes
NA
❑ NE
❑ Excessive Ponding ❑ Hydraulic Overload ❑ Frozen Ground ❑ Heavy Metals (Cu, Zn, etc.)
❑ PAN ❑ PAN > 10% or 10 lbs ❑ Total Phosphorus ❑ Failure to Incorporate Manure/Sludge into Bare Soil
❑ Outside of Acceptable Crop Window ❑ Evidence of Wind Drift ❑ Application Outside of Area
12.
Crop type(s)
13.
Soil type(s)
14,
Do the receiving crops differ from those designated in the CAWMP? ❑ Yes
N El NA
El NE
15.
Does the receiving crop and/or land application site need improvement? [3 Yes
I ❑ NA
ElNE
16.
Did the facility fail to secure and/or operate per the irrigation design or wettable acre determination?[:]Yes
❑ NA
❑ NE
17.
Does the facility lack adequate acreage for land application? ElYes❑
NA
FNo
❑ NE
18.
Is there a lack of properly operating waste application equipment? ❑ Yes
❑ NA
❑ NE
Comments (refer toquestton#gEfl"Jalnag YES' answead
s: andi �:Use drawings of facility to betteaexplaiin s�yytjjions. ()upase ditional#pages as necessary):
Reviewer/Inspector Name °- _, : -I Phone: 7 r YZ 0 d
ReviewerAnspecter Signature: 13 L_ _f c g— ( L Date:
Page 2 of 3 12128104 Cohlinued

Facility Number: ?7 — Date of Inspection l
Renuired Records & Documents
19. Did the facility fail to have Certificate of Coverage & Permit readily available?
20. Does the facility fail to have all components of the CAWMP readily available? If yes, check
the appropirate box. ❑ WUP ❑ Checklists ❑ Design El Maps El Other
❑ Yes �No❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes erNo ❑ NA ❑ NE
21.
Does record keeping need improvement? If yes, check the appropriate box below.
❑ Yes
ZrNo ❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Waste Application ❑ Weekly Freeboard ❑ Waste Analysis ❑ Soil Analysis ❑ Waste Transfers ❑ Annual Certification
❑ Rainfall ❑ Stocking ❑ Crop Yield ❑ 120 Minute Inspections ❑ Monthly and V
Rain Inspections ❑ Weather
Code
22.
Did the facility fail to install and maintain a rain gauge?
❑ Yes
Pto [I NA
❑ NE
23.
If selected, did the facility fail to install and maintain rainbreakers on irrigation equipment?
❑ Yes
�No❑ NA
❑ NE
24.
Did the facility fail to calibrate waste application equipment as required by the permit?
❑ Yes
6<N ❑NA
❑ NE25.
Did the facility fail to conduct a sludge survey as required by the permit?
ElYes
El NA
❑ NE
26.
Did the facility fail to have an actively certified operator in charge?
❑ Yes
NA
❑ NE
27.
Did the facility fail to secure a phosphorus loss assessment (PLAT) certification?
❑ Yes
No ❑ NA
❑ NE
Other Issues
28. Were any additional problems noted which cause non-compliance of the permit or CAWMP? ❑ Yes ❑ No ❑ NA ❑ NE
29. Did the facility fail to properly dispose of dead animals within 24 hours and/or document
❑ Yes
❑ No
❑ NA
❑ NE
and report the mortality rates that were higher than normal?
30. At the time of the inspection did the facility pose an odor or air quality concern?
❑ Yes
❑ No
❑ NA
❑ NE
If yes, contact a regional Air Quality representative immediately
31. Did the facility fail to notify the regional office of emergency situations as required by
❑ Yes
❑ No
❑ NA
❑ NE
General Permit? (ie/ discharge, freeboard problems, over application)
32. Did Rev iewer/lnspector fail to discuss review/inspection with an on -site representative?
❑ Yes
❑ No
❑ NA
❑ NE
33. Does facility require a follow-up visit by same agency?
❑ Yes
❑ No
❑ NA
❑ NE
Additional Coui merits and/or Drawings
h. J
s�k
Lin
3 f
f✓ 1 ✓� � '�
2 ' N/�
C
t
Page 3 of 3 12128104

(Type of Visit: (XCom nce Inspection 0 Operation Review 0 Structure Evaluation 0 Technical Assistance
Reason for Visit: Routine 0 Complaint 0 Follow-up 0 Referral 0 Emergency 0 Other 0 Denied Access
Date of Visit: ze Arrival Time: 0 D O Departure Time: County:
Farm Name: �ftNQ-P,_— D n1 Owner Email:
Owner Name:
Mailing Address:
Physical Address:
Phone:
Facility Contact: / Title:
Onsite Representative: ��� h 4 /?/ Integrator:.
Certified Operator:
Back-up Operator:
Location of Farm:
Phone:
Certification Number:
Certification Number:
Latitude: Longitude:
Region:
Design Cttrrent
Design
Current
Design C*urrent
Swine Capacity Pop.
Wet Poultry Capacity
Pop.
Cattle Capacity Pop.
Wean to Finish
La er
Dairy Cow
Wean to Feeder
Non -La er
Dairy Calf
Feeder to Finish
Dairy Heifer
Farrow to Wean
Design
Current
D Cow
Farrow to Feeder
Dr P,oultr, Ca aeit
P,o P.
Non -Dairy
Farrow to Finish
La ers
Beef Stocker
Gilts
on -Layers
Beef Feeder
Boars
Pullets
jBeef Brood Cow
Turke s
Other
Turkey Poults
Other
Other
Discharges and Stream Impacts
1. Is any discharge observed from any part of the operation?
❑ Yes
No NA
❑ NE
Discharge originated at: ❑ Structure ❑ Application Field El
a. Was the conveyance man-made`?
❑ Yes
No NA
❑ NE
b. Did the discharge reach waters of the State'? (if yes, notify DWR)
❑ Yes
No ❑ NA
❑ NE
c. What is the estimated volume that reached waters of the State (gallons)?
d. Does the discharge bypass the waste management system'? (If yes, notify DWR)
❑ Yes
N NA
❑ NE
2. Is there evidence of a past discharge from any part of the operation`?
El Yes
o ❑ NA
❑ NE
3. Were there any observable adverse impacts or potential adverse impacts to the waters
❑ Yes
No ❑ NA
❑ NE
of the State other than from a discharge?
Page I of 3 21412015 Continued

Facili Number: - Date of Ins ection:
Waste Collection & Treatment
4. Is storage capacity (structural plus storm storage plus heavy rainfall) less than adequate?
No NA
❑ YesqNo
❑ NE
a. Ifyes, is waste level into the structural freeboard?
❑ Yes ❑ NA
❑ NE
Structure I Structure 2 Structure 3 Structure 4
Structure 5 Structure 6
Identifier: �dt+]' q (✓\ SW�' J(
8b " I .add — 13
Spillway?:
Designed Freeboard (in):
Observed Freeboard (in): fLd f/ DD lt j0 Cf
tOtI
?, s
5. Are there any immediate threats to the integrity of any of the structures observed?
❑ Yes No ❑ NA
❑ NE
(i,e., large trees, severe erosion, seepage, etc.)
6. Are there structures on -site which are not properly addressed and/or managed through a
[—]Yes No ❑ NA
❑ NE
waste management or closure plan?
eat, notify DWR
If any of questions 4-6 were answered yes, and the situation poses an immediate public health or environmrNN�-O
7. Do any of the structures need maintenance or improvement? v
❑ Yes NA
❑ NE
8. Do any of the structures lack adequate markers as required by the permit'?
❑ Yes No NA
❑ NE
(not applicable to roofed pits, dry stacks, and/or wet stacks)
9. Does any part of the waste management system other than the waste structures require ❑ Yes ZrNo ❑ NA ❑ NE
maintenance or improvement?
Waste Application
10. Are there any required buffers, setbacks, or compliance alternatives that need ❑ Yes No NA ❑ NE
maintenance or improvement?
11. Is there evidence of incorrect land application? If yes, check the appropriate box below. ❑ Yes No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Excessive Ponding ❑ Hydraulic Overload ❑ Frozen Ground ❑ Heavy Metals (Cu, Zn, etc.)
❑ PAN ❑ PAN > 10% or 10 lbs. ❑ Total Phosphorus ❑ Failure to Incorporate Manure/Sludge into Bare Soil
❑ Outside of Acceptable Crop Window ❑ Evidence of Wind Drift ❑ Application Outside of Approved Area
12. Crop Type(s): S' 6(3- /J/
13. Soil Type(s):
14. Do the receiving crops differ from those designated in the CAWMP?
No
❑ Yes Pr
❑ NA
❑ NE
15. Does the receiving crop and/or land application site need improvement'?
El Yes .2; N
❑ NA
❑ NE
16. Did the facility fail to secure and/or operate per the irrigation design or wettable
❑ Yes No
❑ NA
❑ NE
acres determination?
17. Does the facility lack adequate acreage for land application?
❑ Yes
❑ NA
❑ NE
18. Is there a lack of properly operating waste application equipment`?
❑ Yes VNo
❑ NA
❑ NE
Reauired Records & Documents
19. Did the facility fail to have the Certificate of Coverage & Permit readily available'?
❑ Yes
❑ NA
❑ NE
20. Does the facility fail to have all components of the CAWMP readily available? if yes, check
❑ Yes No
❑ NA
❑ NE
the appropriate box.
❑ WUP ❑Checklists ❑ Design ❑ Maps ❑ Lease Agreements
❑Other:
21. Does record keeping need improvement? If yes, check the appropriate box below.
❑ Yes ffNo
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Waste Application ❑ Weekly Freeboard ❑ Waste Analysis ❑ Soil Analysis
❑ Waste Transfers
❑ Weather Code
❑ Rainfall ❑ Stocking ❑ Crop Yield ❑ 120 Minute Inspections ❑ Monthly and I" Rainfall Inspections [] S dge Survey
22. Did the facility fail to install and maintain a rain gauge?
❑ Yes
Ej NA
❑ NE
23. If selected, did the facility fail to install and maintain rainbreakers on irrigation equipment'?
❑ Yes No
❑ NA
❑ NE
Page 2 of 3
21412015 Continued

acilit Number: - Date of Inspection: 7 — ( —
24. Did the facility fail to calibrate waste application equipment as required by the permit? ❑ Yes No NA ❑ NE
25. Is the facility out of compliance with permit conditions related to sludge? if yes, check ❑ Yes o ❑ NA ❑ NE
the appropriate box(es) below.
❑ Failure to complete annual sludge survey []Failure to develop a POA for sludge levels
❑ Non -compliant sludge levels in any lagoon
List structure(s) and date of first survey indicating non-compliance:
26. Did the facility fail provide documentation of an actively certified operator in charge? ❑ Yes No NA ❑ NE
27. Did the facility fail to secure a phosphorus loss assessments (PLAT) certification? ❑ Yes o NA ❑ NE
Other lssues
28. Did the facility fail to properly dispose of dead animals with 24 hours and/or document ❑ Yes No ❑ NA ❑ NE
and report mortality rates that were higher than normal.
29. At the time of the inspection did the facility pose an odor or air quality concern?
❑ Yes
❑ No
❑ NA
❑ NE
If yes, contact a regional Air Quality representative immediately.
30. Did the facility fail to notify the Regional Office of emergency situations as required by the
❑ Yes
❑ No
❑ NA
❑ NE
permit? (i.e., discharge, freeboard problems, over -application)
31. Do subsurface tile drains exist at the facility? If yes, check the appropriate box below.
❑ Yes
❑ No
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Application Field ❑ Lagoon/Storage Pond ❑ Other:
32. Were any additional problems noted which cause non-compliance of the permit or CAWMP?
❑ Yes
❑ No
0 NA
❑ NE
33. Did the Reviewer/Inspector fail to discuss review/inspection with an on -site representative?
❑ Yes
❑ No
❑ NA
❑ NE
34. Does the facility require'a follow-up visit by the same agency?
❑ Yes
[] No
❑ NA
❑ NE
Comments (refeir to'question #) Explain any YES answers'andlor any�additional recommendations'or any other Comments:
Use drawings offacility to;,better explain situationsAuse additional pagesas necessary)
p 43 ,-,•(2 7 t d
1 (��
U
f = 6.1
i�c,Lr r to. _(S 0 �. 5
Reviewer/Inspector Name:
Phone: 5 / — VZ_da
Reviewer/Inspector Signature: i0-& Q'l I Date:
Page 3 of 3 21412015

•k-2—/2-
Type of Visit: rQ Com . ce Inspection O Operation Review 0 Structure Evaluation 0 Technical Assistance I
Reason for Visit: ORoutine 0 Complaint 0 Follow-up 0 Referral 0 Emergency 0 Other 0 Denied Access
Date of Visit: lal Arrival Time: Departure Time: County:
Farm Name: k](21-41V f- P !V f AP, f;-- Owner Email:
Owner Name:
Mailing Address:
Physical Address:
Facility Contact:
Title:
Phone:
Onsite Representative: P 44 L %TO I— <:�L} 141--- Integrator:
Certified Operator:
Back-up Operator:
Location of Farm:
Latitude:
Phone:
Certification Number:
Certification Number:
Longitude:
Region:
Design Current Design Current
Swine Capacity Pop. Wet Poultry Capacity P.
Wean to Finish La er
Design Current
Cattle Capacity Pop.
Dai Cow
Wean to Feeder Non -La er
airy Calf
Feeder to Finish
airy Heifer
Farrow to Wean Design C►urrent
Farrow to Feeder Dr, P,nult . Ca aci Po
Farrow to Finish La ers
D Cow
Non -Dairy
Beef Stocker
Beef Feeder
Gilts
Non -Layers
Boars ITT--
Pullets
Beef Brood Cow
Other
Other__JELL0ther
Turke s
Turkey Poults
Discharges and Stream Impacts
1. Is any discharge observed from any part of the operation?
[:)Yes No 0 NA NE
Discharge originated at: ❑ Structure ❑ Application Field ❑ Other:
a. Was the conveyance man-made?
❑Yes
No NA
❑ NE
b. Did the discharge reach waters of the State? (If yes, notify DWQ)
❑ YesgNo
❑ NA
❑ NE
c. What is the estimated volume that reached waters of the State (gallons)?
d. Does the discharge bypass the waste management system? (If yes, notify DWQ) ❑ Yes
❑ NA
❑ NE
2. Is there evidence of a past discharge from any part of the operation?
❑YesrNo
❑ NA
❑ NE
3. Were there any observable adverse impacts or potential adverse impacts to the waters
❑ Yes❑
NA
❑ NE
of the State other than from a discharge?
Page I of 3 21412011 Continued

Facili Numbe1r: 3 - Date of inspection: Q �.
Waste Collection & Treatment
4. Is storage capacity (structural plus storm storage plus heavy rainfall) less than adequate? ❑ Yes
a. If yes, is waste level into the structural freeboard?
❑ Yes
❑NA ❑NE
No ❑ NA ❑ NE
Structure I Structure 2 Structure 3 Structure 4 Structure 5 Structure 6
Identifier: � Z P, 3— D/V '�f �S 1 P
Spillway?:
Designed Freeboard (in):
Observed Freeboard (in):
5. Are there any immediate threats to the integrity of any of the structures observed? ❑Yes No 0
NA ❑ NE
(i.e., large trees, severe erosion, seepage, etc.)
6. Are there structures on -site which are not properly addressed and/or managed through a ❑ Yes No ❑ NA ❑ NE
waste management or closure plan?
If any of questions 4-6 were answered yes, and the situation poses an immediate public health or environmental t .eat, notify DWQ
7. Do any of the structures need maintenance or improvement? ❑ Yes No NA ❑ NE
8. Do any of the structures lack adequate markers as required by the permit? ❑ Yes ETNo ❑ NA ❑ NE
(not applicable to roofed pits, dry stacks, and/or wet stacks)
9. Does any part of the waste management system other than the waste structures require ❑ Yes No ❑ NA ❑ NE
maintenance or improvement?
Waste Application
10. Are there any required buffers, setbacks, or compliance alternatives that need ❑ Yes No NA ❑ NE
maintenance or improvement?
11. is there evidence of incorrect land application? If yes, check the appropriate box below. ❑ Yes No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Excessive Ponding ❑ Hydraulic Overload ❑ Frozen Ground ❑ Heavy Metals (Cu, Zn, etc.)
❑ PAN ❑ PAN > 10% or 10 lbs. ❑ Total Phosphorus ❑ Failure to Incorporate Manure/Sludge into Bare Soil
❑ Outside of Acceptable Crop Window ❑ Evidence of Wind Drift ❑ Application Outside of Approved Area
12. Crop Type(s): —44;
13. Soil Type(s):
14. Do the receiving crops differ from those designated in the CAWMP? .
❑ Yes
Z No ❑ NA
❑ NE
15. Does the receiving crop and/or land application site need improvement?
❑ Yes
No NA
❑ NE
16. Did the facility fail to secure and/or operate per the irrigation design or wettable
❑ Yes
2No ❑ NA
❑ NE
acres determination?
17. Does the facility lack adequate acreage for land application?
❑ Yes
�,
❑ NA
❑ NE
18. is there a lack of properly operating waste application equipment?
❑ Yes
❑ NA
90,
❑ NE
Required Records & Documents
19. Did the facility fail to have the Certificate of Coverage & Permit readily available?
❑ Yes
❑ NA
❑ NE
20. Does the facility fail to have all components of the CAWMP readily available? if yes, check
❑ Yes
No ❑ NA
❑ NE
the appropriate box.
❑ WUP [:]Checklists ❑ Design ❑ Maps ❑ Lease Agreements ❑Other:
21. Does record keeping need improvement? If yes, check the appropriate box below. ❑ Yes No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Waste Application ❑ Weekly Freeboard ❑ Waste Analysis ❑ Soil Analysis ❑ Waste Transfer ❑ Weather Code
❑ Rainfall ❑ Stocking ❑ Crop Yield ❑ 120 Minute Inspections ❑ Monthly and V Rainfall Inspectio ❑ Sludge Survey
22. Did the facility fail to install and maintain a rain gauge? ❑ Yes No ❑ NA ❑ NE
23. If selected, did the facility fail to install and maintain rainbreakers on irrigation equipment? ❑ Yes [:]No ❑ NA ❑ NE
Page 2 of 3 21412011 Continued

Facili Numfier: - Date of Inspection:
24. Did the facility fail to calibrate waste application equipment as required by the permit? ❑ Yes on 1" NA ❑ NE
25. Is the facility out of compliance with permit conditions related to sludge? If yes, check ❑Yes No ❑ NA [] NE
the appropriate box(es) below.
❑ Failure to complete annual sludge survey ❑Failure to develop a POA for sludge levels
❑ Non -compliant sludge levels in any lagoon
List structure(s) and date of first survey indicating non-compliance:
26. Did the facility fail to provide documentation of an actively certified operator in charge? ❑ Yes No ❑ NA ❑ NE
27. Did the facility fail to secure a phosphorus loss assessments (PLAT) certification? ❑ Yes rNo❑ NA ❑ NE
Other Issues
28. Did the facility fail to properly dispose of dead animals with 24 hours and/or document ❑ Yes ffNo ❑ NA ❑ NE
and report mortality rates that were higher than normal?
24. At the time of the inspection did the facility pose an odor or air quality concern? ❑ Yes No ❑ NA ❑ NE
If yes, contact a regional Air Quality representative immediately.
30. Did the facility fail to notify the Regional Office of emergency situations as required by the
❑ Yes
❑ No
❑ NA
[] NE
permit? (i.e., discharge, freeboard problems, over -application)
31. Do subsurface the drains exist at the facility? If yes, check the appropriate box below.
❑ Yes
❑ No
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Application Field ❑ Lagoon/Storage Pond ❑ Other:
32. Were any additional problems noted which cause non-compliance of the permit or CAWMP?
❑ Yes
❑ No
❑ NA
❑ NE
33. Did the Reviewer/Inspector fail to discuss review/inspection with an on -site representative?
❑ Yes
❑ No
❑ NA
❑ NE
34. Does the facility require a follow-up visit by the same agency?
❑ Yes
❑ No
❑ NA
❑ NE
Comments (refer to. question #):.Explaigany YES answers and/or any additional,recommendations:or any other comments ,1' s�
Use drawings,of facility to better explain=situations (use additional pages as necessary)
Reviewer/Inspector Name:
Phone: % J I " t-� 2_0 b
Reviewer/Inspector Signature: 84, 5� e e e, a G,l e— ./
Date: lot/ 3-1 l L
Page 3 of 3 21412011

0
"9
(� - Is-( f
Type of Visit: ZFCompli tispection O Operation Review 0 Structure Evaluation O Technical Assistance I
Reason for Visit: outine 0 Complaint 0 Follow-up 0 Referral 0 Emergencv 0 Other 0 Denied Access
Date of Visit: 1 Arrival Time: Departure Time: T County:
Farm Name: h-`. Owner Email:
Owner Name: Phone:
Mailing Address:
Physical Address:
Facility Contact:
Title:
Onsite Representative: ne :�Ac Jao'l Integrator:
Certified Operator:
Phone:
Certification Number:
Back-up Operator: Certification Number:
Location of Farm:
Latitude:
Longitude:
Region:
Design Current
Swine Capacity Pop.
Wean to Finish
Wet Poultry
Layer
Design
Capacity
Current
Pop.
Design
Cattle Capacity
DairyCow
Current
Pop.
Wean to Feeder
I
Dairy Calf
Feeder to Finish
Dairy Heifer
Farrow to Wean
Farrow to Feeder
Farrow to Finish
Dr9 P,oult =
JLayers
Design
Ca aci
Current
P,o
Dry Cow
Non-Dairy
Beef Stocker
Gilts
Nan -La ers
Beef Feeder
Boars
1pullets
Beef Brood Cow
Other
Other
Turkeys
Turkey Poults
Other
Discharees and Stream Impacts
1. Is any discharge observed from any part of the operation?
Discharge originated at: ❑ Structure ❑ Application Field ❑ Other:
a. Was the conveyance man-made?
b. Did the discharge reach waters of the State? (If yes, notify DWR)
c. What is the estimated volume that reached waters of the State (gallons)?
d. Does the discharge bypass the waste management system? (If yes, notify DWR)
2. Is there evidence of a past discharge from any part of the operation?
3. Were there any observable adverse impacts or potential adverse impacts to the waters
of the State other than from a discharge?
❑ Yes 0 <No1[2 NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes N ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes No NA ❑ NE
❑❑ Yes F
Yes
[]Yes
❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ NA ❑ NE
Page I of 3 21412014 Continued

Facili Number: 3- Date of Inspection: Waste Collection &Treatment
4. Is storage capacity (structural plus storm storage plus heavy rainfall) less than adequate? ❑ Yes ❑ NA ❑ NE
a. If yes, is waste level into the structural freeboard? ❑ YesgNo❑ NA ❑ NE
Structure I Structure 2 Structure 3 Structure 4 Structure 5 Structure 6 I
Identifier: .5t) {.' yd3 52 (w An �►'�— � _rth
Spillway?:
Designed Freeboard (in): ,r q,
Observed Freeboard (in): 2 t! // � co O 4r r r Z
5. Are there any immediate threats to the integrity of any of the structures observed? ❑ Yes No NA ❑ NE
(i.e., large trees, severe erosion, seepage, etc.)
6. Are there structures on -site which are not properly addressed and/or managed through a ❑ Yes No ❑ NA ❑ NE
waste management or closure plan?
If any of questions 4-6 were answered yes, and the situation poses an immediate public health or environmental eat, notify DWR
7. Do any of the structures need maintenance or improvement? ❑ Yes No ❑ NA ❑ NE
8. Do any of the structures lack adequate markers as required by the permit? ❑ Yes o NA ❑ NE
(not applicable to roofed pits, dry stacks, and/or wet stacks)
9. Does any part of the waste management system other than the waste structures require ❑ Yes No ❑ NA ❑ NE
maintenance or improvement?
Waste Application
10. Are there any required buffers, setbacks, or compliance alternatives that need ❑ Yes No NA ❑ NE
maintenance or improvement?
11. Is there evidence of incorrect land application? If yes, check the appropriate box below. ❑ Yes No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Excessive Ponding ❑ Hydraulic Overload ❑ Frozen Ground ❑ Heavy Metals (Cu, Zn, etc.)
❑ PAN ❑ PAN > 10% or 10 lbs. ❑ Total Phosphorus ❑ Failure to Incorporate Manure/Sludge into Bare Soil
❑ Outside of Acceptable Crop Window ❑ Evidence of Wind Drift ❑ Application Outside of Approved Area
12. Crop Type(s): tv4a'�, ��' i
j 1
13. Soil Type(s):
14. Do the receiving crops differ from those designated in the CAWMP?
❑ Yes
❑ NA
❑ NE
15. Does the receiving crop and/or land application site need improvement?
❑ Yes
No ❑ NA
❑ NE
16. Did the facility fail to secure and/or operate per the irrigation design or wettable
❑ Yes
❑ NA
�K'
❑ NE
acres determination?
17. Does the facility lack adequate acreage for land application?
❑ Yes
V KN�Vo❑ NA
❑ NE
18. Is there a lack of properly operating waste application equipment?
❑ Yes
Wo ❑ NA
❑ NE
Required Records & Documents
19. Did the facility fail to have the Certificate of Coverage & Permit readily available?
❑ Yes
o ❑ NA
No
❑ NE
20. Does the facility fail to have all components of the CAWMP readily available? If yes, check
❑ Yes
❑ NA
❑ NE
the appropriate box.
❑WUP ❑Checklists ❑ Design ❑ Maps ❑ Lease Agreements ❑Other:
21. Does record keeping need improvement? If yes, check the appropriate box below. ❑ YesPd No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Waste Application ❑ Weekly Freeboard ❑ Waste Analysis ❑ Soil Analysis ❑ Waste Transfers ❑ Weather Code
❑ Rainfall ❑ Stacking ❑ Crop Yield ❑ 120 Minute Inspections []Monthly and V Rainfall Inspections ❑ Sludge Survey
22. Did the facility fail to install and maintain a rain gauge? ❑ Yes No ❑ NA ❑ NE
23. If selected, did the facility fail to install and maintain rainbreakers on irrigation equipment? ❑ Yes No ❑ NA ❑ NE
Page 2 of 3 21412014 Continued

Facili 'Number: jDate of Inspection: /,s'_
24. Did the facility fail to calibrate waste application equipment as required by the permit? ❑ Yes Z�No[o]
NA ❑ NE
25. is the facility out of compliance with permit conditions related to sludge? If yes, check ❑ Yes NA ❑ NE
the appropriate box(es) below.
❑ Failure to complete annual sludge survey ❑Failure to develop a POA for sludge levels
❑ Non -compliant sludge levels in any lagoon
List structure(s) and date of first survey indicating non-compliance:
26. Did the facility fail to provide documentation of an actively certified operator in charge? ❑ Yes N ❑ NA ❑ NE
27. Did the facility fail to secure a phosphorus loss assessments (PLAT) certification? ❑ Yes No aNA ❑ NE
Other Issues
28. Did the facility fail to properly dispose of dead animals with 24 hours and/or document ❑ Yes No ❑ NA ❑ NE
and report mortality rates that were higher than normal?
24. At the time of the inspection did the facility pose an odor or air quality concern?
❑ Yes
❑ No
❑ NA
❑ NE
If yes, contact a regional Air Quality representative immediately.
30. Did the facility fail to notify the Regional Office of emergency situations as required by the
❑ Yes
❑ No
❑ NA
❑ NE
permit? (i.e., discharge, freeboard problems, aver -application)
31. Do subsurface tile drains exist at the facility? If yes, check the appropriate box below.
❑ Yes
❑ No
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Application Field ❑ Lagoon/Storage Pond ❑ Other:
32. Were any additional problems noted which cause non-compliance of the permit or CAWMP?
❑ Yes
[] No
❑ NA
❑ NE
33. Did the Reviewer/Inspector fail to discuss review/inspection with an on -site representative?
❑ Yes
❑ No
❑ NA
❑ NE
34. Does the facility require a follow-up visit by the same agency?
❑ Yes
❑ No
❑ NA
❑ NE
Comments (refeto gnestion #!) Explain ariyXES answers, and/or. any additiona[recumrn6fidations or any other,cornments ;
Use drawings of facility to better explain sit4atlons`(u` ase,additional es'=as necessa
5/1JF ✓vie
7
Reviewer/Inspector Name:
Reviewer/]nspector Signature:�j(�
Page 3 of 3
Phone: 27 /— V 20 b
Date: c/p -h?— ( --5-
21412014

6,( 25(( 0
Type of Visit I'Compliance Inspection 0 Operation Review O Structure Evaluation O Technical Assistance
Reason for Visit outing O Complaint Q Follow up O Referral O Emergency O Other ❑ Denied Access
Date of Visit:. Arrival Time: � Departure Time: County: Region:
Farm Name: D eq4L h-- __ Owner Email:
Owner Name:
Mailing Address:
Physical Address:
Facility Contact:
Onsite Representative:
Title:
Phone:
Integrator:
Certified Operator: _._ & h r3 16 ", `14- Operator Certification Number:
Phone No:
Back-up Operator:
Location of Farm:
Back-up Certification Number:
Latitude: = c 0 1 0 O Longitude: =°= 6= H
Design Current
Design Current
Design Current
Swine C►apacity Population
Wet Poultry C•apaeity Population
Cattle Capacity Population
❑ Wean to Finish
❑ Layer
❑ Dairy Cow
❑ Wean'to Feeder I ID Non -Layer I
❑ Dairy Calf
❑ Feeder to Finish
❑ Daity Heifer
❑ Farrow to Wean
Dry Poultry
❑ Dry Cow
❑ Farrow to Feeder
❑ Non -Dairy
❑ Farrow to Finish
El Layers
El Beef Stocker
❑ Gilts
❑Non -La Non -Layers
❑Beef Feeder
❑ Boars
❑ Pullets
❑ Beef Brood Cowl
❑ Turke s
Other
❑ Other
❑Turke Puults
JEE11 Other
Number of Structures:
Discharges & Stream Impacts
1. Is any discharge observed from any part of the operation?
Discharge originated at: ❑ Structure ❑ Application Field ❑ Other
a. Was the conveyance man-made?
b. Did the discharge reach waters of the State? (1 f yes, notify DWQ)
c. What is the estimated volume that reached waters of the State (gallons)?
d. Does discharge bypass the waste management system? (If yes, notify DWQ)
2. Is there evidence of a past discharge from any part of the operation?
3. Were there any adverse impacts or potential adverse impacts to the Waters of the State
other than from a discharge?
❑ Yes ONo ❑ ❑ NE
❑ Yes N NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes rNo
NA ❑ NE
[I Yes NA ❑ NE
El Yes NA ❑ NE
Page 1 of 3 12128104 Continued

F'acility'Number: 33 — Date of Inspection
Waste Collection & Treatment
4. Is storage capacity (structural plus storm storage plus heavy rainfall) less than adequate? ❑ Yes NoTEINA
A ❑ NE
a. If yes, is waste level into the structural freeboard? ❑ Yes o ❑ NE
Structure 1 Structure 2 Structure 3 Structure 4 Structure 5 Structure 6
Identifier: Saw !� 4av- P.r-1 —O JDt,/r -5. 130;11( li ,d
Spillway?:
Designed Freeboard (in): /r
Observed Freeboard (in); 6 l� �� << Z/r h
5. Are there any immediate threats to the integrity of any of the structures observed? ❑ Yes No ❑ NA ❑ NE
(ie/ large trees, severe erosion, seepage, etc.)
6. Are there structures on -site which are not properly addressed and/or managed
❑ Yes
o ❑ NA
❑ NE
through a waste management or closure plan?
If any of questions 4-6 were answered yes, and the situation poses an immediate public health or environmental
thr , no DWQ
7. Do any of the structures need maintenance or improvement?
❑ Yes
No OVA
❑ NE
8. Do any of the stuctures lack adequate markers as required by the permit?
❑ Yes
No A
❑ NE
(Not applicable to roofed pits, dry stacks and/or wet stacks)
4. Does any part of the waste management system other than the waste structures require
❑ Yes
No ❑ NA
❑ NE
maintenance or improvement?
Waste Application
10. Are there any required buffers, setbacks, or compliance alternatives that need ❑ Yes No ❑ NA ❑ NE
maintenance/improvement?
11. Is there evidence of incorrect application? If yes, check the appropriate box below. ❑ Yes eNo ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Excessive Ponding ❑ Hydraulic Overload ❑ Frozen Ground ❑ Heavy Metals (Cu, Zn, etc.)
❑ PAN ❑ PAN > l0% or l0 lbs ❑ Totai Phosphorus ❑ Failure to incorporate Manure/Sludge into Bare Soil
❑ Outside of Acceptable Crop Window ❑ Evidence of Wind Drift ❑ Application Outside of Area
12. Crop type(s)
13. Soii type(s)
14. Do the receiving crops differ from those designated in the CAWMP?
❑ Yes
ld'No NA
El NE
15. Does the receiving crop and/or land application site need improvement?
❑ Yes
NA
❑ NE
16. Did the facility fail to secure and/or operate per the irrigation design or wettable acre determination ?
❑ Yes
NA
❑ NE
17. Does the facility lack adequate acreage for land application?
❑ YesVNo
NA
❑ NE
18. Is there a lack of properly operating waste application equipment?
❑ Yes
NA
❑ NE
Comme���-. s'.".nts (rI
e:i r, tosha aquen .#) 'Explain ariy YES,an,swers:and/or any recommendations or, any other comments
Use drawtngs:ot facility to,�� titter explain situations�(use;addittonal page5�as necessary,):,
.
Y'3�1 " �. r40'DIXNA
�, 7 / _ zod
Reviewer/Inspector Name �� �', n�� Phone:
Reviewer/Inspector Signature: (Lr 0we, Date: �d
Page 2 of 3 12128104 Continued
lI

. Facility Number: — f Date of Inspection t
Required Records & Documents
19. Did the facility fail to have Certificate of Coverage & Permit readily available? ❑ Yes No NA El NE
20. Does the facility fail to have all components of the CAWMP readily available? If yes, check ❑ Yes No ❑ NA ❑ NE
the appropriate box. ❑ WUP ❑ Checklists ❑ Design ❑ Maps ❑ Other
21. Does record keeping need improvement? If yes, check the appropriate box below. ❑ Yes 4 No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Waste Application ❑ Weekly Freeboard ❑ Waste Analysis ❑ Soil Analysis ❑ Waste Transfers ❑ Annual Certification
❑ Rainfall ❑ Stocking ❑ Crop Yield ❑ 120 Minute Inspections ❑ Monthly and 1" Rain Inspections ❑ W ther Code
22. Did the facility fail to install and maintain a rain gauge? ❑ Yes No ❑ NA ❑ NE
23. If selected, did the facility fail to install and maintain rainbreakers on irrigation equipment? ❑ Yes No NA ❑ NE
24. Did the facility fail to calibrate waste application equipment as required by the permit? ❑ Yes o NA ❑ NE
25. Did the facility fail to conduct a sludge survey as required by the permit? ❑ Yes N El NA El NE
26. Did the facility fail to have an actively certified operator in charge? El Yes �❑ NA ❑ NE
27. Did the facility fail to secure a phosphorus loss assessment (PLAT) certification? ❑ Yes No ❑ NA ❑ NE
Other Issues
28. Were any additional problems noted which cause non-compliance of the permit or CAWMP? ❑ Yes ❑ No ❑ NA ❑ NE
29. Did the facility fail to properly dispose of dead animals within 24 hours and/or document ❑ Yes ❑ No ❑ NA ❑ NE
and report the mortality rates that were higher than normal?
30. At the time of the inspection did the facility pose an odor or air quality concern? ❑ Yes ❑ No ❑ NA ❑ NE
If yes, contact a regional Air Quality representative immediately
31. Did the facility fail to notify the regional office of emergency situations as required by ❑ Yes ❑ No ❑ NA ❑ NE
General Permit? (ie/ discharge, freeboard problems, over application)
32. Did Reviewer/Inspector fail to discuss review/inspection with an on -site representative? ❑ Yes ❑ No ❑ NA ❑ NE
33. Does facility require a follow-up visit by same agency? ❑ Yes ❑ No ❑ NA ❑ NE
.kdditional Cominents andlot DiarvQs 5 a A#_. z � s�', �. b
�+r
Page 3 of 3 12128104

r —�
i"vi"sion of Water Quality
Facility Number ©� ® © Division of Soil and Water Conservation0
M Other Agency
type of Visit. 0 Compliance Inspection 0 Operation Review 0 Structure Evaluation 0 Technical Assistance
teason for Visit: 0 Routine 0 Complaint 0 Follow-up 0 Referral 0 Emergency 0 Other 0 Denied Access
Date of Visit: f L Arrival Time: © Departure Time: County:
Farm Name: 2yM-- Owner Email:
Owner Name:
Mailing Address:
Physical Address:
Facility Contact:
Onsite Representative:
Title:
Phone:
Integrator:
Phone:
Certified Operator: 110—1 1 yo t--'a Certification Number:
Back-up Operator:
Location of Farm:
Latitude:
Certification Number:
Longitude:
Region:
Design Current
Design Current
Design Current
Swine Capacity Pop. Wet Poultry
Capacity Pop.
Cattle Capacity Pop.
Wean to Finish ILayer
I
Dairy Cow
Wean to Feeder
Non -La er
I
Dairy Calf
Feeder to Finish
Dairy Heifer
Farrow to Wean
Design Current
Dry Cow
Farrow to Feeder
DER P,outt ,
Ca aci P.o
Non -Dairy
Farrow to Finish
Layers
Beef Stocker
Gilts
Non -Layers
Beef Feeder
Boars
Pullets
Beef Brood Cow
Turkeys
Other Turkey Poults
L_j0ther
Other
Discharges and Stream Impacts
1. Is any discharge observed from any part of the operation?
[:]Yes
o ❑ NA
❑ NE
Discharge originated at: ❑ Structure ❑ Application Field ❑ Other:
a. Was the conveyance man-made?
❑ Yes
NA
VN
❑ NE
b. Did the discharge reach waters of the State? (If yes, notify DWQ)
❑ Yes
❑ NA
❑ NE
c. What is the estimated volume that reached waters of the State (gallons)?
d. Does the discharge bypass the waste management system? (If yes, notify DWQ) ❑ Yes
NA
❑ NE
2. Is there evidence of a past discharge from any part of the operation?
ElYes❑
Vl�� NA
❑ NE
3. Were there any observable adverse impacts or potential adverse impacts to the waters
[] Yes
No ❑ NA
❑ NE
of the State other than from a discharge?
Page 1 of 3 21412011 Continued

Facili Number: 3 3 - Date of Inspection: 130'
Waste Collection & Treatment
4. Is storage capacity (structural plus storm storage plus heavy rainfall) less than adequate? ❑ Yes <No�❑ NA ❑ NE
a. If yes, is waste level into the structural freeboard? ❑ Yes No ❑ NA ❑ NE
Structure 1 Structure 2 Structure 3 Structure 4 Structure 5 Structure 6
Identifier:
Spillway?:
Designed Freeboard (in): ! /
Observed Freeboard (in): tG� << �( o , ?1� _ (�
5. Are there any immediate threats to the integrity of any of the structures observed? ❑ Yes No ❑ NA ❑ NE
(i.e., large trees, severe erosion, seepage, etc.)
6. Are there structures on -site which are not properly addressed and/or managed through a ❑ Yes No ❑ NA ❑ NE
waste management or closure plan?
If any of questions 4-6 were answered yes, and the situation poses an immediate public health or environment�alVhreat, notify DWQ
7. Do any of the structures need maintenance or improvement? ❑ Yes N ❑ NA ❑ NE
8. Do any of the structures lack adequate markers as required by the permit? ❑ Yes o ❑ NA ❑ NE
(not applicable to roofed pits, dry stacks, and/or wet stacks)
9. Does any part of the waste management system other than the waste structures require [] Yes R No ❑ NA ❑ NE
maintenance or improvement?
_Waste Application
10. Are there any required buffers, setbacks, or compliance alternatives that need [] Yes P�No ❑ NA ❑ NE
maintenance or improvement?
11. is there evidence of incorrect land application? if yes, check the appropriate box below. ❑ Yes WNo ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Excessive Ponding ❑ Hydraulic Overload ❑ Frozen Ground ❑ Heavy Metals (Cu, Zn, etc.)
❑ PAN ❑ PAN > 10% or 10 lbs. ❑ Total Phosphorus ❑ Failure to Incorporate Manure/Sludge into Bare Soil
❑ Outside of Acceptable Crop Window ❑ Evidence of Wind Drift ❑ Application Outside of Approved Area
12. Crop Type(s): 5-10 e / 60-11 / Sa y h r*,7 S
�T
13. Soil Type(s): 1Z
14. Do the receiving crops differ from those designated in the CAWMP?
❑ Yes
XN ❑ NA
❑ NE
15. Does the receiving crop and/or land application site need improvement?
❑ Yes
❑ NA
❑ NE
16. Did the facility fail to secure and/or operate per the irrigation design or wettable
❑ Yes
No ❑ NA
❑ NE
acres detennination?
17. Does the facility lack adequate acreage for land application?
❑ Yes
❑ NA
�No
❑ NE
18. Is there a lack of properly operating waste application equipment?
❑ Yes
❑ NA
❑ NE
Required Records & Documents
19. Did the facility fail to have the Certificate of Coverage & Permit readily available?
❑ Yes
❑ NA
❑ NE
20. Does the facility fail to have all components of the CAWMP readily available? If yes, check
❑ Yes
VN ❑ NA
❑ NE
the appropriate box.
❑ WUP ❑Checklists ❑ Design ❑ Maps ❑ Lease Agreements ❑Other:
21. Does record keeping need improvement? If yes, check the appropriate box below. ❑ Yes o ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Waste Application ❑ Weekly Freeboard ❑ Waste Analysis ❑ Soil Analysis ❑ Waste Transfers ❑ Weather Code
❑ Rainfall ❑ Stocking ❑ Crop Yield ❑ 120 Minute Inspections ❑ Monthly and 1" Rainfall Inspections ❑ Sludge Survey
22. Did the facility fail to install and maintain a rain gauge? ❑ Yes o ❑ NA ❑ NE
23. If selected, did the facility fail to install and maintain rainbreakers on irrigation equipment? ❑ Yes No ❑ NA ❑ NE
Page 2 of 3 21412011 Continued

Facility Number: 3 3 - S Date of Inspection: & 1,jajI
24. Did the facility fail to calibrate waste application equipment as required by the permit? ❑ Yes
25. Is the facility out of compliance with permit conditions related to sludge? If yes, check ❑ Yes
the appropriate box(es) below.
❑ Failure to complete annual sludge survey ❑ Failure to develop a POA for sludge Ieve] s
❑ Non -compliant sludge levels in any lagoon
List structure(s) and date of first survey indicating non-compliance:
No 0 NA ❑ NE
Vo❑ NA ❑ NE
26. Did the facility fail to provide documentation of an actively certified operator in charge? ❑ Yes ❑ NA ❑ NE
27. Did the facility fail to secure a phosphorus loss assessments (PLAT) certification? ❑ Yes No ❑ NA ❑ NE
Other Issues
29. Did the facility fail to properly dispose of dead animals with 24 hours and/or document ❑ Yes o ❑ NA ❑ NE
and report mortality rates that were higher than normal?
29. At the time of the inspection did the facility pose an odor or air quality concern? ❑ Yes ❑ No DNA [] NE
If yes, contact a regional Air Quality representative immediately.
30. Did the facility fail to notify the Regional Office of emergency situations as required by the
permit? (i.e., discharge, freeboard problems, over -application)
31. Do subsurface tile drains exist at the facility? If yes, check the appropriate box below.
❑ Application Field ❑ Lagoon/Storage Pond ❑ Other;
32. Were any additional problems noted which cause non-compliance of the permit or CAWMP?
33. Did the Reviewer/Inspector fail to discuss review/inspection with an on -site representative?
34. Does the facility require a follow-up visit by the same agency?
❑ Yes ❑ No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes
❑ No
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Yes
❑ No
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Yes
[:]No
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Yes
❑ No
❑ NA
❑ NE
Comments (refer to question #): Explain any YES answers and/or any additional recommendations or any other comments.
Use drawings°of facility to -better explain situations (use additional DaQcs as necessarv).
Reviewer/Inspector Name:
Reviewer/inspector Signature:
Page 3 of 3
Phone:
Date: 3, y
21412011

�211'71II-
S
Type of Visit: to Con nee Inspection U Operation Review Q Structure Evaluation Q Technical Assistance I
Reason for Visit: Routine 0 Complaint 0 Follow-up 0 Referral 0 Emergency 0 Other 0 Denied Access
Date of Visit: Arrival Time: D d Departure Time: County: Region:
Farm Name: 14nna IZ Its f;l t�/�_ Owner Email:
Owner Name: Phone:
Mailing Address:
Physical Address:
Facility Contact: Title:
Onsite Representative:
Certified Operator: %7 12- 4-1 ::�D r- J 4 ,1
Back-up Operator:
Location of Farm:
Latitude:
Phone:
Integrator:
Certification Number:
Certification Number:
Longitude:
Design Current
C*apaci_. Pop.op.
MPoult�plff-Wavaci%tvlSwine
C►attle Capacity Pap.
Wean to Finish
La er
Dairy Cow
Wean to Feeder
on -Layer
Dairy Calf
Feeder to Finish
Dairy Heifer
Farrow to Wean
Design
C►urrent
DEZ Cow
Farrow to Feeder
1)r. P.oultr,
Ca aei
P,o P.
Nan-Dal
Farrow to Finish
Layers
Beef Stocker
Gilts
Non -Layers
Beef Feeder
Boars
Pullets
Turkeys
Beef Brood Cow
SKIM
Turkey Poults
NJ Other
Other
Discharp-es and Stream Impacts
1. Is any discharge observed from any part of the operation? ❑ Yes No ❑ NA ❑ NE
Discharge originated at: ❑ Structure ❑ Application Field ❑ Other:
a. Was the conveyance man-made? ❑Yes N NA ❑ NE
b. Did the discharge reach waters of the State? (if yes, notify DWQ) ❑Yes No ❑ NA ❑ NE
c. What is the estimated volume that reached waters of the State (gallons)?
d. Does the discharge bypass the waste management system? (If yes, notify DWQ) ❑ Yes MNN
❑ NE
2. Is there evidence of a past discharge from any part of the operation? ❑ Yes❑ NE
3. Werethere any observable adverse impacts or potential adverse impacts to the waters ❑ Yes❑ NE
of the State other than from a discharge?
Page I of 3 21412011 Continued

Facility Number: - Date of inspection:
Waste Collection & Treatment
4. Is storage capacity (structural plus storm storage plus heavy rainfall) less than adequate? ❑ Yes ZNo ❑ NA ❑ NE
a. If yes, is waste level into the structural freeboard? ❑ Yes �No❑ NA ❑ NE
Structure 1 St u t 2 Structure 3 Structure 4 Structure 5 Structure 6
tj Ow
Identifier: r S�'� � �� l) l;3 n --y 3 � � "` I11 -P
Spillway?:
Designed Freeboard (in):
Observed Freeboard (in): » [ (
5. Are there any immediate threats to the integrity of any of the structures observed? [] Yes EfNo ❑ NA ❑ NE
(i.e., large trees, severe erosion, seepage, etc.)
6. Are there structures on -site which are not properly addressed and/or managed through a ❑ Yes 6 No ❑ NA ❑ NE
waste management or closure plan?
If any of questions 4-6 were answered yes, and the situation poses an immediate public health or environmental threat, notify DWQ
7. Do any of the structures need maintenance or improvement? ❑ Yes KNc ❑ NA ❑ NE
8. Do any of the structures lack adequate markers as required by the permit? ❑ Yes �No❑ NA ❑ NE
(not applicable to roofed pits, dry stacks, and/or wet stacks)
9. Does any part of the waste management system other than the waste structures require ❑ Yes 0 No ❑ NA ❑ NE
maintenance or improvement'?
Waste Application
10. Are there any required buffers, setbacks, or compliance alternatives that need [] Yes No ❑ NA ❑ NE
maintenance or improvement?
11. Is there evidence of incorrect land application? If yes, check the appropriate box below. ❑ Yes No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Excessive Ponding ❑ Hydraulic Overload ❑ Frozen Ground ❑ Heavy Metals (Cu, Zn, etc.)
❑ PAN ❑ PAN > 10% or 10 lbs. ❑ Total Phosphorus ❑ Failure to Incorporate Manure/Sludge into Bare Soil
❑ Outside of Acceptable Crop Window ❑ Evidence of Wind Drift ❑ Application Outside of Approved Area
12. Crop Type(s): �'�}Y %^ M Y i t S' 505
13. Soil Type(s):
14. Do the receiving crops differ from those designated in the CAWMP? ❑ Yes L_ff❑ NA ❑ NE
15. Does the receiving crop and/or land application site need improvement? ❑ Yes ❑ NA ❑ NE
16. Did the facility fail to secure and/or operate per the irrigation design or wettable ❑ Yes No ❑ NA ❑ NE
acres determination?
17. Does the facility lack adequate acreage for land application?
oNA
❑Yes g�No
❑ NE
18. Is there a lack of properly operating waste application equipment?
❑Yes
❑ NA
❑ NE
RecLuired_ Records & Documents
19. Did the facility fail to have the Certificate of Coverage & Permit readily available?
❑ Yes No
❑ NA
❑ NE
20. Does the facility fail to have all components of the CAWMP readily available? If yes, check
❑ Yes o
❑ NA
❑ NE
the appropriate box.
❑WUP. []Checklists ❑ Design ❑ Maps ❑ Lease Agreements
❑Other
21. Does record keeping need improvement? If yes, check the appropriate box below.
[:]Yes No
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Waste Application ❑ Weekly Freeboard ❑ Waste Analysis ❑ Soil Analysis
❑ Waste Transfers ❑ Weather Code
❑ Rainfall ❑ Stocking ❑ Crop Yield ❑ 120 Minute Inspections []Monthly and V Rainfall Inspectiot[:]
Sludge Survey
22, Did the facility fail to install and maintain a rain gauge?
❑ Yes❑
NA
❑ NE
23. If selected, did the facility fail to install and maintain rainbreakers on irrigation equipment?
❑ Yes
NA
[] NE
Page 2 of 3 21412011 Continued

Facility Number: - Date of Inspection:
24. Did the facility fail to calibrate waste application equipment as required by the permit? ❑ Yes ZNo
0 NA ❑ NE
25. Is the facility out of compliance with permit conditions related to sludge? If yes, check ❑ Yes❑ NA ❑ NE
the appropriate box(es) below.
❑ Failure to complete annual sludge survey ❑ Failure to develop a POA for sludge levels
❑ Non -compliant sludge levels in any lagoon
List structure(s) and date of first survey indicating non-compliance:
26. Did the facility fail provide documentation of an actively certified operator in charge? ❑ Yes No NA ❑ NE
27. Did the facility fail to secure a phosphorus loss assessments (PLAT) certification? ❑ Yes o ❑ NA ❑ NE
Other Issues
28. Did the facility fail to properly dispose of dead animals with 24 hours and/or document
❑ Yes
❑ No
❑ NA
❑ NE
and report mortality rates that were higher than normal?
29. At the time of the inspection did the facility pose an odor or air quality concern?
❑ Yes
0 No
❑ NA
❑ NE
If yes, contact a regional Air Quality representative immediately.
30. Did the facility fail to notify the Regional Office of emergency situations as required by the
❑ Yes
❑ No
❑ NA
❑ NE
permit? (i.e., discharge, freeboard problems, over -application)
31. Do subsurface tile drains exist at the facility? If yes, check the appropriate box below.
❑ Yes
❑ No
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Application Field ❑ Lagoon/Storage Pond ❑ Other:
32. Were any additional problems noted which cause non-compliance of the permit or CAWMP?
❑ Yes
❑ No
❑ NA
❑ NE
33. Did the Reviewer/Inspector fail to discuss review/inspection with an on -site representative?
❑ Yes
❑ No
❑ NA
❑ NE
34. Does the facility require a follow-up visit by the same agency?
❑ Yes
❑ No
❑ NA
❑ NE
rComments (refer to questicin #) Explain any YES ans»ers and/or any addittonal recommendations or any other,comments
Jse drawings of facility to better explaio situations (use additional pages as necessary) ;
5-/ 1, j �C Su ,,., -I
eotr -3�kJ (21
2C(
3.
Reviewer/Inspector Name:
Reviewer/Inspector Signature: !`J , kz _ `,, -, t [
Phone: '7 / - I, Z 0 U
Page 3 of 3
Date: -P / � & ( ( 7-
2/4/2011

,2 Routine O Complaint O Follow-up of DWQ inspection O Follow-up of DSWC review O Other
Faci 'ty Number Date of Inspection
Time of Inspection b 24 hr. (hh:mm)
Permitted [3 Certified [3 Conditionally Certified [3 Registered 113 Not Opera Date Last Operated:
1fr �? Farm Name: ✓ l fen.� County:........ .....................................
Owner Name: ...... .......C...... L'Ps7/d 2 ....L. f!- .Y Phone No:........................................ft�
FacilityContact: L,5. .y..... ....................... Title: ................................................... I ............Phone No:...................................................
Mailing Address:..12.fG1. �t��.�.7..?'.`f....CIy.6.......r2..�.............�f....�Oecn`� lyL...................... ..........................
Onsite Representative: „�:i,!1'e., �►,1Integrator: IL
...........................................I....................................................................................................
Certified Operator: .............�t•R.:..(!`jd`!s4`"................................................ Operator Certification Number: ............................. 6.........
...
Location of Farm: S /2 / q o q
r................................... ............ t
Latitude ��' �" 1 Longitude
E r P e's:!C! Des!tyF '
3r, u�E .Destg!n�Cturren
Wattle a aPO oulonCaat y CieCaac! '
P: Po elation
❑ Wean to Feeder ° [] Layer ❑ Dairy
,Sr ❑ Feeder to Finish ❑ Non -Layer ❑ Non Dairy
„' ❑ Farrow to Wean p o s
`°.di ❑ Farrow to Feeder
0 Farrow to Finish �TotaltDesl$il CapaClt3'f
iF❑Gilts
❑ Boars 3f€ �'TOtal SSLWrzl
.a
' Number of Lagoons ❑ Subsurface Drains Present ❑ Lagoon Area ❑ Spray Field Area],
-
a S 4 '1,}
Holdin Ponds / Sol" Tra s , f
t,.€. g p ❑ No Liquid Waste Management System
Discharges &Stream Impacts
1. Is any discharge observed from any part of the operation? []Yes No
Discharge originated at: ❑ Lagoon ❑ Spray Field ❑ Other
a. If discharge is observed, was the conveyance man-made? ❑ Yes No
b. If discharge is observed, did it reach Water of the State'? (If ycs, notify DWQ) j] Yes
c. If discharge is observed, what is the estimated flow in gal/min?
d. Does discharge bypass a lagoon system? (Il'yes, notify DWQ) ❑ Yes ZNo _
2. Is there evidence of past discharge from any part of the operation? ❑ Yes No
3. Were there any adverse impacts or potential adverse impacts to the Waters of the State other than from a discharge? ❑ Yes kNo
Waste Collection & Treatment
4. Is storage -capacity (freeboard plus storm storage) less than adequate? ❑ Spillway ❑ Yes
Structurc
i1oro
Structure 2
j'l14r�fG.�l�
Stricture
o,,� ,.. Structure 4 t .
Structure 5
Structure'b
Identifier:
Freeboard (inches): y f...........................i..........................................................,.
4 t t
L q '�...'�........................
.....
L'y..��....................
v.... ..........
//
S. Are there any immediate threats to the integrity of any of the structures observed? (ic/ trees, severe erosion, ❑ Yes o
seepage, etc.)
3/23/99 Continued on back

Facility Number: 3 — Date of Inspection
6. Are there structures on -site which are not properly addressed and/or managed through a waste management or
closure plan?
(If any of questions 4-6 was answered yes, and the situation poses an
immediate public health or environmental threat, notify DWQ)
7. Do any of the structures need maintenance/improvement?
8. Does any part of the waste management system other than waste structures require maintenance/improvement?
9. Do any stuctures lack adequate, gauged markers with required maximum and minimum liquid level
elevation markings?
Waste Application
10. Are there any buffers that need maintenance/improvement?
11. Is there evidence of over application? ❑ Excessive Ponding ❑ PAN
12. Crop typeaa�
❑ Yes
o
❑ Yes
No
❑ Yes
o
❑ Yes
o
❑ Yes
❑ Yes
No
13. Do the receiving crops differ with (hose designated in the Certified Animal Waste Management Plan (CAWMP)?
14. a) Does the facility lack adequate acreage for land application?
b) Does the facility need a wettable acre determination?
c) This facility is pended for a wettable acre determination?
15. Does the receiving crop need improvement?
16. Is there'a lack of adequate waste application equipment?
Renuired Records & Documents
17.' Fail to have Certificate of Coverage & General Permit readily available?
18. Does the facility fail to have all components of the Certified Animal Waste Management Plan readily available?
(ie/ WUP, checklists, design, maps, etc.)
19. Does record keeping need improvement? (ie/ irrigation, freeboard, waste analysis & soil sample reports)
20: Is facility not in compliance with any applicable setback criteria in effect at the time of design?
21. Did the facility fail to have a actively certified operator in charge?
22. Fail to notify regional DWQ of emergency situations as required by General Permit?
(ie/ discharge, freeboard problems, over application)
23. Did Reviewer/Inspector fail to discuss review/inspection with on -site representative?
24. Does facility require a follow-up visit by same agency?
25. Were any additional problems noted which cause noncompliance of the Certified AWMP?
Q • YiON000s'o dtficietictes ire pQte0- 0r'i09 tMs:vjsjt; - :Y:oO ' i11-teeOW6 too fuih¢
coriesb6fidence: about this visit. . ::::.:.:............:::........... .
❑ Yes
E 0
❑ Yes
IJ No
❑ Yes.
❑ Yes
l�o
❑ Yes
❑ Yes
J
;Z�
❑ Yes B-No
❑ Yes
es [❑ No
❑ Yes
❑ Yes
❑ Yes o /
❑ Yes o
❑ Yes 1a 1M0
❑ Yes o

•Facility Number: — J Date of .Inspection
Odor Issues
26.
Does the discharge pipe from the confinement building to the storage pond or lagoon fail to discharge at/or below
❑ Yes
o
liquid level of lagoon or storage pond with no agitation?
27.
Are there any dead animals not disposed of properly within 24 hours?
❑ Yes
N
28.
Is there any evidence of wind drift during land application? (i.e. residue on neighboring vegetation, asphalt,
❑ Yes
No
roads, building structure, and/or public property)
29.
Is the land application spray system intake not located near the liquid surface of the lagoon?
❑ Yes
No
30.
Were any major maintenance problems with the ventilation fan(s) noted? (i.e. broken fan belts, missing or
or broken fan blade(s), inoperable shutters, etc.)
❑ Yes
o
31.
32.
Do the animals feed storage bins fail to have appropriate cover?
Do the flush tanks lack a submerged fill or a cover?
❑ Yes
❑ Yes
O
o
pipe permanent/temporary
o!ra � etrtr' etits a�q Qr rarnn s .;�_ r.:4 ��'� ll; 111.tw ".1"% 1V1 � �, ��," ''a f `s t� "RE" 3 � 3�. i �s; l .1 ttr. 4 r t_ h ,
i
T
J

acility Number: Date of luspection
Printed on: 4/?-4/?UUU
NeOyv
...................... * ........
k6irisp6iidence ab]oixf this .*visit.'-'.
El Field Notes ❑ Final Copy
Additional Coxnmentsan or "N"10
o!7,,Drawi f R
n
1A
01n,
63 )(64yd-f- 1Esc
O Y-
c7 r c? 313
3� V33-2
-;1
Reviewer/Inspector Name
Reviewer/Inspector Signature: Date:

=i
lvt;
Type of Visit QJcomplia 'Inspection O Operation Review O Lagoon Evaluation
Reason for Visit out
O Complaint O Follow up O Emergency Notification O Other ❑ Denied Access
Facility Number [fate of Visit: � � Time: t7 G Q
Q Not Operational Q Below Threshold
0 Permitted 13 Certified © Conditionally Certified (] Registered Date Last Operated or Above Threshold: .........................
Farm Name: �)�lV D 2 a i� vir County:.....................................................................................
../ .........�......................................I...........
Owner Name: I W J..i'%/ Phone No: •
..................................................................................................... .......................................................................................
Facility Contact:
Mailing Address:
Title: ..........................
Onsite Representative: ........
Certified Operator: �� �`LJ.T 0`'
............... ...............................
Location' of Farm:
....... Phone No:... ................................................
Integrator:
.................... Operator Certification Number: .... :...... I ................... I..........
❑ Swine ❑ Poultry ❑ Cattle ❑ Horse Latitude » �� ��� Longitude �• ��
`Design ' Current
Swine , Capacity Population
❑ Wean to Feeder
❑ Feeder to Finish
❑ Farrow to Wean
❑ Farrow to Feeder
❑ Farrow to Finish
❑ Gilts
❑ Boars
'Design Current Desi
Poultry
Ca' aci ' 'Po 'ulationCa#tie ,Capa
❑ Layer ❑ Dairy
❑ Non -Layer ❑ Non -Dairy
❑ Other ..
Total Design Capac>Ity C
,Tatal'sk
"Number. of Lagoons ❑ Subsurface Drains Present ❑ Lagoon Area ❑Spray Field Area
H oldln' g on %Solid Traps' ❑ No Liquid Waste Management System
Discharges & Stream I vacts
1. Is any discharge observed from any part of the operation?
Discharge originated at: ❑ Lagoon ❑ Spray Field ❑ Other
a. If discharge is observed, was the conveyance man-made?
b. If discharge is observed, did it mach Water of the State? (if yes, notify DWQ)
c. li' discharge is observed, what is the estimated flow in gal/min?
cf. Does discharge bypass a lagoon system'? (If yes, notify DWQ)
2. Is there evidence of past discharge from any part of the operation?
3. Were there any adverse impacts or potential adverse impacts to the Waters of the State other than from a discharge?
Waste Collection & Treatment
❑ Yes �No
❑ Yes JQ 0
❑ Yes o
❑ Yes n,,o
❑ Yes
❑ Yes
7
4. Is storage capacity (freeboard plus storm storage) less than adequate? ❑ Spillway ❑ Yes No
Structure
!� l r� Structure 2 Structure 3f Structure 4 p�s Structure 5 f s Structure 6
J1L �} L y tl G S 0 i!
Identirier:................................................I...................................j.....................�.................................. ... �.........................................................
Freeboard (inches): ,
5100 Continued on back

facility Number: - ,7 3 Date of Inspection Printed on: 1/9/2001
5. Are there any immediate threats to the integrity of any of the structures observed? (ie/ trees, severe erosion,
seepage, etc.)
6. Are there structures on -site which are not properly addressed and/or managed through a waste management or
closure plan?
(If any of questions 4-6 was answered yes, and the situation poses an
immediate public,health or environmental threat, notify DWQ)
7. Do any of the structures need maintenancelimprovement?
8. Does any part of the waste management system other than waste structures require maintenancelimprovement?
9. Do any stuctures lack adequate, gauged markers with required maximum and minimum liquid level
elevation markings?
Waste Application
10. Are there any buffers that need maintenance/improvement?
11. Is there evidence of over application? i7❑ Excessive Ponding ❑ PAN ❑ Hydraulic Overload
12. Crop typea,l e+� S �G�-T 5✓ ✓ J f
13. Do the receiving crops differ with those designated in the Certified Animal Waste Management Plan (CAWMP)?
14. a) Does tho facility lack adequate acreage for land application?
b) Does the facility need a wettable acre determination?
c) This facility is pended for a wettable acre determination?
15. Does the receiving crop need improvement?
16. Is there a lack of adequate waste application equipment?
Required_ Records & Documents
17. Fail to have Certificate of Coverage & General Permit readily available?
18. Does the facility fail to have all components of the Certified Animal Waste Management Plan readily available?
(ie/ WUP, checklists, design, maps, etc.)
19. Does record keeping need improvement? (ie/ irrigation, freeboard, waste analysis & soil sample reports)
20. Is facility not in compliance with any applicable setback criteria in effect at the time of design?
21. Did the facility fail to have a actively certified operator in charge?
22. Fail to notify regional DWQ of emergency situations as required by General Permit?
(ie/ discharge, freeboard problems, over application)
23. Did Reviewer/InspecWF-ftiil to discuss review/inspection with on -site representative?
24. Does facili equire a follow-up visit by same agency?
25. W any additional problems noted which cause noncompliance of the Certified AWMP?
Y�Q1� iQgs;off dgf cie ;ies ry re �gted• ....... �... Y .. wi�� �ee$iy. �o .F. .. .
correspondence: albaut; this visit. :.:...... ; :...........:....:....... .
btj ,t 1'% Gv,u /9,.n.nE,i.p
4-1-') v ?_11 v f b
❑ Yes �'PO
❑ Yes
❑ Yes Leo
❑ Yes O
❑ Yes INo
❑ Yes No
❑ Yes No
❑ Yes
ElYes L�'t�o
❑ Yes jd'No
❑Yes o
❑ Yes o
❑ Yes r,401
❑ Yes,,FWo
❑ Yes o�
❑Yes i
o
ElYes No
❑ Yes 0
❑ Yes
❑ Yes N
❑ Yes No
❑ Yes o
Z D J (.%-' % 4 (, b .:r ( r ^- J, C*4,7 /
",/A�,- sti v l j. L..t "YO".� eA je. j
a
Reviewer/Inspector Name
Reviewer/Inspector Signature: Date: )0_61p / S/90

ti
Facility Number: S Date of Inspection Printed on: 1 /9/2001
Odor Issues
26. Does the discharge pipe from the confinement building to the storage pond or lagoon fail to discharge at/or below ❑ Yes o
liquid level of lagoon or storage pond with no agitation?
27. Are there any dead animals not disposed of properly within 24 hours? ❑ Yes OlNo
28. Is there any evidence of wind drift during land application? (i.e. residue on neighboring vegetation, asphalt, ❑ Yes :dNQ
roads, building structure, and/or public property)
29. Is the land application spray system intake not located near the liquid surface of the lagoon? ❑ Yes ulf4
30. Were any major maintenance problems with the ventilation fan(s) noted? (i.e. broken fan belts, missing or
or broken fan blade(s), inoperable shutters, etc.) ❑ Yes o
31. Do the animals feed storage bins fail to have appropriate cover? ❑ Yes O
32. Do the flush tanks lack a submerged fill pipe or a permanent/temporary cover? ❑ Yes No
5100

Type of Visit d Compli Inspection Operation Review 0 Lagoon Evaluation
Reason for Visit outine Complaint Q Follow up Q Emergency Notification Q Other ❑ Denied Access
Fa ' Number Date of Visit: e:
10 Not Operational 0 Below Threshold
Permitted 0 CCerNtied 0 Conditionally Certified E3 Registered Date Last Operated or Above Threshold.ell
Farm Name: /i����2 ��>� j/t� County:
Owner Name:
Mailing Address:
Facility Contact:
Onsite Representative: �^
Certified Operator::_LL_�af) '�Yl
Location of Farm:
Title:
Phone No:
Phone No:
Integrator:
Operator Certification Number:
❑ Swine ❑ Poultry ❑ Cattle ❑ Horse Latitude 0' 0` 0 L{ Longitude 0' 06 0 fL
Design Current
Swine b- Capacity Population
❑ Wean to Feeder
❑ Feeder to Finish
❑ Farrow to Wean
❑ Farrow to Feeder
Gilts
Boars
Design Current Design Cu3rr6t
Poultry Capacity Po ulation ' CattleC8DflCltV Population
❑ Layer ` ❑ Dairy
❑ Non -Layer j ❑ Non -Dairy
a ,
❑ Other I.
Total Design Capacity`
,., Total SSLW
1rn:. ,.,,: ❑ Subsurface Drains Present IFF1 La xnan Aren ❑ Snrav Field Area
.. ❑ No Liquid Waste Management System +.
Discharges & Stream Impacts I
1. Is any discharge observed from any part of the operation? ❑ Yes No
Discharge originated at: El Lagoon El Spray Field El Other
a. If discharge is observed, was the conveyance man-made? 1 El Yes o
b. If discharge is observed, did it reach Water of the State? (If yes, notify DWQ) ❑ Yes ivo
c. If discharge is observed, what is the estimated flow in gal/min?
d. Does discharge bypass a lagoon system'? (If yes, notify DWQ) ❑ YeszNo
2. Is there evidence of past discharge from any part of the operation? El Yes
3. Were there any adverse impacts or potential adverse impacts to the Waters of the State other than from a discharge? ElYes o
Waste Collection & Treatment
4. Is storage capacity (freeboard plus storm storage) less than adequate? ❑ Spillway ❑ Yes No
Structure 1 Structure 2 Structure 3 Structure 4 Structure 5 Structure
Identifier: e- U S t;W _ fou 10 e rt
Freeboard (inches); L4 LAI 1 I S� t I Z C/ Ii ;6 0 ; y
05103101 1! Continued

Facility Number: — Date of Inspection
Odor Issues
26. Does the discharge pipe from the confinement building to the storage pond or lagoon fail to discharge at/or below
liquid level of lagoon or storage pond with no agitation?
27. Are there any dead animals not disposed of properly within 24 hours?
28. Is there any evidence of wind drill during land application? (i.e. residue on neighboring vegetation, asphalt,
roads, building structure, and/or public property)
29. Is the land application spray system intake not located near the liquid surface of the lagoon?
30. Were any major maintenance problems with the ventilation fan(s) noted? (i.e. broken fan belts, missing or
or broken fan blade(s), inoperable shutters, etc.)
31. Do the animals feed storage bins fail to have appropriate cover?
32. Do the flush tanks lack a submerged fill pipe or a permanentitemporary cover?
❑ Yes No
❑ Yes 0Vo
El Yes -
<o-
❑ Yes N
❑ Yes
❑ Yes No
❑ Yes o
Additional Comments and/or'Draw,ings:
AL
05103101

Facility Number: 4j — 5 Date of Inspection a
5. Are there any immediate threats to the integrity of any of the structures observed? (ie/ trees, severe erosion,
seepage, etc.)
6. Are there structures on -site which are not properly addressed and/or managed through a waste management or
closure plan?
(If any of questions 4-6 was answered yes, and the situation poses an
immediate public health or environmental threat, notify DWQ)
7. Do any of the structures need maintenance/improvement?
8. Does any part of the waste management system other than waste structures require maintenance/improvement?
9. Do any stuctures lack adequate, gauged markers with required maximum and minimum liquid level
elevation markings?
Waste Application
10. Are there any buffers that need maintenance/improvement?
11. Is there evidence of over application? ❑ Excessive Ponding ❑ PAN [I Hydraulic Overload
12. Crop type /'ik- +, , LvhlxYt, 5 I,, h col -Al S
❑ Yes eNo
❑ Yes ONo
❑ Yes No
❑ Yes '4
❑ Yes L�1'No
❑ Yes No
ElYes L ] No
13. Do the receiving crops differ with those designated in the Certified Animal Waste Management Plan (CAWMP)? ❑ Yes VNo
14. a) Does the facility lack adequate acreage for land application? ElYes
b Does the facility ❑ need a wettable acre determination? Yes N
c) This facility is pended for a wettable acre determination?
❑ Yes
No
15.
Does the receiving crop need improvement?
❑ Yes
No
16.
Is there a lack of adequate waste application equipment?
❑ Yes
Leo
Reauired
Records & Documents
17.
Fail to have Certificate of Coverage & General Permit or other Permit readily available?
❑ Yes
o
18.
Does the facility fail to have all components of the Certified Animal Waste Management Plan readily available?
(ic/ WUP, checklists, design, maps, etc.)
❑ Yes
N
19.
Does record keeping need improvement? (ie/ irrigation, freeboard, waste analysis & soil sample reports)
❑ Yes
20,
Is facility not in compliance with any applicable setback criteria in effect at the time of design?
❑ Yes
21.
Did the facility fail to have a actively certified operator in charge?
❑ Yes
No
22.
Fail to notify regional DWQ of emergency situations as required by General Permit?
❑ Yes
(ie/ discharge, freeboard problems, over application)
23.
Did ReviewerlInspector fail to discuss review/inspection with on -site representative?
❑ Yes
24.
Does facility require a follow-up visit by same agency?
❑ Yes
No
25.
Were any additional problems noted which cause noncompliance of the Certified AWMP?
❑ Yes
o
0 No violations or deficiencies were noted during this visit. You will receive no further correspondence about this visit.
Gm't
oments,(referAto-question#} �ExpIAn�any�YES a w s and/or,an recommenaations•or any other comments:
Us`e drawings of facility to lietterexplaindsituahons (use addtttbhallpages{asmpecessary,) k ❑Field Copv ❑ Final Notes a
Reviewer/Inspector Name
Reviewer/Inspector Signature: Date: 677
05103101 Continued

Type of Visit 4 Compliance Inspection Q Operation Review O Lagoon Evaluation
Reason for Visit O Routine O Complaint O Follow up O Emergency Notification O Other ❑ Denied Access
Facility Number Date of Visit: Time:rO n0
Not Operational OBelowThreshold
O Permitted 0 Certified [3 Conditionally Certified [3 Registered Date Last Operated or Above Threshold:
Farm Name: I, !V .{� I+V cr=j t' r- County:
Owner Name:
Mailing Address:
Facility Contact:
Onsite Representative: _��
Certified Operator: ��v-C �%%J4,-fE) Al
Location of Farm:
Phone No:
Title: Phone No:
Integrator:
Operator Certification Number:
❑ Swine ❑ Poultry ❑ Cattle ❑ Horse Latitude 0' « Longitude • & Lf
Current
Swipe -
Wean to Feeder
❑ Feeder to Finish
❑ Farrow to Wean
❑ Farrow to Feedei
❑ Farrow to Finish
❑ Gilts
❑ Boars
Number of L
HoidingxPonds /{So
Design Current Design Current
P ultry Capacity Population Cattle Capacity Population
❑ La er I F� EoNon-Dairy
Dairy
❑ Non -Layer
❑ Other
Total Design Capacity
Total SSLW
❑ Subsurface Drains Present ❑ La oon Area
ILI No Liquid Waste M
Discharges & St. r-cam Impacts
1. Is any discharge observed from any part of the operation?
Discharge originated at: ❑ Lavzoon ❑ Sprav Field ❑ Other
a. If discharge is observed, was the conveyance man-made?
b. If discharge is observed, did it reach Water of the State? (If yes, notify DWQ)
c. If discharge is observed, what is the estimated flow in gal/min?
d. Does discharge bypass a lagoon system'? (If yes, notify DWQ)
1 is there evidence of past discharge from any part of the operation?
3. Were there any adverse impacts or potential adverse impacts to the Waters of the State other than from a discharge?
Waste Collection & Treatment
4. Is storage capacity (freeboard plus storm storage) less than adequate? ❑ Spillwav
Structure I Structure 2 Structure 3 "Structure 4 Structure 5
Identifier: 6"v S y. h t^~� F-i'^ -�S'� j[ Freeboard (inches): 761,
�-!o tl 3(ilr_tI
05103101
❑ Yes — ;No
❑ Yes o
❑ Yes o
❑ Yes V
El
❑ Yes o
❑ Yes o
Structure 6
Continued

Facility Number: —
Date of Inspection
5. Are there any immediate threats to the integrity of any of the structures observed? (icl trees, severe erosion,
seepage, etc.)
6. Are there structures on -site which are not properly addressed and/or managed through a waste management or
closure plan?
(If any of questions 4-6 was answered yes, and the situation poses an
immediate public health or environmental threat, notify DWQ)
7. Do any of the structures need maintenance/improvement?
8. Does any part of the waste management system other than waste structures require maintenance/improvement?
9. Do any stuctures lack adequate, gauged markers with required maximum and minimum liquid level
elevation markings?
Waste Application
10. Are there any buffers that need maintenance/improvement?
11. Is there evidence of over application? ❑ Excessive Ponding ❑ PAN ❑ Hydraulic Overload
12. Crop type /'— IOV '` ► 1V 4 136ol-t S , `% /- 1 0 1 j O_j _
13. Do the receiving crops differ with those designated in the Certified Animal Waste Management Plan (CAWMP)?
14. a) Does the facility lack adequate acreage for land application?
b) Does the facility need a wettable acre determination?
c) This facility is pended for a wettable acre determination?
15. Does the receiving crop need improvement?
16. Is there a lack of adequate waste application equipment?
Rgguired Records & Documents
IT Fail to have Certificate of Coverage & General Permit or other Permit readily available?
19. Does the facility fail to have all components of the Certified Animal Waste Management Plan readily available?
(ie/ WUP, checklists, design, maps, etc.)
19, Does record keeping need improvement? (iel irrigation, freeboard, waste analysis & soil sample reports)
20. Is facility not in compliance with any applicable setback criteria in effect at the time of design?
21. Did the facility fail to have a actively certified operator in charge?
22. Fail to notify regional DWQ of emergency situations as required by General Permit?
(ie/ discharge, freeboard problems, over application)
23. Did Reviewer/inspector fail to discuss review/inspection with on -site representative?
24. Does facility require a follow-up visit by same agency?
25. Were any additional problems noted which cause noncompliance of the Certified AWMP?
❑ Yes No
❑ Yes No
❑ Yes No
❑ Yes No
❑ Yes No
❑ Yes No
❑ Yes o
❑ Yes
Flo
❑ Yes
L?'No/
El Yes
E�dr
ElYes
No
❑ Yes
o
❑ Yes
No
❑ Yes
❑ Yes
❑ Yes
❑ Yes
❑ Yes
❑ Yes
❑ Yes
❑ Yes
❑ Yes
j3 No violations or deficiencies were noted during this visit. You will receive no further correspondence about this visit.
(Comtitetits(eferfo'questiont#)iEatplars in ery�YES.answeandliirany recommendations o any ©t, h�er�comments
tY.f di +zr 'f3 ' -v mSd .Y.t
Usc drawings frifacility to+beftcr�expiainysituatlons (use additional-pagesas necessary):'0 Field Copy ❑ Final Notes
BLS to Vie' tin Yk:a .ate ,.
T
Reviewer/Inspector Name
Reviewerfinspector Signature: Date: (®
05103101 Continued

(Type of Visit /d Compyadce Inspection O Operation Review Q Lagoon Evaluation I
Reason for Visit Routine O Complaint - O Follow up O Emergency Notification Q Other j] Denied Access
Facility Number Date of Visit: 3 b Time:-!�
Q Not Operational Q Below Threshold
[3 Permitted 0 Certified U Conditionally Certified 0 Registered Date Last Operated or Above Threshold.
FarmName: ... ..... P... .....-.................................. County:.......................................... .......................
Owner Name: .........
Mailing Address:
Phone No:
FacilityContact:.............................................................................. Title:................................................................ Phone No:.................................::...............,
Onsite Representative: ...................... Integrator:....,. .
....................................................................................
Certified Operator:....' '�` ......... Operator Certification Number:
Location of Farm:
T
❑ Swine ❑ Poultry ❑ Cattle ❑ Horse Latitude Longitude
Structure 1 Structure Str tune 3 Structure 4 Structure 5 Structure 5
Identifier:.......8 .............I..,......%..`.n:5 f �,...1PY4 ............................................ 5........................
Freeboard (inches):
12112103 Continued

Facility Number:.3 Date of Inspection 3 D
5. Are there any immediate threats to the integrity of any of the structures observed? (ie/ trees, severe erosion, ❑ Yes o
seepage, etc.)
6. Are there structures on -site which are not properly addressed and/or managed through a waste management or [] Yes o
closure plan?
(If any of questions 4-6 was answered yes, and the situation poses an
immediate public health or environmental threat, notify DWQ)
7. Do any of the structures need maintenance/improvement? ❑ Yes No
8. Does any part of the waste management system other than waste structures require maintenance/improvement? ❑ Yes CVO
9. Do any stuctures lack adequate, gauged markers with required maximum and minimum liquid level ❑ Yes 0
elevation markings?
Waste Application
10. Are there any buffers that need maintenance/improvement? ❑ Yes No
11. Is there evidence of over application? If yes, check the appropriate box below. ❑ Yes lQ 0
❑ Excessive Ponding ❑ PAN [:]Hydraulic Overload ❑ Frozen Ground ❑ Copper and/or Zinc
12. Crop type
13. Do the receiving crops differ with those designated in the Certified Animal Waste Management Plan (CAWMP)?
14. a) Does the facility lack adequate acreage for land application?
b) Does the facility need a wettable acre determination?
c) This facility is pended for a wettable acre determination?
15. Does the receiving crop need improvement?
16. Is there a lack of adequate waste application equipment?
Odor Issues
17. Does the discharge pipe from the confinement building to the storage pond or lagoon fail to discharge atlor below
liquid level of lagoon or storage pond with no agitation?
18. Are there any dead animals not disposed of properly within 24 hours?
19. Is there any evidence of wind drift during land application? (i.e. residue on neighboring vegetation, asphalt,
roads, building structure, and/or public property)
20, At the time of the inspection did the facility pose an odor or air quality concern? If yes, contact a regional
Air Quality representative immediately.
❑ Yes EfNo,
❑ Yes VN)Y--z
❑ YesVNo
❑ Yes
❑ Yes
❑ Yes
❑ Yes a60
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes ❑ No
i�.i. s1iR"':7ri'.. .w. :tl'a.:SY"';i7 '.w .."'"t;i:' ':.:F 3a€af.Y—". u.tf `_;SE,i€>:a::+fl1Wq[�Cl�....:'�Y`:kViSr''"R€C�;-:Iru:tl^F?iGY: `:E:'""'.#"';'.Sh°Eeyf�. C. :.k €S "4;'t'.1 :l,U; i" :t?4F.k hS'�.t4!;y
'Co
t0 ueshan.#).j ;Ex la>tn an i1YF�;answers °and/or any;tecommendatxons gr=any;Otber Cap€tmen_ts' € is} l i ;, ,i` € €„ i �,,; `
tt� �'fl��:i' :??31??1iE':;1?31<,,;ItEiF• s =agiiL;�-E:{aiEpEsciif �sr,�Jt;° @,APB€€ a.ii°,��s.�.?t€i i:Y,:a?:,�ttd..�{}ii'ti6q�i i Fib§i€';t%1tFt�:���:x::'".'�§::1{:t'�':eosi�tkiSiers� � �tiliq€}it uf��{° tf,6r?3. 3.?i���t� ; w°f:�:+�: .i e�.�. a.:.ra�i.ut.�,: a, a° . «�.3i�e�a8,s...�i� a j° $g„.i7 @
Use drawings,oi"facilrtyitobetter`explam�situaE�ons.�{use add�t�onalipages as�,necessary}E' .� ❑Field COPY ❑Final Notes r�� "'���
^! €e n '- '. S,� x Mhy w,t'i " •.a _ c , f t :a��,r� r. �f
r
T.�
hill,
ni?;'€nn
Reviewer/Ins ectorName Ilu::vdS}�w .19ra'
ReviewerAnspector Signature: Date:
12112103 Continued

Facility Number: —5-9 1 Date of Inspection l b
Required Records & Documents
21. Fail to have Certificate of Coverage & General Permit or other Permit readily available? ❑ Yes o
22. Does the facility fail to have all components of the Certified Animal Waste Management Plan readily available?
(ie/ WUP, checklists, design, maps, etc.) ❑ Yes No
23. Does record keeping need improvement? If yes, check the appropriate box below. ❑ Yes o
❑ Waste Application ❑ Freeboard ❑ Waste Analysis ❑ Soil Sampling
24. Is facility not in compliance with any applicable setback criteria in effect at the time of design? ❑ Yes ONo
25. Did the facility fail to have a actively certified operator in charge? ❑ Yes � No
26. Fail to notify regional DWQ of emergency situations as required by General Permit?
(iel discharge, freeboard problems, over application) ❑ Yes o
27. Did Reviewer/Inspector fail to discuss review/inspection with on -site representative? ❑ Yes
28. Does facility require a follow-up visit by same agency? El Yes , ` No
29. Were any additional problems noted which cause noncompliance of the Certified AWMP? ❑ Yes
NPDES Permitted Facilities
30. Is the facility covered under a NPDES Permit? (If no, skip questions 31-35) Yes ❑ No
31. If selected, did the facility fail to install and maintain rainbreakers on irrigation equipment? ❑ Yes F
32. Did the facility fail to install and maintain a rain gauge? ElYes 0
33. Did the facility fail to conduct an annual sludge survey? ❑ Yes 6<0
34. Did the facility fail to calibrate waste application equipment? ❑ Yes lQ No
35. Does record keeping for NPDES required forms need improvement? If yes, check the appropriate box below. ❑ Yes o
❑ Stocking Form ❑ Crop Yield Form ❑ Rainfall ❑ Inspection After 1 " Rain
❑ 120 Minute Inspections ❑ Annual Certification Form
12112103

Type of Visit CC nce Inspection 0 Operation Review 0 Structure Evaluation 0 Technical Assistance
Reason for Visit Routine O Complaint O Follow up O Referral O Emergency 0 Other ❑ Denied Access
Date of Visit: +% �/ Arrival Time: Departure Time: County:
Farm Name: l�� Owner Email:
Owner Name:
Mailing Address:
Physical Address:
Facility Contact:
Onsite Representative: Certified Operator: �21ld c (. /
� 17�
Back-up Operator:
Title:
Phone:
Phone No:
Integrator:
Operator Certification Number:
Back-up Certification Number:
Region:
Location of Farm: Latitude: =" =' =" Longitude: = ° = I =
11
�Design Current
aIDes!In `Crrinel
urrent
tapa tyw ) pulotion
.. .
Cattle Capacity Population
❑ Wean to Finish
❑ Layer
❑ Dairy Cow
❑ Wean to Feeder
❑ Non -La et
❑ Dairy Calf
El Feeder to Finish`.
❑Dai fieifei
❑ Farrow to Wean
r : '
Dry Poultry...: ,� ti
❑ Dry Cow
ElNon-Dairy
❑ Farrow to Feeder
❑ Farrow to Finish
El Layers
❑ Beef Stocker
❑Gifts
❑Non -La ers
❑ Beef Feeder
❑ Boars
El Pullets
❑ Beef Brood Cow
❑ Turkeys
Other
❑ T rkey Poults
NUMBe of Structures:
❑ Other ❑ Other
MM
Discharges & Stream Impacts
1. Is any discharge observed from any part of the operation?
Cl Yes
No ❑ NA
❑ NE
Discharge originated at: ❑ Structure ❑ Application Field ❑ Other
a. Was the conveyance man-made?
❑ Yes
�❑ NA
[I NE
b. Did the discharge reach waters of the State? (If yes, notify DWQ)
❑ Yes
o ❑ NA
(I NE
c. What is the estimated volume that reached waters of the State (gallons)'?
d. Does discharge bypass the waste management system? (If yes, notify DWQ)
❑ Yes
NA
50ZEE-e:
❑ NE
2. Is there evidence of a past discharge from any part of the operation?
ElNA
❑ NE
3. Were there any adverse impacts or potential adverse impacts to the Waters of the State
❑ Yes
o ElNA
[I NE
other than from a discharge?
12128104 Continued

Facility Number: — j Date of Inspection
Waste Collection & Treatment
4. Is storage capacity (structural plus storm storage plus heavy rainfall) less than adequate? ❑ Yes No NA El NE
a. If yes, is waste level into the structural freeboard? ElYes No ❑ NA ❑ NE
5gucture I Structure 2 Structure 3 Structure 4 Structure 5 Structure 6
� 7
Identifier: 'Ir V% �}t(r ✓ 41 ^ s 6iF`( E�e.' — �k 1#
Spillway?:
Designed Freeboard (in): P
Observed Freeboard (in): � ({ S�Z < < {� y Z6 .4 0 �`
5. Are there any immediate threats to the integrity of any of the structures observed? ❑ Yes ErNto ❑ NA ❑ NE
(iel large trees, severe erosion, seepage, etc.)
6. Are there structures on -site which are not properly addressed and/or managed ❑ Yes No ❑ NA ❑ NE
through a waste management or closure plan?
If any of questions 4-6 were answered yes, and the situation poses an immediate public health or environmental thr , notify DWQ
7. Do any of the structures need maintenance or improvement? ElYes No NA ❑ NE
8. Do any of the stuctures lack adequate markers as required by the permit? El Yes No ❑ NA ❑ NE
(Not applicable to roofed pits, dry stacks and/or wet stacks)
9. Does any part of the waste management system other than the waste structures require ❑ Yes �❑ NA ❑ NE
maintenance or improvement?
Waste Application
10. Are there any required buffers, setbacks, or compliance alternatives that need ❑ Yes ;No
o i NA El NE
maintenance/improvement?
11. Is there evidence of incorrect application? If yes, check the appropriate box below. El Yes ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Excessive Ponding ❑ Hydraulic Overload ❑ Frozen Ground ❑ Heavy Metals (Cu, Zn, etc.)
❑ PAN ❑ PAN > 10% or 10 Ibs ❑ Total Phosphorus ❑ Failure to Incorporate Manure/Sludge into Bare Soil
❑ Outside of Acceptable Crop Window ❑ Evidence of Wind Drifl ❑ Application Outside of Area
12. Crop type(s)
13. Soil type(s)
D V
14. Do the receiving crops differ from those designated in the CAWMP?
15. Does the receiving crop and/or land application site need improvement?
❑ Yes
❑ Yes
16. Did the facility fail to secure and/or operate per the irrigation design or wettable acre determination%❑ Yes
17. Does the facility lack adequate acreage for land application? ❑ Yes
18. Is there a tack of property operating waste application equipment? ❑ Yes
E[No ❑ NA ❑ NE
No �❑ NA ❑ NE
:No NA El NE
N�'NA ❑ NE
6�zo_[:] NA ❑ NE
Name Reviewerllns ector - Phone:
p "�' E Reviewer/Inspector Signature: 2=Pi Date: 7 JIU0
12128104 Continued

'.
Facility Number: 35 — j Date of Inspection !c Ip
Required Records_& Documents
19. Did the facility fail to have Certificate of Coverage & Permit readily available? ❑ Yes ZrNo E]NA ❑ NE
20. Does the facility fail to have all components of the CAWMP readily available? If yes, check ❑ Yes No ❑ NA ❑ NE
the appropirate box. ❑ WUP ❑ Checklists ❑ Design El Maps El Other �
21. Does record keeping need improvement? If yes, check the appropriate box below. ElYes M< LJ NA ❑ NE
- ❑ Waste Application ❑ Weekly Freeboard ❑ Waste Analysis ❑ Soil Analysis ❑ Waste Transfers ❑ Annual Certification
❑ Rainfall ❑ Stocking ❑ Crop Yield ❑ 120 Minute Inspections ❑ Monthly and 1" Rain Inspections ❑ Weather Code
22. Did the facility fail to install and maintain a rain gauge? ❑ Yes RINo DNA ❑ NE
23. If selected, did the facility fail to install and maintain rainbreakers on irrigation equipment? ❑ Yes <No❑ NA ❑ NE
24. Did the facility fail to calibrate waste application equipment as required by the permit? ❑ Yes �No
0 NA ❑ NE
25. Did the facility fail to conduct a sludge survey as required by the permit? ❑ YesFNoa
NA❑ NE
26. Did the facility fail to have an actively certified operator in charge? ❑ YesNA ❑ NE
i
27. Did the facility fail to secure a phosphorus loss assessment (PLAT) certification? ❑ YesA ❑ NE
Other Issues
28. Were any additional problems noted which cause non-compliance of the permit or CAWMP? ❑ Yes No ❑ NA ❑ NE
29. Did the facility fail to properly dispose of dead animals within 24 hours and/or document ❑ Yes ❑ No ❑ NA ❑ NE
and report the mortality rates that were higher than normal?
30. At the time of the inspection did the facility pose an odor or air quality concern? ❑ Yes ❑ No ❑ NA ❑ NE
If yes, contact a regional Air Quality representative immediately
31. Did the facility fail to notify the regional office of emergency situations as required by ❑ Yes ❑ No ❑ NA ❑ NE
General Permit? (ie/ discharge, freeboard problems, over application)
32. Did Reviewer/Inspector fail to discuss review/inspection with an on -site representative? ❑ Yes ❑ No ❑ NA ❑ NE
33. Does facility require a follow-up visit by same agency? ❑ Yes ❑ No ❑ NA ❑ NE
Additional Comimeuts and4oir Drawings ; `
12128104
12128104

Type of Visit Co ance Inspection 0 Operation Review 0 Structure Evaluation 0 Technical Assistance I
Reason for Visit Routine 0 Complaint 0 Follow up 0 Referral 0 Emergency 0 Other El Denied Access
Date of Visit: as b Arrival Time: Ea! KXE Departure Time: County:
Farm Name: -n o e D A/ to P_r' Owner Email:
Owner Name:
Mailing Address:
Physical Address:
Facility Contact:
Onsite Representative: ���
Certified Operator: a��'',,��te^+° -S-'1
Back-up Operator:
Title:
Phone:
Phone No:
Integrator:
Operator Certification Number:
Back-up Certification Dumber:
Region:
Location of Farm: Latitude: Q o ❑ g ❑dt Longitude: = ° ❑ I = [/
Design Current Design Current Design Current
Swine Capacity Population WetI PouIN--y Capacity Population Cattle Capacity Population
❑ Wean to Finish ❑ Layer
❑ Dairy Cow
❑ Wean to Feeder JEJ Non -Layer I
I ❑ Dairy Calf
❑ Dairy Heifer
❑ Feeder to Finish
❑ Farrow to Wean Dry Poultry
❑ Dry coµ'
❑ Farrow to Feeder
ElNon-Dairy
❑ Farrow to Finish ❑ Layers
❑ Beef Stocker
❑ Gilts Non -Layers
❑ Beef Feeder
❑ Pullets
❑ Boars
ElBeef Brood Cow
❑ Turkeys
Other ❑ Turkey Poults
❑ Other ❑ Other
Number of Structures:
Discharges & Stream Impacts
1. Is any discharge observed from any part of the operation? ❑ Yes o❑ NA ❑ NE
Discharge originated at: ❑ Structure ❑ Application Field ❑ Other
a. Was the conveyance man-made? ❑ Yes No NA [I NE
b. Did the discharge reach waters of the State? (If yes, notify DWQ) El Yes No ❑ NA ❑ NE
c. What is the estimated volume that reached waters of the State (gallons)?
d. Does discharge bypass the waste management system? (If yes, notify DWQ) ❑ Yes FNo
NA ❑ NE
2. Is there evidence of a past discharge from any part of the operation? [I Yes
[I NE
3. Were there any adverse impacts or potential adverse impacts to the Waters of the State El Yes o A ❑ NE
other than from a discharge?
Page 1 of 3 12128104 Continued

. rft
Facility Number: — Date of inspection U
Waste Collection & Treatment
4. Is storage capacity (structural plus storm storage plus heavy rainfall) less than adequate? ❑Yes o NA ❑ NE
a. If yes, is waste level into the structural freeboard? ❑ Yes No ❑ NA ❑ NE
Structure 1 Structure 2 p Structure 3S Structure 4 Structure 5 Structure 6
Identifier: r � C_ )I It +' I �1+1 S d'�►y "
Spillway?:
Designed Freeboard (in):
Observed Freeboard (in):
5. Are there any immediate threats to the integrity of any of the structures observed? ❑ Yes o ❑,NA ❑ NE
(ie/ large trees, severe erosion, seepage, etc.)
6. Are there structures on -site which are not properly addressed and/or managed ❑ Yes No ❑ NA ❑ NE
through a waste management or closure plan?
If any of questions 4-6 were answered yes, and the situation poses an immediate public health or environmentalltthreea notify DWQ
7. Do any of the structures need maintenance or improvement? El Yes [ O NA ❑ NE
8. Do any of the stuctures lack adequate markers as required by the permit? El Yes Vo NA ❑ NE
(Not applicable to roofed pits, dry stacks and/or wet stacks)
9. Does any part of the waste management system other than the waste structures require El Yes No ❑ NA ❑ NE
maintenance or improvement?
Waste Application
10. Are there any required buffers, setbacks, or compliance alternatives that need ❑ Yes 5��
A ❑ NE
maintenance/improvement?
11. Is there evidence of incorrect application? If yes, check the appropriate box below. ❑ Yes ❑ No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Excessive Ponding ❑ Hydraulic Overload ❑ Frozen Ground ❑ Heavy Metals (Cu, Zn, etc.)
❑ PAN ❑ PAN > 10% or 10 lbs '❑ Total Phosphorus ❑ Failure to Incorporate Manure/Sludge into Bare Soil
❑ Outside of Acceptable Crop Window ❑ Evidence of Wind Drift ❑ Application Outside of Area
12. Crop type(s) �
13. Soil type(s)
14. Do the receiving crops differ from those designated in the CAWMP?
15. Does the receiving crop and/or land application site need improvement?
❑ Yes
❑ Yes
16. Did the facility fail to secure and/or operate per the irrigation design or wettable acre determination ? ❑ yes
17. Does the facility lack adequate acreage for land application? ❑ Yes
18. Is there a lack of properly operating waste application equipment?
❑ Yes
RrNo NA ❑ NE
El NA El NE
❑ NA ❑ NE
No NA ❑ NE
No ❑ NA ❑ NE
Comments (refer to question #): Explain any YES answers and/or any recommendations 6e any'other comments.
Use drawings of facility to better explain situations. (use additional pages as necessary.):,
Reviewer/Inspector Name Phone:
Reviewer/Inspector Signature: Date: ZO Z 0
Page 2 of 12128104 Continued

Facility Number:3j — )--A I Date of Inspection 0
Required Records & Documents
19. Did the facility fail to have Certificate of Coverage & Permit readily available?
20. Does the facility fail to have all components of the CAWMP readily available? If yes, check
the appropriate box. ❑ WUP ❑ Checklists ❑ Design ❑ Maps ❑ Other
❑ Yes :-_oo_�EINA
NA ❑ NE
ElYes ❑ NE
21.
Does record keeping need improvement? If yes, check the appropriate box below.
❑ Yes No ❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Waste Application ❑ Weekly Freeboard ❑ Waste Analysis ❑ Soil Analysis ❑ Waste Transfers
❑ Annual Certification
❑ Rainfall ❑ Stocking ❑ Crop Yield ❑ 120 Minute Inspections ❑ Monthly and V
Rain Inspections ❑ Weather Code
22.
Did the facility fail to install and maintain a rain gauge?
❑ Yes
❑ NA
❑ NE
23.
If selected, did the facility fail to install and maintain rainbreakers on irrigation equipment?
❑ Yes
No ❑ NA
❑ NE
24.
Did the facility fail to calibrate waste application equipment as required by the permit?
❑ Yes
�No.❑ NA
❑ NE
25.
Did the facility fail to conduct a sludge survey as required by the permit?
❑ Yes
ETINo ❑ NA
El NE
26.
Did the facility fail to have an actively certified operator in charge?
El Yes
No ' NA
❑ NE
27.
Did the facility fail to secure a phosphorus loss assessment (PLAT) certification?
❑ Yes
No ❑ NA
❑ NE
Other Issues
28. Were any additional problems noted which cause non-compliance of the permit or CAWMP? ❑ Yes ❑ No ❑ NA ❑ NE
29. Did the facility fail to properly dispose of dead animals within 24 hours and/or document
❑ Yes
❑ No
❑ NA
❑ NE
and report the mortality rates that were higher than normal?
30. At the time of the inspection did the facility pose an odor or air quality concern?
❑ Yes
❑ No
❑ NA
❑ NE
If yes, contact a regional Air Quality representative immediately
31. Did the facility fail to notify the regional office of emergency situations as required by
❑ Yes
❑ No
❑ NA
❑ NE
General Permit? (ie/ discharge, freeboard problems, over application)
32. Did Reviewer/Inspector fail to discuss review/inspection with an on -site representative?
❑ Yes
❑ No
❑ NA
❑ NE
33. Does facility require a follow-up visit by same agency?
❑ Yes
❑ No
❑ NA
❑ NE
Additional Comments and/or Drawings:
ex n K e,--�Sew G .�5 cif S N� J 1-2 S.
Ls3-�f � ii'� C/'' r pr I�^ A � L► A u-C- i7 CC. u. ✓� dam!' �
ire cam. �.-• e +- �� +'"� a ►�s. 2 �e t. - (.-. P_ n 3
I^� MQ A
i
T
Page 3 of 3 12128104

ivision of Water Quality b
FaCil1ty Number O Division of Soil and Water Conservation,
0 Other Agency;
Type of Visit 6 Co Hance Inspection 0 Operation Review 0 structure Evaluation 0 Technical Assistance
Reason for Visit Routine 0 Complaint 0 Follow up 0 Referral 0 Emergency 0 Other ❑ Denied Access
Date of Visit: Arrival Time:® Departure Time: County:
Farm Name: 1 - /i/r) l2— Yt/ A;T l2''i�— Owner Email:
Owner Name:
Mailing Address:
Physical Address:
Facility Contact:
Onsite Representative:
Certified Operator: r
Title:
Phone:
Phone No:
Integrator:
Operator Certification Number:
Back-up Operator: Back-up Certification Number:
Location of Farm:
Swine
Wean to Finish
Wean to Feeder
Feeder to Finish
Farrow to Wean
Farrow to Feeder
Farrow to Finish
Gilts
Other
❑ Other
Region:
Latitude: ❑ o = 6 Longitude: 0 o = , ❑
Design Current Design Current
Capacity Population Wet Poultry Capacity Population
❑ La er
❑ Non -La eT
Dry Poultry
❑ La ers
❑ Non -Layers
❑ Pullets
❑ Turkeys
❑ Turkey Puults
❑ Other
Discharges & Stream Impacts
1. Is any discharge observed from any part of the operation?
Discharge originated at: ❑ Structure ❑ Application Field ❑ Other
a. Was the conveyance man-made'?
Design Current
Cattle Capacity Population.:
11
❑
Dairy Cow
❑
Dairy Calf
❑
Dairy hleifej
❑
Dry Cow
❑
Non -Dairy
❑
Beef Stocker
❑
Beef Feeder
❑
Beef Brood Cow
Number of Structures:
b. Did the discharge reach waters of the State? (If yes, notify DWQ)
c. What is the estimated volume that reached waters of the State (gallons)?
d. Does discharge bypass the waste management system? (If yes, notify DWQ)
2. Is there evidence of a past discharge from any part of the operation'?
3. Were there any adverse impacts or potential adverse impacts to the Waters of the State
other than from a discharge`?
❑ Yes ;NA
❑ NE 4.
❑ Yes ❑ NE ,
❑ Yes No A ❑ NE {
❑ Yes N NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes No A ❑ NE
❑ Yes ❑ ❑ NA ❑ NE
12128104 Continued t

r Facility Number: 3j —T)? Date of Inspection M11 D
Waste Collection & Treatment
";No�NA
4. Is storage capacity (structural plus storm storage plus heavy rainfall) less than adequate'?
❑ Yes
❑ NE
a. If yes, is waste level into the structural freeboard?
El Yes
o ❑ NA ❑ NE
Structure I Structure 2 Structure 3 Structure 4
Structure
5 Structure 6
Identifier: P-I­ S � e'L Ft/) Sow -
Spillway?:
Designed Freeboard (in):
Observed Freeboard (in):
5. Are there any immediate threats to the integrity of any of the structures observed'?
❑ Yes
No NA [I NE
(ie/ large trees, severe erosion, seepage, etc.)
6. Are there structures on -site which are not properly addressed and/or managed
❑ Yes
o ❑ NA El
through a waste management or closure plan?
If any of questions 4-6 were answered yes, and the situation poses an immediate public health or
environmental
thr , notify DWQ
7. Do any of the structures need maintenance or improvement?
El
No NA ❑ NE
8. Do any of the stuctures lack adequate markers as required by the permit?
❑ Yes
NA ❑ NE
oi[I
(Not applicable to roofed pits, dry stacks and/or wet stacks)
9. Does any part of the waste management system other than the waste structures require
El Yes
NoNA❑ NE
maintenance or improvement?
Waste Application
10. Are there any required buffers, setbacks, or compliance alternatives that need
❑ Yes
NA ❑ NE
maintenance/improvement?
11. Is there evidence of incorrect application? If yes, check the appropriate box below.
❑ Yes
No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Excessive Ponding ❑ Hydraulic Overload ❑ Frozen Ground ❑ Heavy Metals (Cu, Zn, etc.)
❑ PAN ❑ PAN > 10% or 10 Ibs ❑ Total Phosphorus ❑ Failure to Incorporate Manure/Sludge into Bare Soil
❑ Outside of Acceptable Crop Window ❑ Evidence of Wind Drill ❑ Application Outside of Area
12. Crop type(s)
13. Soil type(s)
/ —,, '. S
14. Do the receiving crops differ from those designated in the CAWMP?
15. Does the receiving crop and/or land application site need improvement?
❑ Yes
❑ Yes
16. Did the facility fail to secure and/or operate per the irrigation design or wettable acre determination?[] Yes
17. Does the facility lack adequate acreage for land application?
18. Is there a lack of properly operating waste application equipment?
❑ Yes
❑ Yes
ErN ❑ NA
N NA
NA
o ❑ NA
No ❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ NE
❑ NE
❑ NE
❑ NE
Comments (refer to question #): Explain any YES answers and/or any recommendations or any other comments.
Use drawings of facility to better explain situations. (use additional pages as necessary):
Reviewer/Inspector Name ,Q� Phone: 76—L/Z00
Reviewer/Inspector Signature: Date: 21 6 D
12128104 Continued

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

1(5( b
Type of Visit Co lance Inspection 0 Operation Review 0 Structure Evaluation 0 Technical Assistance
Reason for Visit Routine O Complaint O Follow up O Referral O Emergency 0 Other ❑ Denied Access
Date of Visit: 2 d Arrival Time: Departure Time: County:
Farm Name: d��1Z � aYL Owner Email:
Owner Name:
Mailing Address:
Physical Address:
Facility Contact:
Onsite Representative::
Certified Operator: 21t 7
Back-up Operator:
Location of Farm:
Title:
Phone:
Phone No:
Integrator:
Operator Certification Number:
Back-up Certification Number:
Latitude: 0 0 = 4 Longitude: C
Region:
Design Current
Desigp Current
Design Current
Swine Capacity Population
Wet Poultry Capacity Population
Cattle Capacity Population
❑ Wean to Finish
❑ La er
❑ Dairy Cow
❑ Wean to Feeder
❑Non -La er
❑ Dairy Calf
❑ Feeder to Finish
❑ Dairy Heifer
❑ Farrow to Wean
Dry Poultry
❑ Dry Cow
❑ Farrow to Feeder
❑ Non -Dairy
❑ Farrow to Finish
❑ La ers
❑ Beef Stocker
❑ Gilts
❑Non -La ers
❑ Beef Feeder
❑ Boars
El Pullets
❑ Beef Brood Cow
❑ Turkeys
Other
❑ Other
❑ Turkey Poults
❑ Other
Number of Structures:
Discharees & Stream Impacts
1. Is any discharge observed from any part of the operation?
❑ Yes
No ❑ NA
❑ NE
Discharge originated at: ❑ Structure ❑ Application Field ❑ Other
a. Was the conveyance man-made?
❑ Yes
NA
Vo
[INE
b. Did the discharge reach waters of the State? (If yes, notify DWQ)
❑ Yes
❑ NA
❑ NE
c. What is the estimated volume that reached waters of the State (gallons)?
;F[I:
d. Does discharge bypass the waste management system? (If yes, notify DWQ)
❑ Yes
NA
❑ NE
2. Is there evidence of a past discharge from any part of the operation?
❑ Yes
No NA
❑ NE
3. Were there any adverse impacts or potential adverse impacts to the Waters of the State
❑ Yes
o ❑ NA
❑ NE
other than from a discharge?
Page I of 3
12128104 Continued

Facility Number: 3 — Date of Inspection O
Waste Collection & Treatment
4. Is storage capacity (structural plus storm storage plus heavy rainfall) less than adequate? ❑ Yes No ` NA ❑ NE
a. If yes, is waste level into the structural freeboard? ❑ Yes No ❑ NA ❑ NE
rr�� Structure I Structure 2 Structure 3 Structure 4 Structure 5 Structure 6
Identifier: D t' l" murk,,, 5-1 Z _ _5k4 rl_ ._ iC"i,
Spillway?:
Designed Freeboard (in):
Observed Freeboard (in): 5_2 / ell 7 << D d",
5. Are there any immediate threats to the integrity of any of the structures observed? ❑ Yes No ❑ NA ❑ NE
(ie/ large trees, severe erosion, seepage, etc.)
6. Are there structures on -site which are not properly addressed and/or managed ❑ Yes ���oONA ❑ NE
through a waste management or closure plan?
If any of questions 4-6 were answered yes, and the situation poses an immediate public health or environment;N5
rotify DWQ
7. Do any of the structures need maintenance or improvement? El YesNA ❑ NE
8. Do any of the stuctures lack adequate markers as required by the permit? ❑ Yes No ❑ NA ❑ NE
(Not applicable to roofed pits, dry stacks and/or wet stacks) .,�
9. Does any part of the waste management system other than the waste structures require El Yes 2 o ❑ NA ❑ NE
maintenance or improvement?
Waste Application
10. Are there any required buffers, setbacks, or compliance alternatives that need ❑ Yes o 'NA ❑ NE
maintenance/improvement?
11. Is there evidence of incorrect application? If yes, check the appropriate box below. ❑ Yes No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Excessive Ponding ❑ Hydraulic Overload ❑ Frozen Ground ❑ Heavy Metals (Cu, Zn, etc.)
❑ PAN ❑ PAN > 10% or 10 lbs ❑ Total Phosphorus ❑ Failure to Incorporate Manure/Sludge into Bare Soil
❑ Outside of Acceptable Crop Window ❑ Evidence of Wind Drift ❑ Application Outside of Area
12. Crop type(s) rjpr rr S'04 r Sr/�q r 4
13. Soil type(s)
14, Do the receiving crops differ from those designated in the CAWMP? ❑ Yes ,., Noo NA ❑ NE
15. Does the receiving crop and/or land application site need improvement? ElYes I N ❑ NA ❑ NE
16. Did the facility fail to secure and/or operate per the irrigation design or wettable acre determination?❑ Yes ❑ NA ❑ NE
17. Does the facility lack adequate acreage for land application? ❑ YesVNoONA
NA El NE
18. Is there a lack of properly operating waste application equipment? ❑ Yes ❑ NE
ReviewerAnspector Name "F Phone: -]9 f 2— DU
Reviewer/inspector Signature: k Date: Ql (Z/ o
Page 2 of 3 12128104 Continued

Facility Number: — Date of Inspection E=
Re uired Records & Documents
19.
Did the facility fail to have Certificate of Coverage & Permit readily available?
❑ Yes
No 0 A
❑ NE
20.
Does the facility fail to have all components of the CAWMP readily available? If yes, check
❑ Yes
No ❑ NA
❑ NE
the appropirate box. ❑ WUP ❑ Checklists ❑ Design El Maps El Other
21.
Does record keeping need improvement? If yes, check the appropriate box below.
❑ Yes
No ❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Waste Application ❑ Weekly Freeboard [:]Waste Analysis ❑ Soil Analysis ❑ Waste Transfers ❑ Annual Certification
❑ Rainfall ❑ Stocking ❑ Crop Yield ❑ 120 Minute Inspections ❑ Monthly and I"
Rain Inspections ❑ Weather Code
22.
Did the facility fail to install and maintain a rain gauge?
❑ Yes
2<0_�o A
❑ NE
23.
If selected, did the facility fail to install and maintain rainbreakers on irrigation equipment?
❑ Yes
I o ❑ NA
❑ NE
24.
Did the facility fail to calibrate waste application equipment as required by the permit?
❑ Yes
No ❑ NA
❑ NE
25.
Did the facility fail to conduct a sludge survey as required by the permit?
❑ Yes
No ❑ NA
❑ NE
26.
Did the facility fail to have an actively certified operator in charge?
❑ Yes
is No ❑ NA
❑ NE
27.
Did the facility fail to secure a phosphorus loss assessment (PLAT) certification?
❑ Yes
6<01""E]
NE
Other Issues
29.
Were any additional problems noted which cause non-compliance of the permit or CAWMP?
❑ Yes
o ❑ NA
❑ NE
29.
Did the facility fail to properly dispose of dead animals within 24 hours and/or document
❑ Yes
❑ No ❑ NA
❑ NE
and report the mortality rates that were higher than normal?
30.
At the time of the inspection did the facility pose an odor or air quality concern?
❑ Yes
❑ No ❑ NA
❑ NE
If yes, contact a regional Air Quality representative immediately
31.
Did the facility fail to notify the regional office of emergency situations as required by
❑ Yes
❑ No ❑ NA
❑ NE
General Permit? (ie/ discharge, freeboard problems, over application)
32.
Did Reviewer/Inspector fail to discuss review/inspection with an on -site representative?
❑ Yes
❑ No ❑ NA
❑ NE
33.
Does facility require a follow-up visit by same agency?
❑ Yes
❑ No ❑ NA
❑ NE
Additiionel,Co. nrnents and/or Dra)yin s i
a
Page 3 of 3 12128104

Facillty �Numhc
PI�IAIII AIII II YIIIIInr�
Type of Visit oZutine
nspection O Operation Review O Structure Evaluation 0 Technical Assistance
Reason for Visit O Complaint O Follow up Q Referral Q Emergency O Other ❑ Denied Access
Date of Visit: Z7 Arrival Time: Departure Time: County: Region:
Farm Name: Owner Email:
Owner Name:
Mailing Address:
Physical Address:
Facility Contact:
Phone:
Title: Phone No:
Onsite Representative: � lIntegrator:
Certified Operator: ?A '1 7es:,� Operator Certification Number:
Back-up Operator:
Location of Farm:
Design Current
Swine Canacitv.: Ponulatior
❑ Wean to Finish
❑ Wean to Feeder
El Feeder to Finish
❑ Farrow to Wean `
❑ Farrow to Feeder
❑ Farrow to Finish
❑ Gilts
❑ Boars
Other
Back-up Certification Number:
Latitude: 0 c =' =" Longitude: = ° 0 I = 11
Design Current-
Wet Poultry Capacity Population
❑ Layer
❑ Non -Layer
Dry Poultry
Non -
Cattle
Design Current
Capacity Pon: pulatio=;
❑
Dairy Cow
❑
Dairy Calf
❑
Dairy Heifer
ELDry
Cow
❑
Non -Dairy
❑
Beef Stocker
❑
Beef Feeder
❑
Beef Brood Cow
�.,
❑ Turkey Poults
❑ Other' Number of Structures: EJi'
.r
Discharges & Stream Impacts
1. Is any discharge observed from any part of the operation?
Discharge originated at: ❑ Structure ❑ Application Field ❑ Other
a. Was the conveyance man-made?
b. Did the discharge reach waters of the State? (If yes, notify DWQ)
c. What is the estimated volume that reached waters of the State (gallons)?
d. Does discharge bypass the waste management system? (If yes, notify DWQ)
2. Is there evidence of a past discharge from any part of the operation?
3. Were there any adverse impacts or potential adverse impacts to the Waters of the State
other than from a discharge?
❑ Yes 0 No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes �❑ NA El NE
❑ Yes 2 No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes ZIN ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes eNo ❑ NA ❑ NE
12128104 Continued

Facility Number: — Date of Inspection Z b
Waste Collection & Treatment _
4. Is storage capacity (structural plus storm storage plus heavy rainfall) less than adequate? ❑ Yes No❑ NE
a. If yes, is waste level into the structural freeboard? ❑ Yes ZNo ❑ NA ❑ NE
Structure 1 Structure 2 Structure 3 Structure 4 Structure 5 Structure 6
���,� r,
Identifier: n vtJ�' ,1�cct7. hit Sow y lr''e. C f ,i , 5 % .."-, r�
Spillway?: �e G
Designed Freeboard (in):
Observed Freeboard (in): !r �' SC7 << A�v L( � f
5. Are there any immediate threats to the integrity of any of the structures observed? ❑ Yes No A ❑ NE
(ic/ large trees, severe erosion, seepage, etc.)
6. Are there structures on -site which are not properly addressed and/or managed ❑ Yes No ❑ NA ❑ NE
through a waste management or closure plan?
If any of questions 4-6 were answered yes, and the situation poses an immediate public health or environmentaZo
tA
DWQ
7. Do any of the structures need maintenance or improvement? ❑ Yes ❑ NE
8. Do any of the stuctures lack adequate markers as required by the permit? ❑ Yes No >A ❑ NE
(Not applicable to roofed pits, dry stacks and/or wet stacks)
9. Does any part of the waste management system other than the waste structures require ❑ Yes o ❑ NA ❑ NE
maintenance or improvement?
Waste Application
10. Are there any required buffers, setbacks, or compliance alternatives that need ❑ Yes o NA El NE
maintenance/improvement?
11. is there evidence of incorrect application? If yes, check the appropriate box below. El Yes2�No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Excessive Pending ❑ Hydraulic Overload ❑ Frozen Ground ❑ Heavy Metals (Cu, Zn, etc.)
❑ PAN ❑ PAN > 10% or 10 1bs ❑ Total Phosphorus ❑ Failure to Incorporate Manure/Sludge into Bare Soil
❑ Outside of Acceptable Crop Window ❑ Evidence of Wind Drift ❑ Application Outside of Area
12. Crop type(s) 64jyP,
13. Soil type(s)
14. Do the receiving crops differ from those designated in the CAWMP?
15. Does the receiving crop and/or land application site need improvement?
❑ Yes
❑ Yes
16. Did the facility fail to secure and/or operate per the irrigation design or wettable acre determination?❑ Yes
17, Does the facility lack adequate acreage for land application? ❑ Yes
18. Is there a lack of properly operating waste application equipment? ❑ Yes
-Zo � 5-1 L. arc -P-e ys I—"- S'
ZNo NA ❑ NE
No NA ❑ NE
5 o N NE
o NA ❑ NE
o ❑NA ❑NE
Reviewer/Inspector Name F, d , -i ]Phone: ,7-- �f 2_0
Reviewer/Inspector Signature:
Page 2 of 3
Date: � Z 7 r G_/�
12128104 Continued

Facility Number: — Date of Inspection 27J n
Required Records & Documents
19. Did the facility fail to have Certificate of Coverage & Permit readily available?
20. Does the facility fail to have all components of the CAWMP readily available? if yes, check
the appropirate box. ❑ WUP ❑ Checklists ❑ Desi n ❑ Ma s ❑Other
❑ Yes a<oNA [:3 NE
El Yes o ❑ NA ❑ NE
g p
21. Does record keeping need improvement? if yes, check the appropriate box below. ❑ Yes - No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Waste Application ❑ Weekly Freeboard ❑ Waste Analysis ❑ Soil Analysis ❑ Waste Transfers ❑ Annual Certification
❑ Rainfall ❑ Stocking ❑ Crop Yield ❑ 120 Minute Inspections ❑ Monthly and i" Rain Inspections ❑ Weather Code
22. Did the facility fail to install and maintain a rain gauge? ❑ Yes rNo
" NA ❑ NE
23. If selected, did the facility fail to install and maintain rainbreakers on irrigation equipment? ❑ Yes
NA ❑ NE
24. Did the facility fail to calibrate waste application equipment as required by the permit? ❑ Yes�NA ❑ NE
25. Did the facility fail to conduct a sludge survey as required by the permit? ❑ Yes !�J N NA ❑ NE
26. Did the facility fail to have an actively certified operator in charge? ❑ Yes N NA ❑ NE
27. Did the facility fail to secure a phosphorus loss assessment (PLAT) certification? ❑ Yes No ❑ NA ❑ NE
Other issues
28. Were any additional problems noted which cause non-compliance of the permit or CAWMP? ❑ Yes o ❑ NA ❑ NE
29. Did the facility fail to properly dispose of dead animals within 24 hours and/or document ❑ Yes ❑ No ❑ NA ❑ NE
and report the mortality rates that were higher than normal?
30. At the time of the inspection did the facility pose an odor or air quality concern?
❑ Yes
❑ No
❑ NA
❑ NE
if yes, contact a regional Air Quality representative immediately
31. Did the facility fail to notify the regional office of emergency situations as required by
❑ Yes
❑ No
❑ NA
❑ NE
General Permit? (ie/ discharge, freeboard problems, over application)
32. Did Reviewer/Inspector fail to discuss review/inspection with an on -site representative?
❑ Yes
❑ No
❑ NA
❑ NE
33. Does facility require a follow-up visit by same agency?
❑ Yes
❑ No
❑ NA
❑ NE
Addition alComments'andlarDrav+in(�s4 s,F� �; ` f' ;$'+(y�`•,� �kA P�
Page 3 of 3 12128104
Page 3 of 3 12128104

S `
f
PrDSWC Animal'Feedlot Operation Review
Te
0 DWQ Animal Feedlot Operation Site inspection " 1
LoRoutine O Complaint O Follow-up of UWQinsiection O Fulio%v-up of DSWC review 0 Outer
Date of inspection
Faciiity Number
Time of Inspection I JO'. 3o Use 24 hr. time
E Total Time (in hours) Spent onReview
Farm Status: _ G 2T I F! L � _ _
or Inspection (includes travel and processing)
Farm Natne: H R tior� ✓�iv �- T.r p 1 _ County:
Owner Name:... ..��.. Phone No: C1 I
Mailing Address:
Onsite Representative: tILL) Integrator.
Certified Operator. Operator Certification Number -
Location of Farm:
. Latitude • 6 r�----�" Longitude
Not Operational Date Last Operated:
type of vperatton ana imstgn
Swine x` ~';
Wean to Feeder
L421kjW lV r-CGUC1
Farrow to Finish ri Other Type of Livestock 1
'��
"..... �.. .. .. ,.:,v '* k `Rr..,,,i.i w.i's .1. '.:� .,. ,f,: ',.Y w{. ... .1'. ., �.1.-.-;�.: ,'•`:St ��-. �: �f. h. Y�'� �; :�3.
NuctberoC�axgoaastHaldi~iirko ds'
Substerfaoe Dramess s Prrat
� Y .sr^• JS t i. �� V .. fix€ ,5,. ..:
Lagoon Area` Spray Field Area
- !,.....: sx r " ",
General
1. Are there any buffers that need maintenance/improvement?
2. Is any discharge observed from any part of the operation?
a. If discharge is observed, was the conveyance man-made?
b. If discharge is observed, did it teach Surface Water? (If yes, notify DwQ)
c. If discharge is observed, what is the estimated flow in gal/min?
d. Does discharge bypass a lagoon system? (If yes, notify DWt)
3. Is there evidence of past discharge from any part of the operation?
4. Was there any advent impacts to the waters of the State other than from a discharge?
S. Dots any part of the waste management system (other than lagoons/hoIding ponds) require •.
maintenance/improvemeno
❑ Yes
[ No
❑ Yes
No
❑ Yes
No
❑ Yes
No
❑ Yes No
❑ Yes 1 No
❑ Yes 1P No
❑ Yes [P No

6. Is facility not in compliance with any applicable setback criteria?
7. Did the facility fail to have a certified operator in responsible charge (if inspection after 1/l/97)?
8. Are there lagoons or storage ponds on site which need to be properly closed?
Structures (Lagoons and/or Holding Ponds)
9. Is structtual freeboard less thaw adequate?
Freeboard (ft): T n 1 Lagoon 2
Lagoon 3
❑ Yes No
❑ Yes No
❑ Yes No
❑ Yes P No
Lagoon 4
10. Is seepage observed from any of the structures?
❑ Yes
allo
I I.. Is erosion, or any other threats to the integrity of any of the structures observed?
❑ Yes
No
12. Do any of the structures need maintenancehmprovement?
❑ Yes
No
/
(If any of questions 9-12 was answered yes, and the situation poses an
immediate public bealth or environmental threat, notify DWQ)
13. Do any of the structures lack adquate markers to identify start and stop pumping levels?
❑ Yes
P No
Waste _Application
14. Is there physical evidence of over application?
❑ Yes
p4lo
(If in excess of WMP, or runoff entering waters of the State, notify DWQ)
15. Crop type
16. Do the active crops differ with those designated in the Animal Waste Management Plan?
❑ Yes
9�io
17. Does the facility have a lack of adequate acreage for land application?
❑ Yes
[7'No
18. Does the cover crop need improvement?
❑ Yes
P No
19. Is there a lack of available irrigation equipment?
❑ Yes
[7No
For Certified Facilities Only
20. Does the facility fail to have a copy of the Animal Waste Management Plan readily available?
❑ Yes
7No
!![a
21. Does the facility fail to comply with the Animal Waste Management Plan in any way?
❑ Yes
No
![�
22. Does record keeping need improvement?
❑ Yes
No
23. Does facility require a follow-up visit by same agency? f
❑ Yes
P No
24. Did Reviewer/Inspector fail to discuss review/inspection with owner or operator in charge?
❑ Yes
t No
Comments (refer to question #): Explain any YES answers and/or any recommendations or any other comments. : 3
Use drawings of facility to better explain situations'( additional pages as necessary): "
Reviewer/Inspector Name
Reviwer/Inspector Signature:
Date: L%
cc. Division of Water Quality, Water QuAty Section, Facility Assessment Unit 11/14/96
Reviewer/Inspector Name
Reviwer/Inspector Signature:
Date: L%
cc. Division of Water Quality, Water QuAty Section, Facility Assessment Unit 11/14/96

DSWC Anima Feedlot Operation Review
1 e lion
3 DWQ -AnitnaI Feedlot Operation Site -inspection Y
❑ Wean to Feeder
to Finish
to Wean
FFerder
tocedr
to Finish
Routine O Complaint C Fallow -up of DWQ inspection
w Facility Number
Fi►Ilove-up of DSWC review :•Q
Date annspectfon-'
Time of Inspection
Use 24 hr. time
Farm Status: F1 CYO Total Time (in hours) Spent onReview �I
or Inspection (locludes travel and processing)
Farm Naine: t'� i�,�:%.f� U, .'T 1 P JL) L�?? Coitnrv:
4 01vner Name: x3 n T— Phone No: ,
Mailing Address:
Onsite Represeatative: , t20 � ru (a j. L EG- - Integrator.
b
Certified Operator. Operator Certification Number,
Location of farm:
Latitude Longitude �•' �"
113 Not 0 erational Date Last Operated:
Type of Operation and Design Capacity
`: t'• --'�',
s' .e ^ut� -; ,xr` 'e`. -
Swine ��.f „ Niimiyer �-s� Poultr �;a� f>.Nt�ber~<Cattia"y
JU Laver` ❑ Dairy
M
IM❑Nan Laver Beef':
..
{"",; ''r.P "'`,^;�g::'�. .a'�'..Y: _, ..�,;�r, a�. •,.,.x ,--'r a ii '�^7�"a:
Li F e v
'a Other Typo of Livestacic �' a
Mkt
`<•;,', ,;•y.• :avk.,,,,:,i.0 "#w"..x:. "bar':"d'a :,t.?{:-�S�A-,K3.: dam. >s: ;?f�+' <:.ri: a."' ::'�•- iti' 1�' ^F•,:' ,."+. 'Ti,.,a �s;a�.:'
�wNuntber otT.agooas �Saldfn d= Subsurface Drains Present r
4 ti
.,, Lagoon
Spray F
yL on Area field Area
General-
i. Are there any 6ai%rs that need tnainteasacelimprovemcnt? ❑Yes Ej No
2. Is any discharge observed from any part of the operation? ❑Yes E�No
a. If discharge is observed, was the conveyance man-made? ❑Yes ;3 No
b. If discharge is observed, did it reach Surface Water? (If yes, notify DWG ❑Yes 0 No
c. If discharge is observed, what is the estimated flow in gaUmin? _
d. Does discharge bypass a lagoon system? (if yes, notify DWQ) - ❑ yes QJ No
3. Is there evidence of past discharge from any part af the operation? ' ' ' � - • 0 Yes • d No
4. Was there any adverse impacts to the waters of the State other than from a discharge? ❑Yes � No
S. Does any part of the waste management system (other tttzn lagoons/bolding ponds) require .. " ❑Yes � No
maintenanceTrriprovemrnr'
Continued on back

6. Is facility not in compliance with any applicable setback criteria?
❑ Yes 8 No
7. Did the facility fail to have a certified operator in responsible charge (if inspection after 1/1/97)? ❑ Yes X1 No
8. Are there lagoons or storage ponds on site which need to be properly closed? - - w ❑ Yes ZNo
tructares a oons and/ot oldie Ponds -_ Y i�,� .� m..-._ ..,., ..• -
9.�Is sttvcdual frxboard less than adequate?;. ., ;,. r,.: _..m. :. .� w - -�_ ❑ Yes UNo
Freeboard (ft):h Lag000ni'.I Lagoon 2 _ _ Lagoon 3 Lagoon 4
... , "•?� "' ,,_ ., : �i' "'.. 7M ems.. „- � _ �... .r....�1..�.�«...... ' - ��....-.�. ...._.�� ...�...
10. IB seepage observed from any of the structures? ❑ Yes VNo
11: U "erasion; ar any other threats to the integrity of any of the structures observed? P'Yes ' i No
12. Do any of the structures need maintenance/improvement? ❑ Yes Z No
--.(If any,of questions 9-12 was answered yes,'and the situation poses an
immediate public bealth or environmental threat, notify DWQ)
-13. •Do any of the strdctiffes lack adquaie markers to identify start and stop pumping levels? ❑ Yes Mo
1
Waste Aunlieation
14. Is there physical evidence of over application? ❑ Yes VfNo
- (If in excess of WMP, or runoff entering waters of the State, notify DWQ)
15. Crop type —..... Y . .�.._ _ _...._ .. _ _..._...___:..
16. Do the active crops differ with those designated in the Animal Waste Management Plan? ❑ Yes P No
17. Does the facility have a lack of adequate acreage for land application? ❑ Yes [9 No
18. Does the cover crop need improvement? ❑ Yes. No
19. Is there a lack of available irrigation equipment? ❑ Yes No
Eor Certified Facilities Only
20. Does the facility fail to have a copy of the Animal Waste Management Plan readily available? ❑ Yes No
21. Does the facility fail to comply with the Animal Waste Management Plan in any way? ❑ Yes //� No
22. Does record keeping need improvement? - ❑ Yes No
23. Does. facility require a follow-up visit by same agency? . ❑ Yes O No
24. -Did Reviewer/Inspector fail to discuss review/inspection with owner or operator in charge? ❑ Yes 4J No
Comments (refer to question #): , Explain any -YES answers and/or any recommendations or any other comments.-- .
Use drawings' of facilityto better explain situations: (tise4"tional pages es necessary):
1 I PIP E COA)A) E C. T 1A)fr PP—IA-1 R 1Z -1 0- 5 E CC'-v,9 AR �-r} 6- e o.4LZ A)L-zr_s
P) t5.t)1 P/+ E R 70 r" lM4TE� 4:7 IL0S vti T1 k 5 --�_(_ok)Dlhey
0
8
Reviewer/Inspector Name
Reviwer/Inspector Signature:
Date: L)Z) K -_
cc. Division of Water Quality, Water Quality Section, Facility Assessment Unit 11/14/96

17DSWC Animal Feedlot Operation Review
Q.DWQ. Animal Feedlot Operation Site Inspection
Routine O Complaint O Fallon -up of DWQ inspection 'O Fbilow-up of DSWC revie%v - O Other
- Date of Inspection N
Facilitv,Number "..$E _
Time of inspection') _"r_�� Use 24 hr. time
Farm Status: M Total Tune (in hours) Spent onReviei
or Inspection (includes travel and processing)
Farm'&ame:
Owner tiame:..
Mailing Address:
County:
Prone No:
Onsite Representative: _ r0 f} .J t` h C G �` _ . Integrator:
r:
Certified Operator: / AJ +' L - Operator Cerdfication Number.
Location of Farm:
e
Latitude Longitude �• �` �"
0 Not Oiper= Date Last Operated:
Type of Operation and Design Capacity
k Number poultrjr:b
mber-
Number=-
❑ Wean to Feeder 3 0 - ` ❑Laver < ❑ Dairy
Feeder to Finish . ❑ ❑Non Laver � ❑Beef
Farrow to Wean x X'
kip 5 *o*K'•"i �rc"�
as e �`"uS4°`'�"y�.
Farrow r� •'
to Feeder :� ��
Farrow to Finish ` ❑ Other Type of Livestock
ZK7a 3'%""a v: i.w• az "s°`.
s Number ofLa owns Ix�aldFa onds Substuface flraias Present
�.
Lagoon Area Spray F
<...ield Area ;
�, . >, a �a�i
-
�'� ❑
1.
Are there any buffers that need maintetsance/improvement?
❑ Yes
O No
2.
Is any discharge observed from any part of the operation?
❑ Yes
6 No
a. If discharge is observed, was the conveyance man -trade?
❑ Yes
17No
b. If discharge is observed, did it reach Surface Water? (If yes, notify DWQ)
❑ yes
Na
c. If discharge is observed, what is the estimated flow in gallmin?
d. Does discharge bypass a Iagoon system'? (If yes, notify DWQ)
❑ Yes
D No
3.
Is there evidence of past discharge from any part of the operation?
[I Yes
[No
4.
Was there any adverse impacts to the waters of the State other than from a discharge?
❑yes
(0 No
S.
Does any parr of the waste managerrtent system (other than IagoortsTholding ponds) require
❑Yes
No
maintenance/improvement?
///
Continued on back-

7. Did the facility fail to have a certified operator in responsible charge (if inspection after 111/97)?
S. Are there lagoons or storage ponds on site which need to be properly closed?
Structures f1,22oons and/or HoldingPonds)
9: `Is structural freeboard less�than adequate?l,,,—,.....
Freeboard (fr): � ;,„Lapon 1Lagoon 2 Lagoon,3
--10.--Is seepage obscived from any of the strucdaes? _
r 11."Is erosion; or any other `threats to'the integrity of any of the structures observed?
12. Do any of the strucaims need maintenance/improvement? •-' '
(If any of questions 9-12 was answered yes, and the situation poses an „
immediate public health or environmental threat, not[6 DWQ)
13. Do any of the structures lack adquatc, markers to identify start and stop pumping levels?
NV.aste Aaallention
14. - Is there physical evidence of over application?
(If in excess of WMP, or runoff entering witers of the State, notify D WQ)
IS.' Crop type /V-
16. Do the active crops differ with those designated in the Animal Waste Management Plan?
17. Does the facility have a lack of adequate sewage for land application?
IS. Does the cover crop need improvement?
I9. Is there a Iack of avafiable.irrigadon equipment? -
For Certified Facilities Only
20. Does the facility fail to have a copy of the Animal Waste Management Plan readily available?
21. Does the facility fail to comply with the Animal Waste Management PIan in any way?
22. Does record keeping need improvement?
23. Does facility require a follow-up visit by same agency?
24. Did Reviewer/Inspector fail to discuss review/inspection with owner or operator in charge?
❑ Yes ZNo
❑ Yes '
u❑ Yes -0 No
Lag666`4- .
❑ Yes lJ No
❑ Yes E1 No
❑ Yes �to
Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes P(No
❑ Yes [�No
❑ Yes 2f No
❑ Yes . �No
❑ Yes PrNo
Dyes
❑ No
❑ Yes
No
❑ Yes
C� No
❑ Yes
No
❑ Yes
P(No
Comments
Jse drags of.Facrty toetterezIaia?iivati� a`ac_ a� a.
/ 3 ? t9z /c c-x rE f3vT Aver r I x)3Tfi AA lr0c-,V
i
WUP o
/Vo � s art � O
v P�- c Pv�
)j
p T
Reviewer/Inspector Name
Reviwer/Inspector Sibnature: Dater
cc: Division of Wafer Qualiry,'tirarer Qua/hy SecrAin, Facility Assessment Unit 1 1/ 14/96

P DSWC Animal Feedlot Operation Review
❑ DWQ Animal Feedlot Operation Site Inspection A
ftoctine O Complaint O Follow-up of DW2 ins ectiun O Fiillow-up of DSWC review O Other
Date of Inspection L!L11
Facility Number Time of inspection ® Use 24 hr. time
L .-fr Fl Total Time (in hours) Spent onReview �
Farm Status: or Inspection (includes travel and processing)
Farm Name:.... P AN o �- . ,. A 12L I, Pi- 1=12 , County: E
t- 0%vner Name: rig L 1-tF1 ► L �_I�iait `� —[ sy� Phone No: 1 �, y� 'J - -7c7 3
Mailing Address: 6 CO {J.L1 i 7L•K U>s I 1� Di✓ �t r
J -
Onsite Representative: _ E]2 1-j A) CI))"'L 67, Intearator.
Certified Operator. I rn J1%o Ca i ! .tom - C _ Operator Certification Number. L2 Li
Location of Farm:
Latitude Longitude
© ,Not 0 erationaI Date Last Operated:
Type of operation and Design Capacity
"Swine , ,'`r: �'Nnmiiei
Wean to Feeder
7
❑ Feeder to Finish
Farm%v to Wean
Fa ow to Feeder
Farrow to Finish
_ X .,._ ..
Other Type of Livestock L i�
General
1. Are there any buffers that need maintenance/improvement?
2. Is any discharge observed from any pan of the operation?
a. If discharge is observed, was the conveyance man-made?
b. If discharge is observed, did it reach Surface Watefl (If yes, notify DWQ)
c. If discharge is observed, what is the estimated flow in gal/min?
d. Does discharge bypass a lagoon system? (if yes, notify DWi )
3. Is there evidence of past discharge from any part of the operation?
4. Was there any adverse impacts to the waters of the State other than from a discharge?
S. Does any part of the waste management system (other than lagoons/holding ponds) require ..
maintenance unprovement?
i+.
❑ Yes ;dNo
❑ Yes 1A No
❑ Yes No
❑ Yes No
❑ Yes [A No
13 Yes' It No
❑ Yes No ,
❑ Yes No
Continued on back

6. Is facility not in compliance with any applicable setback criteria?
❑ Yes
0 No..
7. Did the facility fail to have a certified operator in responsible charge (if inspection after 1/1/97)?
❑ Yes
Ej No
9. Are there lagoons or storage ponds on site which need to be properly closed?
❑ Yes
,l No
Structures [Lagoons and/or Holdi� Ponds)
9. Is structural freeboard less than adequate?
❑ Yes
[Z No
Freeboard (ft): Lagoon l Lagoon 2 Lagoon 3
Lagoon 4
10. Is seepage observed from any of the structures?
❑ Yes
UNo
I L. Is erosion, or any other threats to the integrity of any of the structures observed?
❑ Yes
Z No
12. Do any of the structures need maintenance/improvement?
❑ Yes
[Z No
(If any of questions 9-12 was answered yes, and the situation poses an
immediate public health or environmental threat, notify DWQ)
13. Do any of the structures lack adquate markers to identify start and stop pumping levels?
Yes
❑ No
WastLAp2lication
14. Is there physical evidence of over application?
❑ Yes
/No
(If in excess of WMP, or runoff entering waters of the State, notify DWQ)
15. Crop type r _
16. Do the active crops differ with those designated in the Animal Waste Management Plan?
❑ Yes
(YNo
17. Does the facility have a lack of adequate acreage for land application?
❑ Yes
O No
18. Does the cover crop need improvement?
❑ Yes
No
19. Is there a lack of available irrigation equipment?
❑ Yes
No
For Certified Facilities Only
20. Does the facility fail to have a copy of the Animal Waste Management Plan readily available?
❑ Yes
E!(No
21. Does the facility fail to comply with the Animal Waste Management Plan in any way?
❑ Yes
ZNo
22. Does record keeping need improvement?
❑ Yes
)n No
23. Does facility require a follow-up visit by same agency? ►'
❑ Yes
KNO
24.ADid Reviewer/Inspector fail to discuss review/'inspection with owner or operator in charge?
❑ Yes
ONo
Comments (refer to. question ft . Explain any YES answers and/or any recommendations or any other cornments. �. Y
1Use'drawin s of facili to better lain situations: use additional pages as nxcess ;
} 3 . 42 ►c E-'z- d ,u s,i TE f3 r � T { /J -S 78 J_,L try .
»..-
4
8
Reviewer/Inspector Name �mexr,'F
Reviwer/Iuspector Signature: Date: `-
ec: Division of Water Quality, Water Quality Section, Facility Assessment Unit 11/14/96

State of North Carolina
Department of Environment,
Health and Natural Resources
James B, Hunt, Jr„ Governor
Jonathan B: Howes, Secretary
The Hanor Company Inc
Hanor Multiplier
876 Country Club Rd
Rocky Mount NC 27804
INA
EDEHNR
November 12, 1996
SUBJECT: Operator In Charge Designation
Facility: Hanor Multiplier
Facility ID#: 33-57
Edgecombe County
Dear Farm Owner:
Senate Bill 1217, An Act to Implement Recommendations of the Blue Ribbon Study
Commission on Agricultural Waste, enacted by the 1996 North Carolina General Assembly,
requires a certified operator for each animal waste management system that serves 250 or more
swine by January 1, 1997. The owner of each animal waste management system must submit a
designation form to the Technical Assistance and Certification Group which designates an
Operator in Charge and is countersigned by the certified operator. The enclosed form must be
submitted by January 1, 1997 for all facilities in operation as of that date. Failure to designate a
certified operator for your animal waste management system is a violation of 15A NCAC 2H
.0224 and may result in the assessment of a civil penalty.
If you have questions concerning operator training or examinations for certification, please
contact your local North Carolina Cooperative Extension Service agent or our office.
Examinations have been offered on an on -going basis in many counties throughout the state for
the past several months and will continue to be offered through December 31, 1996,
Thank you for your cooperation. If you have any questions concerning this requirement please
call Beth Buffington or Barry Huneycutt of our staff at 919/733-0026.
Sincerely,
A. Preston Howard, Jr., P.E., Director
Division of Water Quality
Enclosure
cc: Raleigh Regional Office
Water Quality Files
P.O. Box 27687, 1P6. FAX [phone]
Raleigh, North Carolina 27611-7687 NP An Equal Opportunity/Affirmative Action Employer
Voice 919-715-4100 50°% recycled/100% post -consumer paper

Technical Spedallst Certification
i
L As a technical specialist designated by the 1*rth Carolina Soil and Water Conservadon•Comm ission pursuant to 15 A
NCAC 6F .0003, l certify that the animal waste management system for the farm named above has an animal waste
management plan that meets -or exceeds standards and specifications of the Division of Environmental Nfanagement
(DRM) as specified in 15A NCAC 2H.0217 and the USDA-Natutal Resources Conservation Service (MRCS) and/or the
North Carolina Soil and Water Conservation Commission pursuant to 15A NCAC 2H.0211 and 15A NCAC 6F .0001.
.0005. The following elements are included in the plan as applicable. While each category designates a technical specialist
who may sign each certification (SD, SI, WUP, RC, 1), the technical specialist should only certify parts for which they are
technically competent.
IT Certification of Design
A) Coll ction t r e .Treatment S stem
Check the appropriate box .
4 i (SD or WUP).
Storage volume is adequate -for operation capacity; storage capability consistent with waste udlizadon
requirements.
C] kkw ,gxpandgd or retrofitxe_d facility (SD)
Animal waste storage and treatment structures, such as but not limited to collection systems, lagoons and ponds,
have been designed to meet or -exceed the minimum standards and specifications.
Name of Technical Specialist (Please Print):
Affiliation Date Work Completed:
Address (Agency): Phone No.:
Signature• Date•
B) Lan Ile do Site (WUP)
The plan provides for minimum separations (buffers); adequate amount of land for waste utilization; chosen crop is
suitable for waste management hydraulic and nutrient loading rates.
Name of Technical Specialist (Please Print): L. M. Oaf lay .alx._._Ph11 P. E. ._
Affiliation Ak ri-Waste Technology, Inc. Date Work Completed:
Address (Agency):Phone No.
C) Runoff Controls from Exterior Lotq
Check 'tile appropriate box
RECEIVED / DEAR / DWQ
13 Facility without exterior lots (SD or WUP or RC) Aquifer Protection Section
This facility does not contain any exterior lots..
MAR 3.0 2009
❑ Facile with exterior loth. (RC)
Methods to minimize the run off of pollutants from lounging and heavy use areas have been designed in.
accordance with technical standards developed by MRCS.
Name of Technical Specialist (Please Print):L,_.,M. sa fley. jr.,Ph]).,
to Work Completed:
Address (Agency):. sjqoa t,Phone Yo.:' 1. Q59-0669
Signature: Date: 1
1171
AWC -- August 1, 1997

12. Land ApplicationfWaste Utilization Plan
Land application of the lagoon liquid is the final step in this operation's waste management
system. The goal of the Land Application/Waste Utilization Plan (LAWUP) is to apply nutrients
at rates that do not exceed agronomic rates. By obtaining this goal, the quantity of nutrients that
is applied is effectively utilized by the crops that are grown on the fields.
12.1 Application Method
The land application area at the DN site is divided into 24 application fields. Traveling gun and
center pivot irrigation will be utilized to apply lagoon liquid.
12.2 Nitrogen Production
The amount of nitrogen produced by the facilities is estimated by using NRCS Standard 633.
This standard estimates that 5.4 pounds of Plant Available Nitrogen (PAN) per sow per year is
produced from a Farrow to Wean operation, 6.5 pounds of PAN per sow per year is produced
from a Farrow to Feeder operation and 2.3 pounds of PAN per head per year is produced from a
Feeder to Finish operation. Therefore, the 2,500 sows will produce 13,500 (2,500 sows x 5.4
lbs/sow) pounds of PAN on an annual basis. The 7,680 nursery pigs will produce 3,686.4 (7,680
head x 0.48 lbs/head) pounds of PAN on an annual basis. The 8,640 finisher pigs will produce
19,872 (8,640 head x 2.3 lbs/head) pounds of PAN on an annual basis. The 170 boars will
produce 629 (170 head x 3.7 lbs/head) pounds on an annual basis. The combined PAN
production from the facilities will be approximately 37,687.4 lbs of PAN per year (see Table 12-
1}.
12-1

Table 12-1. Plant Available Nitrogen (PAN) Production At The DN Site
Facility
PAN Produced Per Head Per
Year (lb PAN/hd-yr)
Total PAN Produced
(lb PAN/yr)
2,500 Sow
5.4
13,500
7,680 head nursery
0.48
3,686.4
8,640 head finisher
2.3
19,872
170 Boars
3.7
629
TOTAL:
37,687.4
A copy of the applicable pages from NRCS Standard 633 can be found in Attachment 3.
The amount of nitrogen in the sludge is also estimated from NRCS Standard 633 assuming
broadcast application. The quantity of PAN that will be available from the lagoon sludge (all
lagoons) on an annual basis estimated to be 6,084 pounds based on NRCS Standard 633. Table
12-2 displays the amount of PAN in the sludge generated by each facility and for the entire site on
an annual basis. In order to properly determine the application rate for the sludge, it will be
analyzed when it is to be removed and applied at the agronomic uptake rate of the crops that are
grown on the application fields.
Table 12-2. Plant Available Nitrogen In Sludge (Annual Basis)
Facility
PAN Produced In
Sludge'
(lb PAN/hd-yr)
PAN Produced In
Sludge Per Year
(lb PAN/yr)
2,500 Sow
0.88
2,200
7,680 heat' nursery
0.076
583.7
8,640 head finisher
0.37
3,197
170 Boars
0.61
103.7
TOTAL:
6,084.4
'Assumes broadcast application of sludge.
12-2

12.3 Nitrogen Utilization
The cultivated areas on the DN property consist of 24 separate fields containing approximately
216.5 effective wettable acres available for application of lagoon liquid.
The amount of Plant Available Nitrogen (PAN) which could be effectively utilized by the crops, is
dependant on the realistic expected crop yield for the dominant soil type present in each of the
fields, and the recommended PAN per unit of yield to that particular crop. The realistic expected
crop yields were determined for each soil type found in the application fields. The yield used for
overseeded wheat/rye is 2 tons/acre.
Information concerning the realistic expected yields and the nitrogen application rate are also
included in Attachment 5.
The pounds of plant available nitrogen (PAN) that each field can utilize was calculated using a
one year crop rotation. For example, a rotation of corn followed by wheat/rye is considered. For
the portion of Field 1 that is Goldsboro soil the pounds of PAN that could be utilized in one year
by growing corn would be 640.63 lbs PAN, as demonstrated by the following calculations.
4.1 acres x 125 bu corn x 1,25 lb PAN = 640.63 lbs PAN
ac bu corn
Similarly, the PAN requirement for the rye portion of the rotation is 410 lbs PAN.
The total pounds of PAN that all application fields with their respective crops could utilize is
51,108.4 lbs of PAN per year (see Spreadsheet 12-1). According to NRCS design calculations,
the DN facilities will produce a total of 37,687 lbs of PAN in lagoon liquid each year. Therefore,
sufficient area is available in the application fields on the property to utilize all of the PAN in the
lagoon liquid that must be applied yearly. Sludge utilization and application is discussed in
Section 12.5.
12-3

s s i aaiaaa sail
g gg 55gg5gg gg gggg
��AA4AAA���AAAAAAAAAA�7LL����LL{{{LLLLyLL�LLELLaLLLLaaI�LL�LL7!!lLLSSti����LLLLLLLaLL 1�1����ttt
6 7 7 i i i i ...........
e7t�iRg�f�gg8Rs�gsmg�RRg3�g$$BSSSSR8$8a$$$8888$8$$0�6
��$�
�e^� ��8� nm��
Zj dog$- $-g-$$$gg---$$$g$ $$$ £
NBA_
a ,Q gran
S
amide
E
„„ Y[ N N N N N N N n N N N N
���
w w� n S
M M� �� � 4 O S
eee6e63'$'S R'�$i�RRRS$$a$S$9�$$a$$r3
•,
•
�E
s�
�3
pp�n1 �t99 }�y.ppgppppppppApyyFF
b E m' S 3 R 8 S o o S 5 6 Q E S S E 8 E a
A
SwF �F-f- r�9rr=rrrrrrrr-err
%, R
PPm�
o 0 0 E o e
dNe'H ec
y� N ry Y Y v++ d g p p G$ g p O$ p p n n N$ n N n O ry n n n n ry N N N N N N N n N n
_ ^ ' _ ^ C G/- n f- On Cn r Gr Cn F
mry
mm3
{ V p g gb
NO No
m b m 2 m m m m N n Y
m NNNn a g HE
R n $
�t gSa$m�3
8008 $$o`o �`a,00 =
nes
_noo _now _nmo-
gz �
y�xeryti'N°aa"aXa��aaa" �a"aa �� aX��a�a�sa��aa 3aas .��
NUMNUr
ss s.nnv.wom�^'��n ss 33 ww
4i FR is� sA Gqj E4 h
N J% W IO b woo N
Mt
2 p3 _
1` m �y N p n ^ o
J j
m ��3m3�33���sr 33�9 � 39� 11 ����j� 9IM
f �ri���'r umi �'lerir�.l�Stog���rn$�r�po+�vui `�onrY�8g�$����w$e w
�yv
a
• ��
I
a g
e
Rm2
m'nam'Nnvnnm_nn��mmRammmmmm =

12.4 Application of Lagoon Liquid
Prior to the application of lagoon liquid, the following items will be evaluated and recorded on
Form 8 "Pre -Application Checklist" (included in Attachment 7).
• Evaluation of field records to verify that the nitrogen goal for the given crop
has not been exceeded.
• Determination of amount of lagoon liquid to apply to the field.
• Evaluation of lagoon to determine if sufficient liquid volume exists (above
minimum pumpdown level) to achieve desired application.
In addition, the following general guidelines have been developed for land application of
wastewater.
• No runoff from the application site
• The soil is dry enough to apply with no deep seepage or runoff
• Wastewater will be applied to land with a growing crop or on land where a crop
will be planted within 30 days.
• Wastewater be applied at a rate (inches/hour) that is less than the soil infiltration
rate.
According to information supplied by The Hanor Company, Inc. the irrigation system will consist
of a mobile irrigation pump which can be transferred from lagoon to lagoon. Mainline attachment
points, located on the berm of the lagoon, will transfer lagoon liquid to a 6", Class 200, PVC
mainline which runs to the irrigated fields. The pump will be capable of supplying 650 gallons per
minute to a center pivot at a delivery pressure of approximately 35 psi and 300 to 250 gallons per
minute to the traveling gun at a delivery pressure of approximately 70 to 80 psi. The traveling
gun is a Ag-Rain T37A.
In order to avoid deep seepage or runoff from the application fields, the maximum application at
any one time should be 0.50 inches.
12-5

IR
�5
1
LJ
The Hanor Comp_ _iv. Inc.
Daughter Nucleus Farm
Edgecomlae County, North Carolina
Irrigation Option 2
X
ON FTelda Northern Tract
tw
1
6.9
4.1
5.3
2
14.9
11.1
12.0
3
18.3
13.8
15.2
4
20.6
7.1
8.3
5
14.8
12.1
14.9
6
36.2
463
48.6
7
6.6
0
0
8
19.9
14.4
16.6
9
0.4
0
0
11
7.7
5.8
6.8
12
21.8
15.2
18
13
5.2
a
0
14
4.9
3.4
4.2
15
9.8
7.5
&4
ON
Flelds Souther Truct
PAW
B1
6.8
4.7
5.5
82
23
1.1
1.4
B3
5.5
3
4.1
84
0.76
0.4
0.6
B5
22.4
17.6
18.9
- B6
28.2
20.8
27.8
87
13.0
8.8
10.2
B8
1.7
1.3
1.5
89
2.3
1,6
2.1
B10
1.7
1.1
1.2
811
10.0
8.7
9.7
B12
9.2
8.6
7.5
Lasead
-
a
R-d/Rahay
Properly Una
StruLt"
. ,
r
Trost
9eramp
E�deth,a phmo a
,iHuDdIng
®
lagoon
- -
Dratror Mtch
®
Panel
^a
too -,-Flood
Pleat
----_
Wetted Adaaspa
Edfsted
C3Trawer
Aria"
OM
>
emov
-ram
DN Farm Site Map
T.
� * >�b-
eere !Ma 3o0. �
arq esrr
r� Pe e�-uw

12.5 Application of Sludge
When the level of sludge in the lagoon has accumulated to the extent that it begins to infringe on
the required treatment volume, the sludge will be removed. The sludge will be removed by means
of an floating dredge, pumped into a leak -proof tanker trucks and transported to the application
areas. Some of the application areas will be located at another nearby site (The Whitakers Site)
owned by The Hanor Company, Inc.
It may be desirable to construct a temporary, flexible membrane lined settling basin to store the
sludge material and to allow free liquid to drain back into the lagoon. In this case, the floating
dredge would pump the material to the temporary containment basin, liquid would be allowed
drain back into the lagoon, and the sludge would then be pumped from the containment basin into
leak -proof trucks for transport to the sludge application sites.
When the sludge is applied at the application site, the sludge will be broadcast applied from the
trucks. Surveyor's flags will be used to indicate the proper buffers from the sludge application
areas.
Sludge will be applied according to the following guidelines.
• Evaluation of field records to verify that the nitrogen goal for the given crop
has not been exceeded.
• Determination of amount of sludge to apply to the field.
• No runoff from the application site
• The soil is dry enough to apply with no deep seepage or runoff
• Sludge will be applied to land with a growing crop or on land where a crop will be
planted within 30 days.
• All applicable buffers will be observed.
Sludge will be applied to all application fields since all nitrogen applied via effluent can be utilized
by the crops without meeting the maximum nitrogen uptake of the crops. All the fields will be
cultivated in grass or corn overseeded with rye. Table 12-6 displays the PAN produced via
effluent and sludge and the PAN utilization by crops.
12-7

Table 12-6. Nitrogen Balance For DN Site Including Sludge
PAN Produced -
Effluent
PAN Produced -
Sludge (annually)
Total PAN
Produced
PAN Utilized
By Crops
Deficit (-)/Surplus
(+} Utilized (lbs)
37,687 lb
6,084 lb
43,771 lb
51,108 lb
7,337 Ib
12.6 Summary of Waste Production and Application
Based on the steady state Iive animal population of the site, approximately 37,687 lbs of Plant
Available Nitrogen (PAN) are produced in the lagoon liquid each year. Additionally, 6,084 lbs of
PAN will be produced in the lagoon sludge every year. The total of PAN produced is 43,771 lb.
The lagoon liquid application system will cover 216.5 acres with a potential yearly PAN uptake
(based on current crops) of 51,108 pounds. Changes to the crop rotation on some fields may be
necessary for future years based on economic and agronomic factors.
12-8

Technical Specialist Certification
L As a technical specialist designated by the North Carolina Soil and Water Conservation Commission pursuant to 15A
NCAC 6H .0104, I certify that the animal waste management system for the farm named above has an animal waste
management plan that meets or exceeds standards and specifications of the Division of Water Quality as specified in 15A
NCAC 2T .1300 (formerly 2H .0217) and the USDA -Natural Resources Conservation Service and/or the North Carolina
Soil and Water Conservation Commission pursuant to 15A NCAC 2T .1300 (formerly 2H .0217) and 15A NCAC 6F .0101-
.0105. The following elements are included in the plan as applicable. While each category designates a technical specialist
who may sign each certification (SD, SI, WUP, RC, 1), the technical specialist should only certify parts for which they are
technically competent.
II. Certification of Design
A) Collection Storage, Treatment System
Check the appropriate box
o Existiniz facility without retrofit (SD or WUP)
Storage volume is adequate for operation capacity; storage capability consistent with waste utilization
requirements.
a New, expanded or retrofitted facility (SD)
Animal waste storage and treatment structures, such as but not limited to collection systems, lagoons and
ponds, have been designed to meet or exceed the minimum standards and specifications.
Name of Technical Specialist (Please Print):
Affiliation Date Work Completed:_
Address (Agency): Phone No.:
Signature: Date:
B) Land Application Site (WUP)
The plan provides for minimum separations (buffers); adequate amount of land for waste utilization; chosen crop
is suitable for waste management; and the hydraulic and nutrient loading rates are appropriate for the site and
receiving crop.
Name of Technical Specialist (Please Print): L. M. Saf ley, Jr., Ph. D., P. E.
Affiliation 'Agri -Waste Technology, Inc. Date Work Completed: 3-17-06
Address (Agency): 5400 Etta Burke /Ct. Raheigh NC 27606
C) Runoff Controls from Exterior Lots
Check the appropriate box
o Facility without exterior lots (SD or WUP or RC)
This facility does not contain any exterior lots.
e No.: 919-859-0669
RECEIVED I DENR ! DWQ
Aquifer Protection Section
o Facility with exterior lots (RC) MAR 3 4 2009
Methods to minimize the run off of pollutants from lounging and heavy use areas have been designed in
accordance with technical standards developed by NRCS.
Name of Technical Specialist (Please Print):
Affiliation Date Work Completed:
Address (Agency): Phone No.:
Signature: Date:
AWC - September 18, 2006 2

Client: HANOR-NG
The Manor Company, Inc.
Revised: 4f14f2008
Daughter Nucleus Site
ay: Jeff
2008 Nitrogen Uptake Spreadsheet
Nitrogen
Soil
Soli
Field
Slope
Realistic
Unw
Removed
Ibs N
Total N
Applle.
Field #
Acres
Series
Type
Symbol
%
Crop
Yield
Acre
Ibslunit
per ac.
(Ibs)
Period
1
5.3
GoldsborolNorfolk
Sandy Loam
1
0-2
Soybeans
36
bu
3.91
140.76
746.03
Apr 1 - Sep 15
2
10.1
Norfolk
Loamy Sand
2
2-6
Soybeans
34
bu
3.91
132.94
1342.69
Apr 1 -Sep 15
3
13.0 GoldsborolNorfolklBibb
Sandy loam/Loamy Sanc
3
0.2
Soybeans
35
bu
3.9
136.50
1774.50
Apr 1 -Sep 15
4
9.30
Norfolk
Loamy Sand
4
0-6
Corn
114
Bu
1.14
129.96
1078.67
Feb 15-Jun
5
14A0
Goldsboro/Norfolk
Sandy loam/Loamy Sanc
5
0-2
Corn
122
Bu
1.14
139.08
1947.12
Feb 15-Jun
6
46.10 GoldsborolNorfolk/Rains$andyloam/Loamy Sanc
6
0-2
Corn
123
Bu
1.12
137.76
6350.74
Feb 15-Jun
7
2.50
Norfolk
Loamy Sand
7
0-2
Corn
114
Bu
1.14
129.96
324.90
Febl5Jun
8
14.6
NorfoikiRains
Loamy Sand
8
0-2
Com
ill
Bu
1.11
123.21
1798.87
Feb 15-Jun
11
6.3
Norfolk
Loamy Sand
11
0-6
Corn
114
Bu
1A4
129.96
618.75
Feb 15-Jun
12
17.00
Norfolk
Loamy Sand
12
0-6
Corn
114
Bu
1.14
129.96
2209.32
Feb 15-Jun
13
2.7
Norfolk
Loamy Sand
13
2.6
Corn
114
Bu
1.14
129.96
350.89
Feb 15-Jun
14
4.1
Norfolk
Loamy sand
14
2-6
Corn
114
Bu
1.14
129.96
532.84
Feb15Jun
15
7.6
Norfolk
Loamy Sand
15
2-6
Corn
114
Bu
1,14
129.96
974.70
Feb 15-Jun
Robbins
66.40
NorfolklGoldsbaro
Sandy loanVLoamy Sant Ease. Prop,
0-6
Soybeans
36
Bu
3.91
140.76
9346.46
Apr 1 -Sep 15
1
5.3
GoldsborNNorfotk
Sandy Loam
1
0-2
Wheat
62
Tons
2.09
129.58
68677
Sep -Mar
2
10.1
Norfolk
Loamy Sand
2
2�6
Wheat
59
Tons
2.09
123.31
1245.43
Sep -Mar
3
13.0 GoldsborciNorfolk/Sibb
Sandy loam/Loamy Sanc
3
0-2
Wheat
56
Tons
2.06
115.36
1499.68
Sep -Mar
4
8.30
Norfolk
Loamy Sand
4
OFi
Wheat
2
Tons
50
100,00
830-DO
Sep -Mar
5
14.00
GotdsborolNorfolk
Sandy loamlLoamySanc
5
0-2
Wheat
2
Tons
50
100.00
1400.00
Sep -Mar
6
46AO Goldsboro'NorfolkfRainsSandyloamlLoamySanc
6
0-2
Wheat
2
Tons
50
100.00
4610,00
Sep -Mar
7
2.50
Norfolk
Loamy Sand
7
0-2
Wheat
2
Tons
5o
100.00
250.00
$Rp-Mar
8
14.6
NorfolkiRains
Loamy Sand
8
0-2
Wheat
2
Tons
50
100.00
1460.00
Sep -Mar
11
6.3
Norfolk
Loamy Sand
11
0-6
Wheat
2
Tons
50
100.00
630.00
Sep -Mar
12
17.00
Norfolk
Loamy Sand
12
0.6
Wheat
2
Tons
50
100.00
1700,00
Sep -Mar
13
2.7
Norfolk
Loamy Sand
13
2-6
Wheat
2
Tons
50
100.00
270.00
Sep -Mar
14
4.1
Norfolk
Loamy Sand
14
2-6
Wheat
2
Tons
50
100.06
410.00
S"ar
15
T5
Norfolk
Loamy Sand
15
2-6
Wheat
2
Tons
50
100.00
750.00
Sep -Mar
Robbins
66.40
NorfolkfGoldsboro
Sandy loamfLoamySanc Ease, Prop.
OF
Wheal
62
Tons
2.09
129.58
8604.11
Sep -Mar
217.9
Total lbs N utiltzed:
53942A7
Weighted Average:
247.56
Indicates an assumed R.Y.E.
Nitrogen
Produced from Effluent
Nitrogen Produced from Sludge
Sludge
0
lbs N
Year
W4 Avg.
ibslunit
Animals
Produced
Acres
BIGIF Site
1 247.5560762
0.88
2500
2200
6.886876386
# of animal units:
2500
3 247.5560762
0.98
2500
660D
26.66062616
lbs Nfanimal unit
5.4
6 247.5560762
0.88
2500
13200
53.32125231
lbs N produced:
13500
9 24T5560762
0.88
2500
19800
79.98187847
Nursery Site
1 247,5560762
0.076
7680
583.68
2.35776883
# of animal units:
7680
3 247.5560762
0.076
7680
1751.04
7.073306489
lbs Nlanimal unit:
0.48
6 247.5560762
0.076
7680
3502.08
14.14661298
lbs N produced:
3686.4
9 247.5560762
0.076
7600
5253.12
21.21991947
GIF Site
1 247.5560762
0.37
864D
3196.8
12.91343783
# of animal units:
8640
3 247.5W762
031
8640
9590A
38.7403135
lbs Nfanimal unit:
2.3
6 247.5560762
0.37
8640
19190.8
77.480627
lbs N produced:
19872
9 247.5560762
0.37
8640
26771,2
116.2209405
Boar Stud Site
1 247.5560752
0.61
170
103.7
0.41889499
# of animal units:
170
3 247.5560762
0.61
170
311.1
1.256684969
lbs Nfanimal unit:
3.7
6 247.5560762
0.61
17O
622.2
2.513369939
lbs N produced:
629
9 247.5560762
0.61
17D
933.3
3.770054908
Total lbs N Produced from Effluent:
37687.40
Total Ibs N Produced from Sludge in 3 years:
18252.54
Deficit (.)(Surplus (+) Utilized (lbs):
16265.07
Deficit (-Vraurpius (+) Utfllzed (lbs):
-1997.47

Client HANQR-NC
The Hanor Company, Inc.
Revised: 3117r2006
Daughter Nucleus Site
Br. Jeff
2006 Nitrogen
Uptake Spreadsheet
Ntrogen
Soil
Soil
Field
Slope
Realls le
unit!
Removed
Ibs N
Total N
Appllc.
Field #
Acres
series
Type
Symbol
%
Crop
Yield
Acre
Ibsfunit
per WC.
(lbs)
Period
1
53
GaidsbomMorfolk
Sandy Loam -
1
0.2
Cam
III
lbs
0.089
9.88
5236
Fob -Jun
2
10.1
Norfolk
Loamy Sand
2
2b
Cam
III
lbs
0.089
9.88
99.78
Feb -Jun
3
13.0 OoidaboroNarfond6ibb
Sandy loamiLoemySand
3
0-2
Com
120
lbs
0.0116
10,32
134.1E
Fab -Jun
4
6.30
Norfolk
Loamy Sand
4
0-6
Com
ill
Bu
1.14
126.54
im.26
Feb -Jun
r 11 F I f f rf f
5
14.0D
Goldsbor ortolk
Sandy IoandLoamy Sand
5
0-2
Cam
120
Bu
1.14
136.80
1915.20
Feb -Jun
t�1 f�
♦ I
AR �AR
6
46.10 GoidsboroMorfolk/Rains Sandy loam&camy Sand
6
0-2
Cam
123
Bu
1.12
137,76
6350.74
Feb -Jun
/f�'��i�
••• /�"9
7
8
250
14.6
Norfolk
Norfbillalft
Loamy Sand
Loamy Sand
7
8
0-2
0-2
Com
Cum
35
36
Bu
Bu
3.91
3,89
136,85
140.04
342.13
2044.5E
Fob -Jun
FebJun
2O • �•.[• ��� O '
11
U
s
Noftk
Loamy Sand
11
0-6
Com
34
Bu
3.91
132.94
e37.52
Feb-Jwn
^Ot�(L
12
17.00
Norfolk
Loamy Sand
12
0-6
Cam
34
Bu
3.91
13294
2259.98
Fob -Jun
J �4\` f
_
13
27
Norfolk
Loamy Sand
13
2-6
Cam
111
Bu
1.14
126.54
341.6E
Feb -Jun
=
14
4.1
Norfolk
Loamy Sand
14
2-6
Com
III
Bu
1.14
128.54
518.81
Feb -Jun
:SE
' •
264 •
15
7.5
Norfolk
Loamy Sand
15
2-6
Com
III
Bu
1.14
126.$4
949.05
FebJun
•
� • ti Robbins
- •
86.40
Norfo[krt3oldsboro
Sandy IoamlL.oamy Sand Ease. Prop,
0.6
Cum
120
Bu
1. 14
i36.80
9083.52
Feb -Jun
• It��lf i �•
1
5.3
GddsborofNorfolk
Sandy Loam
1
0-2
WheetlRy
2
Tons
50
100.00
630.00
Sep -Mar
�if9/ .•;+r�l � ���• 1 y
2
10.1
Norfolk
Loamy Sand
2
2-6
WbeatRye
2
Tans
50
100.00
1010.00
Sep-Mer
�r To ......a ♦�
3
13.0 GoklsbaraJNorl WE!lbh
Sandy kramA.oamy Sand
3
0-2
WheAmys
2
Torn
50
100.00
1300.00
Sep.Mar
M. S PFN�:�''
4
8.30
Narfa[k
Loamy sand
4
D s
WheatlRye
2
Tons
50
100,00
s30.00
Sep -Mar
•�f"ffff
5
14.00
OddsbormMifolk
Sandy kmm&oamy Sand
5
D-2
WhestlRys
2
Tons
50
100.00
1e0 0.D0
Sep -Mar
flit}'�f,�
6
46.10 GoldsborolNorlbWRains Sandy loamlLoamy Sand
6
0-2
WheatlRye
2
Tons
50
100.00
4610.00
Sep -Mar.
r/ b
3 }7
7
2,50
Norfolk
Loamy Sand
7
0-2
WheaffRye
2
'tans
s0
100.00
2%00
SOP -Mar
III!!!/
8
14,6
No foWains
Loamy Sand
8
0-2
Wbeavye�
2
Tons
50
100.00
1460.00
Sep -Mar
11
6.3
Norfolk
Loamy Sand
11
WheallRya
2
Tons
s0
100.00
630.00
S•p-Mar
/J
12
17.00
Norfolk
Loamy Sand
12
0-6
Wh-VRye
2
Tons
50
100.00
1700,00
S"ar
13
2.7
Norfolk
LoamySwd
13
2-9
WheatlRys
2
Tons
50
100.00
270.00
Sep -Mar
14
4.1
Norfolk
Loamy Sand
14
2-6
WheaV"
2
Tote
50
100,00
410.00
Sep -Alan
15
7.5
Norfolk
Loamy Sand
15
2-6
WheavRys
2
Tons
50
100.00
750.00
Sep -Mar
Robbins
66.40
NorfoWoklsboro
Sandy loamAxamy Sand Ease. Prop.
0-6
WheaURys
2
Torts
50
100.00
6640.00
Sep -Mar
217.9
Total Ibs N vdflzed:
47769.77
Welghlyd Average:
21913
Indicates an
assumed R.Y.E
Nktosen
Produced from Effluent
Nltsogen
Producedfrom
Sdudue
Sludge
#
lbs H
Yen
W'LAvg.
ibsfun(t
Animals
Produced
Acres
Blo1F Site
1 219.2279376
0.89
2500
2200
10.03521734
#of animal units:
25M
3 219.2279376
0.88
25M
B600
30.10565201
lbs Nfanimal unit
5.4
6 219.227937E
0.68
2500
13200
00.21130402
lbs N praduaad:
13500
9 219,2279370
0.88
25M
19900
90,31695603
Nursery$fbe
1 219.2279378
0.076
7630
583.68
Z662434389
# of animal units:
7680
3 219.2279370
0.076
7880
1751.04
7.9a7303168
lbs Nfanimalunit
0,48
8 219.2279376
0.076
7680
350108
15.97460633
lbs N produced:
38864
9 219.2279376
0.070
7680
5253.12
23.9E19095
GIF Site
f 219.Y279376
0,37
8"0
3196.8
14.58208308
9 of animal unites'
8640
3 219.2279379
0.37
W40
9590.4
43.74824925
lbs Nlanimal unit
23
B 219.2279376
0.37
BB40
19180.8
87.4924985
Ibs N praducee
19972
9 219.2279376
0,37
6840
2MI.2
131.2M?07
s
Boar Stud Slte
1 219.2279376
0,61
170
103.7
0.473023654
# of animal units:
170
3 219.2279M
0.81
170
311A
1.419070961
lbs Nfanimal unit
3.7
6 219.2279379
0.61
170
6=2
2838141921
lbs N produced
em
9 219.2279378
0.61
170
933.3
4.257212882
Total Ibs N Produced from Efffumd:
37687AG
Total
lbs N Produced
from Sludge fit 3
Deficit (-pSurptus (+) Ltdllred (lbs)-
1008237
Deficit (-ySurplus (+) Utilized (lbs):
.817G 7

Technical Specialist Certification
L As a technical specialist designated by the North Carolina Soil and Water Conservation Commission pursuant to 15A
NCAC 6H .0104, I certify that the animal waste management system for the farm named above has an animal waste
management plan that meets or exceeds standards and specifications of the Division of Water Quality as specified in 15A
NCAC 2T .1300 (formerly 2H .0217) and the USDA -Natural Resources Conservation Service and/or the North Carolina
Soil and Water Conservation Commission pursuant to 15A NCAC 2T .1300 (formerly 2H .0217) and 15A NCAC 6F .0101-
.0105. The following elements are included in the plan as applicable. While each category designates a technical specialist
who may sign each certification (SD, S1, WUP, RC, 1), the technical specialist should only certify parts for which they are
technically competent.
II. Certification of Design
A) Collection Storage, Treatment System
Check the appropriate box
o Existing facility without retrofit (SD or WUP)
Storage volume is adequate for operation capacity; storage capability consistent with waste utilization
requirements.
o New, expanded or retrofitted facility (SD)
Animal waste storage and treatment structures, such as but not limited to collection systems, lagoons and
ponds, have been designed to meet or exceed the minimum standards and specifications.
Name of Technical Specialist (Please Print):
Affiliation Date Work Completed:
Address (Agency): Phone No.:
Signature: Date:
D) Land Application Site (WUP)
The plan provides for minimum separations (buffers); adequate amount of land for waste utilization; chosen crop
is suitable for waste management; and the hydraulic and nutrient loading rates are appropriate for the site and
receiving crop.
Name of Technical Specialist (Please Print): L. M. Safiey, Jr., Ph. D., P. E.
Affiliation Agri -Waste Technology, Inc. Date Work Completed:
Address (Agency): 5400 Etta Burke
C) Runoff Controls from Exterior Lots
Check the appropriate box
3/17/06
NC 27606- Phone No.: 919-859-0669
Date: e-12
o Facility without exterior lots (SD or WUP or RC)
This facility does not contain any exterior lots.
RECEIVED I DENR I DWQ
Aquifer Protection Section
a Facility with exterior lots (RC) MAR 3 0 2009
Methods to minimize the run off of pollutants from lounging and heavy use areas have been designed in
accordance with technical standards developed by NRCS.
Name of Technical Specialist (Please Print):
Affiliation Date Work Completed:
Address (Agency): Phone No.:
Signature: Date:
AWC - September 18, 2006 2

Technical Specialist Certification
L As a technical specialist designated by the North Carolina Soil and Water Conservation Commission pursuant to 15A
NCAC 6H .0104, I certify that the animal waste management system for the farm named above has an animal waste
management plan that meets or exceeds standards and specifications of the Division of Water Quality as specified in 15A
NCAC 2T .1300 (formerly 2H .0217) and the USDA -Natural Resources Conservation Service and/or the North Carolina
Soil and Water Conservation Commission pursuant to 15A NCAC 2T .1300 (formerly 2H .0217) and 15A NCAC 6F .0101-
.0105. The following elements are included in the plan as applicable. While each category designates a technical specialist
who may sign each certification (SD, SI, WUP, RC, 1), the technical specialist should only certify parts for which they are
technically competent.
H. Certification of Design
A) Collection, Storatre, Treatment System
Check the appropriate box
o Existing facility without retrofit (SD or WUP)
Storage volume is adequate for operation capacity; storage capability consistent with waste utilization
requirements.
o New, expanded_ or retrofitted facility (SD)
Animal waste storage and treatment structures, such as but not limited to collection systems, lagoons and
ponds, have been designed to meet or exceed the minimum standards and specifications.
Name of Technical Specialist (Please Print):
Affiliation Date Work Completed:
Address (Agency): Phone No.:
Signature:. Date:
B) Land Application Site (WUP)
The plan provides for minimum separations (buffers); adequate amount of land for waste utilization; chosen crop
is suitable for waste management; and the hydraulic and nutrient loading rates are appropriate for the site and
receiving crop.
Name of Technical Specialist (Please Print): L. M. Safley, Jr., Pb. D., P. E.
Affiliation Agri -Waste Technology, Inc. Date Work Completed: 4/26/06
Address (Agency): 5400 Etta 5urke Court, Ral i h NC 27606 Phone No.: 919-859-0669
Signature: F Date:
C) Runoff Controls from Exterior Lots
Check the appropriate box RECEIVED 1 DENR I DWQ
o Facilfty without exterior lots (SD or WUP or RC) Aquifer pratPinn
SPrtion
This facility does not contain any exterior lots. MAR 3 0 Z009
o Facility with exterior lots (RC)
Methods to minimize the run off of pollutants from lounging and heavy use areas have been designed in
accordance with technical standards developed by NRCS.
Name of Technical Specialist (Please Print):
Affiliation Date Work Completed:_
Address (Agency): Phone No.:
Signature: Date:
AWC - September 18, 2006 2

ot4ty VA i\ul {Ri �.AR Vulisl
Department of Environment and Natural Resources
Division of Water Quality
Animal Waste Management Systems
NPDES Short Form B — Existing Facility
The following questions have been completed utilizing information on file with the Division. 'Please review the
info::Xmation:foi•;copleteuess,�aad;�rtiakeany�carrectiot�s;that are, appropriate.; 1Cf.a .question his>not been
completed by the Divisiont.ptease-answer:it to f he,best oSxoar ability. l.Do not. leans aay.question,unanswered.
1
2
3
4
Id
6
7
Facility Number: Facility Number: 33 - 58 or Permit Number: NCA233058
Facility Name: Hanor Multiplier
Landowner's name (must :match the name on the Certified Animal Waste Management Plan): The Hanor
Company
Landowner's Mailing address: ^
Telephone Number (include area code): 919-443-703 8
County where facility is located: Edgecombe
Farm Manager's name (if different from Landowner):
Farm Manager's telephone number (include area code):
Zip:-=04,1Q7 2 d1
y37-
0
Submit a copy of the most recent Waste Utilization Plan for this facility with. this application. .The Waste
Utilization Plan must be signed by the owner and a technical specialist.
I attest that this application has been reviewed by me and is accurate and complete to. the best! of my knowledge. I
understand that if all required parts of this application are -not completed and that if all required supporting
information and attachments are not included, this application package will be returned to me as incomplete. Note:
In accordance with NC General Statutes 143-215.6A and 143-215.6B, any person who knowingly makes any false
statement, representation, or certification in any application shall be guilty of a Class .2 misdemeanor which may
include a fine not to exceed $10,000 as well as civil penalties up to $25,000 per violation. (18 U.S.C. Section 1001
provides a punishment by a fine of not more than $10,000 or imprisonment of not more than 5 years, or both for a
similar offense.)
Printed Name of Signing Official (Landowner, or .if multiple Landowners, all landowners should sign. If
Landowner is a corporation, signature should be by a principal executive officer of the corporation):
Name: 01-ma nrX41 scot/ Q_(5 Title: NC OA):8_AAL�111
(r
n 00 11 Q I MAgo
Signature:
Date: 1 ~ o) G -�
Tf]E COMPEETE� APPLICAMN SHOULD BE SENT TO THE FOLLOWING ADDRESS:
NORTH_ CAROLINA DIVISION OF WATER QUALITY
WATER QUALITY SECTION
NON -DISCHARGE PERMITTING UNIT
1617 MAIL SERVICE CENTER RECEIVED I DENR I DWQ
RALEIGH, NORTH CAROLINA 27699-1617 Aquifer Protection Section
TELEPHONE NUMBER: [phone] FAX NUMBER: (9I9) 715-60AR
VAR 3 4 2049
NPDES SHORT FORM B - Existing

Technical Specialist Certification
I. As a technical specialist designated by the North Carolina Soil and Water Conserva(ion.Contmissiun pursuant tv 15,E
NCAC 6F .0005, 1 certify that the animal waste management system for the farm Hamad above has an animal waste
management plan that meets- or exceeds standards and specifications of the Division of Environmental Management
(DEM) as specified in 15A NCAC 214.0217 and the USDA -Natural Resources Conservation Service (N[RCS) and/or the
North Carolina Soil and Water Conservation Commission pursuant to 15A NCAC 2H.0217 and 15A NCAC 6F .0001-
-0005. The following elements an included in the plan as applicable. While each category designates a technical specialist
who may sign eacti certification (SD, SJ, WUP, RC, [i, the technical specialist should only certify parts for which they are
technically competent.
II.. Certification of Design
A) Collection, Stornge,.Treatment System
Check the appropriate box
Ll Existing facility without retrofit (SD or Will')
Storage volume is adequate for operation capacity; storage capability consistent witb waste udlizadon
requirements.
0 News expae$ed„or retrofitted facility (SD)
Animal waste storage and treatment structures, such as but not limited to collection systems, lagoons and ponds,
have been designed to meet or -exceed the minimum standards and specifications.
Name of Technical Specialist (Please Print):
Affiliation Date Work Completed;
Address (Agency): Phone No.:
'Signature: Date:
B) Land ApRileation Site (WUP)
The plan provides for mlain*uut separations (buffers); adequate amount of land for waste utilization; chosen crop Is
suitable for waste management; hydraulic and nutrient loading rates.
Name of Technical Specialist (Please Print) L. M, Safl.ey Jr. , PhD. P. E.
Afflllation Agri—WastTechnology, Inc. Date Work Completed:
Address
Signature
Q RunafControls from Exterl_o_r Lots
Check the appropriate box
RECEIVED / DENR / DWQ
Aquifer Protection Section
13 Facility without exterior 1Qts (SD or WUP or RC) MAR 3 0 2009.
This facility does not contain* any exterior lots.
EacilitX with trxtedor lots (RC)
Methods to minimize the run off of pollutants from lounging and heavy use areas have been designed in
accordance with technical standards developed by MRCS.
Name of Technical Specialist (Please Print): T,._m..� sales Ir ... PhD., E. F .
Affilindo
Address (
Signature
AWC -- Ai
Work Completed:
Phone u)_: 91 859-0669
Date: Z' ��

12. Land Application/Waste Utilization Plan
Land application of the lagoon liquid is the final step in this operation's waste management
system. The goal of the Land Application/Waste Utilization Plan (LAVWP) is to apply nutrients
at rates that do not exceed agronomic rates. By obtaining this goal, the quantity of nutrients that
is applied is effectively utilized by the crops that are grown on the fields.
12.1 Application Method
The land application area at the DN site is divided into 24 application fields. Traveling gun and
center pivot irrigation will be utilized to apply lagoon liquid.
12.2 Nitrogen Production
The amount of nitrogen produced by the facilities is estimated by using NRCS Standard 633.
This standard estimates that 5.4 pounds of Plant Available Nitrogen (PAN) per sow per year is
produced from a Farrow to Wean operation, 6.5 pounds of PAN per sow per year is produced
from a Farrow to Feeder operation. and 2.3 pounds of PAN per head per year is produced from a
Feeder to Finish operation. Therefore, the 2,500 sows will produce 13,500 (2,500 sows x 5.4
lbs/sow) pounds of PAN on an annual basis. The 7,680 nursery pigs will produce 3,686.4 (7,680
head x 0.48 lbs/head) pounds of PAN on an annual basis. The 8,640 finisher pigs will produce
19,872 (8,640 head x 2.3 lbs/head) pounds of PAN on an annual basis. The 170 boars will
produce 629 (170 head x 3.7 lbs/head) pounds on an annual basis. The combined PAN
production from the facilities will be approximately 37,687.4 lbs of PAN per year (see Table 12-
1).
12-1

Table 12-1. Plant Available Nitrogen (PAN) Production At The DN Site
Facility
PAN Produced Per Head Per
Year (lb PAN/hd-yr)
Total PAN Produced
(lb PAN/yr)
2,500 Sow
5.4
13,500
7,680 head nursery
0.48
3,686.4
8,640 head finisher
2.3
19,872
170 Boars
3.7
629
TOTAL:
37,687A
A copy of the applicable pages from NRCS Standard 633 can be found in Attachment 3.
The amount of nitrogen in the sludge is also estimated from MRCS Standard 633 assuming
broadcast application. The quantity of PAN that will be available from the lagoon sludge (all
lagoons) on an annual basis estimated to be 6,084 pounds based on NRCS Standard 633. Table
12-2 displays the amount of PAN in the sludge generated by each facility and for the entire site on
an annual basis. In order to properly determine the application rate for the sludge, it will be
analyzed when it is to be removed and applied at the agronomic uptake rate of the crops that are
grown on the application fields.
Table 12-2. Plant Available Nitrogen In Sludge (Annual Basis)
Facility
PAN Produce]IMn
Sludge'Sludge
(lb PAN/hd-
PAN Produced In
Per Year
(lb PAN/yr)
2,500 Sow
0.88
2,200
7,680 head nursery
0.076
583.7
8,640 head finisher
0.37
3,197
170 Boars
0.61
103.7
TOTAL:
6,084.4
'Assumes broadcast application of sludge.
12-2

12.3 Nitrogen Utilization
The cultivated areas on the DN property consist of 24 separate fields containing approximately
216.5 effective wettable acres available for application of lagoon liquid.
The amount of Plant Available Nitrogen (PAN) which could be effectively utilized by the crops, is
dependant on the realistic expected crop yield for the dominant soil type present in each of the
fields, and the recommended PAN per unit of yield to that particular crop. The realistic expected
crop yields were determined for each soil type found in the application fields. The yield used for
overseeded wheat/rye is 2 tons/acre.
Information concerning the realistic expected yields and the nitrogen application rate are also
included in Attachment 5.
The pounds of plant available nitrogen (PAN) that each field can utilize was calculated using a
one year crop rotation. For example, a rotation of corn followed by wheat/rye is considered. For
the portion of Field 1 that is Goldsboro soil the pounds of PAN that could be utilized in one year
by growing corn would be 640:63 lbs PAN, as demonstrated by the following calculations.
4.1 acres x 125 bu corn x 1.25 tb PAN 640.63 lbs PAN
ac bu corn
Similarly, the PAN requirement for the rye portion of the rotation is 410 lbs PAN.
The total pounds of PAN that all application fields with their respective crops could -utilize is
51,108.4 lbs of PAN per year (see Spreadsheet 12-1). According to NRCS design calculations,
the DN facilities will produce a total of 37,6871bs of PAN in lagoon liquid each year. Therefore,
sufficient area is available in the application fields on the property to utilize all of the PAN in the
lagoon liquid that must be applied yearly. Sludge utilization and application is discussed in
Section 12.5.
12-3

�i gg r�r�gg55 §g y�y r� as aaa a aaaraa 1a.a5x
iX4l� iA � i Y k 4b� y � l�Xa yuriLLd �t{LL� $$u'
•sue: s� x� ����������� " tl ��yow om Moo N N N10N f0 ob w
b',.R�9�fgr'�R�YrdR$PetSS$R�P�K9K8$8t8S8Py8888e P8888S$&'a,$�e w e8 ��
ogs vms nBRi
�n(alMf1O OOCOaPOP$8$$ssssssgssgsssssgss o0o4$$ss-Rase
8$Sn�t33ggoeaxxaaa�aaaaags83sss3s8sa-------88888 T
7«
$ 8$'r8851 lag a s2gaS Bass e89C"a3
N K K K K
oeeaeee00000
33 q�
9y�
g.- rvn.�n ow _ r r ■!L � � �YA[� Yl� W � � ' ••__ _���Y7�� W � W W �fY
pass€€sssssss€€ss
1 JIMAH11.11111111
��'ti•P•Ft�a'Qi��w��8�8$f'e,.d.,oar'.,8��'��%i�nRe��P^.PB.�i,�BB�e����
. --mmaammmoma�e- --mm�ammmmmeem
z
a$
• � 4
$$$a 1 MA
�A$ It
N O

12.4 Application of Lagoon Liquid
Prior to the application of lagoon liquid, the following items will be evaluated and recorded on
Form 8 "Pre -Application Checklist" (included in Attachment 7).
• Evaluation of field records to verify that the nitrogen goal for the given crop
has not been exceeded.
• Determination of amount of lagoon liquid to apply to the field.
• Evaluation of lagoon to determine if sufficient liquid volume exists (above
minimum pumpdown level) to achievedesired application.
In addition, the following general guidelines have been developed for land application of
wastewater.
• No runoff from the application site
• The soil is dry enough to apply with no deep seepage or runoff
• Wastewater will be applied to land with a growing crop or on land where a crop
will be planted within 30 days.
• Wastewater be applied at a rate (inches/hour) that is less than the soil infiltration
rate.
According to information supplied by The Hanor Company, Inc. the irrigation system will consist
of a mobile irrigation pump which can be transferred from lagoon to lagoon. Mainline attachment
points, located on the berm of the lagoon, will transfer lagoon liquid to a 6", Class 200, PVC
mainline which runs to the irrigated fields. The pump will be capable of supplying 650 gallons per
minute to a center pivot at a delivery pressure of approximately 35 psi and 300 to 250 gallons per
minute to the traveling gun at a delivery pressure of approximately 70 to 80 psi. The traveling
gun is a Ag-Rain T37A.
In order to avoid deep seepage or runoff from the application fields, the maximum application at
any one time should be 0.50 inches.
12-5

The Hanor _ComU�iv. Inc. -
"r1
_ D.u/+rr Neer+
P116M
I
M I
� •\ Lj�rw�+.wwr
mom
ar.n '
A v +'sit'"•
77- =-= DIA,lWir%
IA
i
i
N
n'riirT ha+ D.n
Daughter Nucleus Farm
Edgecombe County, North Carolina
Irrigation Option 2
.K
DN
Fielda Narthem Tr oat
t
5.9
4.1
52
14.9
11.1
12.8
18.3
13.8
15.2
4
20.6
7.1
8.3
5
14.8
12.1
14.9
6
36.2
46.3
48.6
7
6.6
0
a
a
19.9
14.4
18.6
9
0.4
0
0
11
7.7
6.0
6.8
12
21.8
1S.2
18
13
5.2
a
0
14
4.9
3.4
4.2
15
9.8
7.5
8.4
DN
Fields Sotithem Tract
rhm
T bw fkw
Amess
91
&11
4.7
5.5
82
2.3
1.1
1.4
83
5.5
3
4.1
94
0.76
0.4
0.6
85
22.4
17.6
1 a_9
96
28.2
20.8
27.8
87
13.0
8.6
10.2
ea
1.7
1.3
1.5
89
Z.3
1.8
2.1
a10
1.7
1.1
1.2
811
10.0
8.7
9.7
812
1 9.2
0.8
7.8
Legend
Road/ Hlgh "
_.._...
Stream
Properly Una
r
Structure
.`
Trom
S1ramp
EYtearrg P(peQne
-----
Proposed P4mffn4
!s
Building
®
l.opeen
--
DraTnoge Ditch
Pond
EAZ
year Flood
=yam
Plain
Pfrat
-••-- --
Wetted Acreage
Effected Acreage
li
Traveler Gum
G
Carnage
-- DN Farm Site Map
sepeem7s. caaaq, imF=j Iri
© 4v�-eiu.r. sres.resc a
we Tot. ssti a a�.
Tr►rea Tra WON 7.f1 r
.r-r.rr �

12.5 Application of Sludge
When the Ievel of sludge in the lagoon has accumulated to the extent that it begins to infringe on
the required treatment volume, the sludge will be removed. The sludge will be removed by means
of an floating dredge, pumped into a leak -proof tanker trucks and transported to the application
areas. Some of the application areas will be located at another nearby site (The Whitakers Site)
owned by The Hanor Company, Inc.
It may be desirable to construct a temporary, flexible membrane lined settling basin to store the
sludge material and to allow free liquid to drain back into the lagoon. In this case, the floating
dredge would pump the material to the temporary containment basin, liquid would be allowed
drain back into the lagoon, and the sludge would then be pumped from the containment basin into
leak -proof trucks for transport to the sludge application sites.
When the sludge is applied at the application site, the sludge will be broadcast applied from the
trucks. Surveyor's flags will be used to indicate the proper buffers from the sludge application
areas.
Sludge will be applied according to the following guidelines.
• Evaluation of field records to verify that the nitrogen goal for the given crop
has not been exceeded.
• Determination of amount of sludge to apply to the field.
No runoff from the application site
• The soil is dry enough to apply with no deep seepage or runoff
• Sludge will be applied to land with a growing crop or on land where a crop will be
planted within 30 days.
• All applicable buffers will be observed.
Sludge will be applied to all application fields since all nitrogen applied via effluent can be utilized
by the crops without meeting the maximum nitrogen uptake of the crops. Ail the fields will be
cultivated in grass or corn overseeded with rye. Table 12-6 displays the PAN produced via
effluent and sludge and the PAN utilization by crops.
12-7

Table 12-6. Nitrogen Balance Pot DN Site Including Sludge
PAN Produced -
Effluent
PAN Produced -
Sludge (annually)
Total PAN
Produced
PAN Utilized
By Crops
Deficit (-)/Surplus
(+) Utilized (lbs)
37,687 lb
L 6,084 lb 43,771 lb
51,108 lb
7,337 lb
12.6 Summary of Waste Production and Application
Based on the steady state live animal population of the site, approximately 37,687 lbs of Plant
Available Nitrogen (PAN) are produced in the lagoon liquid each year. Additionally, 6,084 lbs of
PAN will be produced in the lagoon sludge every year. The total of PAN produced is 43,771 lb.
The lagoon liquid application system will cover 216.5 acres with a potential yearly PAN uptake
(based on current crops) of 51,108 pounds. Changes to the crop rotation on some fields may be
necessary for future years based on economic and agronomic factors.
12-8

AWr
Agri Waste Technology, Inc.
5400 Etta Burke Court
.Raleigh, North Carolina 27606
Phone: [phone]
Fax: [phone]
Email: awtpagriwaste.com
June 30, 2004
Memorandum
TO: Mr. Greg Sconyers, HANOR - NC
Mr. Doug Johnson, HANOR - NC
FROM: Chris Mosley, AWT
SUBJECT: PLAT Evaluation for Daughter Nucleus, Shellbank and Whitakers
Enclosed are the Phosphorus Loss Assessment Tool (PLAT) Completion forms for Daughter
Nucleus, Shellbank and Whitakers. The PLAT output for each of the individual fields is
included behind the respective completion forms. Keep these materials on site with the
Certified Animal Waste Management Plans.
Waste plans with fields having a high or very high rating (Daughter Nucleus) will have to be
modified to address phosphorus loss by the next permit cycle beginning July, 2007. It is our
recommendation that Hanor refrains from applying effluent to Field B4 at Daughter Nucleus out
of an abundance of caution. Additionally, many fields (see list below) at the three farms have not
received effluent applications in the last couple of years and have low STP (P-I).
Daughter Nucleus: Fields 1, 2, 7, 9, 11, 14, and 15
Shellbank: Fields 1, 2, 3, 5, 6, 7, 9, 10, 12, 20 and 21
Whitakers: Fields 24,' 25 and 26
If possible, effluent applications should be made such that the effluent is more evenly distributed
among the fields in the waste management plans so that phosphorus will not be an issue in the
years to come.
RECEIVED 1 DENR 1 DWQ
Aquifor Protection Section
MAR 3 0 2009
"Concepts in Agricultural Byproduct Utilization"

The following fields need to be soil sampled (44" depth) because they have not been
sampled in the last three years:
Shellbank: Field 20 and 21
Whitakers: Field 21 and 25
When the sampling has been accomplished, please let me know so I can obtain results from the
lab.
Even though most of the fields at the farms have a low P Rating, it is still important to monitor
effluent applications, continue to update the PLAT as new soil samples are taken (soil samples
must stay current - within last 3 years) and adjust management as needed. If you have any
questions, please don't hesitate to call.
2110s4.wpd
2

Phospholrus Loss Assessment Tool Completion
Name of Facility: me ganvr Co., 13w., sUVA l �anl[-.Fare Facility Number• FACA . 233002
Owner(s) Name: Greer Seonvers. ooerajnsyam!r . Phone No* am_ga2-TQ3a_—
Mailing Address: 6717 NC 97 hest, Routey,Z, Box 117, Mttleboro, NC 27809
Check the appropriate bog below, and sign at the bottom:
®' No fields received a high or very high rating.
❑ Yes, the Melds listed below received a high or very high rating.
Field Number Size (Acres) R.atin (ffigh or Ym Hi h
Please use as many additional attachment forms (PLAT-�A-I0-31-03) as needed for additional fields.
By completing the above section 'and any additional attachments and by signing this form, the facility
owner and Technical Specialist acknowledge all application fields were evaluated using the Phosphorus
Loss Assessment Tool. All necessary calculations'wcre completed to conduct the Assessment A copy will
be kept .on site with the Certified Animal Waste Management Plan.. Any future rnodifications must be
approved by a technical specialist and bled with the Soil and Water Conservation District prior to
implementation.'. Waste plans with fields having a. high or very high rating will have to be modified to
address.phosphorus loss by the next permit cycle beginning July, 2007.
Owner, Name: soonpers , o xa Manager
Owner Signature: D;
Technical Specialist Name: -Lawson K: ley
Technical Specialist Signature:S4A D;
Affiliation:_ Agri-*aste Tecbnologyl_ Tnc: _ _ _ -Phone No:9I9-859-0669
Submit this form to: .�°��N CARQ��
Attn: Keith Laricic .� .••••••.,
Non -Discharge Compliance and Enforcement Unit�`� .•'� $$f
NC Division of Water Quality /}
1617 Mail Servkc Center
Raleigh, NC 276W 1617 1026 Y 0�
MAT:12-11-03 RECEIVED/ 1 DENR I DWQ r'••r9�y'••f*CI NE�:�''•-i
•., soh ......A���,.•
Aquifer ?rotectian SeCtlorl Nj, S
. .. MAR 3 0 2009.-

NCANAT Version: 1.62
PLAT Results For: Edgecombe 6/25/2004 9:31:36 AM
Ca- _.idar Year:
County:
Producer Identifier:
Tract Number:
Field Number:
Soil Series:
Crop:
Fertilizers:
applications
Soil Loss:
Receiving Slope Distance
Soil Test 0" - 4"
WV_Fac for ( DATABASE )
Artificial Drainage System
Hydrologic Condition:
PARTICULATE P = 3
S" "RLE P = 5
LEACHATE P - 0
SOURCE P - 0
TOTAL P RATING = 8 (LOW)
INPUTS
2004
Edgecombe
Hanor
Shellbank 1
AaA: ALTAVISTA FINE SANDY LOAM, 0 TO 3 PERCENT SLOPES
Corn (Silage) : Conservation
Tillage - minimum residue
Swine -Lagoon liquid
Yearly Applied Amount:
0 ac in
Lb P205:
53.4 lb
Application Method:
All other surface
2.55 t/ac/yr
0-9 ft
46
1.3
NO
GOOD
OUTPUTS

NCANAT Version: 1.62
PLAT Results For: Edgecombe 6/25/2004 9:34:42 AM
Cal ..dar Year:
County:
Producer Identifier
Tract Number:
Field Number:
Soil Series:
Crop:
Fertilizers:
applications
Soil Loss:
Receiving Slope Distance
Soil Test 0" - 4"
WVTFactor (DATABASE)
Artificial Drainage System:
Hydrologic Condition:
PARTICULATE P = 2
Sf tRLE P 3
LEACHATE P = 0
SOURCE P 0
DOTAL P RATING = 5 (LOW)
1
2004
Edgecombe
Hanor
Shellbank 2
AaA: ALTAVISTA FINE SANDY LOAM, 0 TO 3 PERCENT SLOPES
Corn (Silage) : Conservation Tillage - minimum residue
Swine -Lagoon liquid
Yearly Applied Amount: 0 ac in
Lb P205: 53.4 lb
Application Method: All other surface
2.55 t/ac/yr
0-9 ft
32
1.3
NO
GOOD
OUTPUTS

NCANAT Version: 1.62
PLAT Results For: Edgecombe 6/25/2004 9:36:04 AM
Ca. _�idar Year:
County:
Producer Identifier:
Tract Number:
Field Number:
Soil Series:
Crop:
Fertilizers:
applications
Soil Loss:
Receiving Slope Distance
Soil Test 0" - 4"
WV Factor (DATABASE)
Artificial Drainage System:
Hydrologic Condition:
PARTICULATE P = 4
S" "ALE P = 11
LEACHATE P - 0
SOURCE P = 0
TOTAL P RATING = 15 (LOW)
INPUTS
2004
Edge c ombe
Hanor
Shellbank 3
Ro: ROANOKE LOAM
Corn (Silage) : Conservation Tillage - minimum residue
Swine -Lagoon liquid
Yearly Applied Amount: 0 ac in
Lb P205: 53.4 lb
Application Method: All other surface
2.58 t/ac/yr
0-9 ft
66
1.2
NO
GOOD
OUTPUTS

NCANAT Version: 1.62
PLAT Results For: Edgecombe 6/25/2004 9:37:00 AM
Cal. _ndar Year:
County:
Producer Identifier
Tract Number:
Field Number:
Soil Series:
Crop:
Fertilizers:
applications
Soil Loss:
Receiving Slope Distance
Soil, Test 0" - 4"
WV Factor (DATABASE)
Hydrologic Condition:
PARTICULATE P = 8
SOLUBLE P = 6
Li- LATE P - 0
SOURCE P = 0
TOTAL P RATING = 14 (LOW)
INPUTS
2004
Edgecombe
Hanor
Shellbank 4
WkB: WICKHAM SANDY LOAM, 0 TO 4 PERCENT SLOPES
Corn (Silage) : Conservation Tillage - minimum residue
Swine -Lagoon liquid
Yearly Applied Amount: 0 ac in
Lb P205: 53.4 lb
Application Method: All other surface
3.67 t/ac/yr
0-9 ft
123
1.3
GOOD
OUTPUTS

NCANAT Version: 1.62
PLAT Results For: Edgecombe
6/25/2004 9:37:43 AM
Ca-L_:idar Year:
County:
Producer Identifier
Tract Number:
Field Number:
Soil Series:
Crop:
Fertilizers:
applications
Soil Loss:
Receiving Slope Distance
Soil Test 0" - 4"
WV -Factor (DATABASE)
Artificial Drainage System:
Hydrologic Condition:
PARTICULATE P = 2
SC T'QLE P = 4
LEACHATE P = 0
SOURCE P = 0
TOTAL P RATING = 6 (LOW)
INPUTS
2004
Edgecombe
Hanor
Shellbank 5
AaA: ALTAVISTA FINE SANDY LOAM, 0 TO 3 PERCENT SLOPES
Corn (Silage) : Conservation Tillage - minimum residue
Swine -Lagoon liquid
Yearly Applied Amount: 0 ac in
Lb P205: 53.4 lb
Application Method: All other surface
2.55 t/ac/yr
0-9 ft
40
1.3
NO
GOOD
OUTPUTS

NCANAT Version: 1.62
PLAT Results For: Edgecombe
6/25/2004 9:38:54 AM
Cal�,idar Year:
County:
Producer Identifier
Tract Number:
Field Number:
Soil Series:
Crop:
Fertilizers:
applications
Soil Loss:
Receiving Slope Distance
Soil Test 0" - 4"
WV Factor (DATABASE)
Artificial Drainage System
Hydrologic Condition:
PARTICULATE P 4
Sr 'LE P - 6
LEACHATE P - 0
SOURCE P - 0
TOTAL P RATING = 10 (LOW)
INPUTS
2004
Edgecombe
Hanor
Shellbank 6
AaA: ALTAVISTA FINE SANDY LOAM, 0 TO 3 PERCENT SLOPES
Corn (Silage) : Conservation Tillage - minimum residue
Swine --Lagoon liquid
Yearly Applied Amount: 0 ac in
Lb P205: 53.4 lb
Application Method: All other surface
2.55 t/ac/yr
0-9 ft
64
1.3
NO
GOOD
OUTPUTS

NCANAT Version: 1.62
PLAT Results For: Edgecombe 6/25/2004 9:39:20 AM
INPUTS
Car�.idar Year:
2004
County:
Edgecombe
Producer Identifier:
Hanor
Tract Number:
Field Number:
Shellbank 7
Soil Series:
AaA: ALTAVISTA FINE SANDY LOAM, 0 TO 3 PERCENT SLOPES
Crop:
Corn (Silage) Conservation
Tillage - minimum residue
Fertilizers:
Swine -Lagoon liquid
Yearly Applied Amount:
0 ac in
Lb P205:
53.4 lb
Application Method:
All other surface
applications
Soil Loss:
2.55 t/ac/yr
Receiving Slope Distance
0--9 ft
Soil Test 0" - 4"
50
WV_Factor (DATABASE)
1.3
Artificial Drainage System:
NO
Hydrologic Condition:
GOOD
OUTPUTS
PARTICULATE P =
3
S' --.LE P =
5
LEACHATE P =
0
SOURCE P -
0
TOTAL P RATING =
8 (LOW)

NCANAT Version: 1.62
PLAT Results For: Edgecombe 6/25/2004 9:40:32 AM
Ca.-...idar Year:
County:
Producer Identifier
Tract Number:
Field Number:
Soil Series:
Crop:
Fertilizers:
applications
Soil Loss:
Receiving Slope Distance
Soil Test 0" - 4"
WV_Factor (DATABASE)
Artificial Drainage System
Hydrologic Condition:
PARTICULATE P = 7
SC 'RLE P - 12
LEACHATE P = 0
SOURCE P = 0
TOTAL P RATING = 19 (LOW)
INPUTS
2004
Edgecombe
Hanor
Shellbank 8
AaA: ALTAVISTA FINE SANDY LOAM, 0 TO 3 PERCENT SLOPES
Corn (Silage) : Conservation Tillage - minimum residue
Swine -Lagoon liquid
Yearly Applied Amount: 0 ac in
Lb P205: 53.4 lb
Application Method: All other surface
2.55 t/ac/yr
0-9 ft
117
1.3
NO
GOOD
OUTPUTS

NCANAT Version: 1.62
PLAT Results For: Edgecombe 6/25/2004 9:41:06 AM
Caa _.idar Year:
County:
Producer Identifier
Tract Number:
Field Number:
Soil Series:
Crop:
Fertilizers:
applications
Soil Loss:
Receiving Slope Distance
Soil Test 0" -- 4"
WV —Factor (DATABASE)
Hydrologic Condition:
PARTICULATE P = 2
SOLUBLE P - 1
Ll_ :ATE P - 0
SOURCE P = 0
TOTAL P RATING = 3 (LOW)
INPUTS
2004
Edgecombe
Hanor
Shellbank 9.
StB: STATE LOAMY SAND, 0 TO 4 PERCENT SLOPES
Corn (Silage) : Conservation Tillage - minimum residue
Swine -Lagoon liquid
Yearly Applied Amount: 0 ac in
Lb P205: 53.4 lb
Application Method: All other surface
4.75 t/ac/yr
0-9 ft
27
1.3
GOOD
OUTPUTS

NCANAT Version: 1.62
PLAT Results For: Edgecombe 6/25/2004 9:43:45 AM
INPUTS
Ca_ jdar Year: 2004
County: Edgecombe
Producer Identifier: Hanor
Tract Number:
Field Number: Shellbank 10
Soil Series: WkB: WICKHAM SANDY LOAM, 0 TO 4 PERCENT SLOPES
Crop: Corn (Silage) : Conservation Tillage - minimum residue
Fertilizers: Swine -Lagoon liquid
Yearly Applied Amount: 0 ac in
Lb P205: 53.4 lb
Application Method: All other surface
applications
Soil Loss: 3.67 t/ac/yr
Receiving Slope Distance 0-9 ft
Soil Test 0" - 4" 30
WV —Factor (DATABASE) 1.3
Hydrologic Condition: GOOD
OUTPUTS
PARTICULATE P = 2
SOLUBLE P = 1
Li. ATE P W 0
SOURCE P - 0
TOTAL P RATING = 3 (LOW)

NCANAT Version: 1.62
PLAT Results For: Edgecombe 6/25/2004 9:46:11 AM
Ca, _.idar Year:
County:
Producer Identifier:
Tract Number:
Field Number:
Soil Series:
Crop:
Fertilizers:
applications
Soil Loss:
Receiving Slope Distance
Soil Test 0" - 4"
WV —Factor (DATABASE)
Soil Test 28" - 32"
WV_Factor (DATABASE)
Hydrologic Condition:
PARTICULATE P = 7
SG_ LE P = 4
LEACHATE P = 8
SOURCE P = 5
TOTAL P RATING 24 (LOW)
INPUTS
2004
Edgecombe
Hanor
Shellbank 11
TaB: TARBORO LOAMY SAND, 0 TO 6 PERCENT SLOPES
Corn (Silage) : Conservation Tillage - minimum residue
Swine -Lagoon liquid
Yearly Applied Amount: 10.64 ac in
Lb P205: 38.58 lb
Application Method: All other surface
2.95 t/ac/yr
0-9 ft
181
1.4
26
1.4
GOOD
OUTPUTS

NCANAT Version: 1.62
PLAT Results For: Edgecombe 6/25/2004 9:46:55 AM
Ca-L-ndar Year:
County:
Producer Identifier:
Tract Number:
Field Number:
Soil Series:
Crop:
Fertilizers:
applications
Soil Loss:
Receiving Slope Distance
Soil Test 0." - 4"
WV Factor (DATABASE)
Hydrologic Condition:
PARTICULATE P - 6
SOLUBLE P = 4
LL. ATE P = 0
SOURCE P = 0
TOTAL P RATING = 10 (LOW)
Wmill
2004
Edgecombe
Hanor
Shellbank 12
WkB: WICKHAM SANDY LOAM, 0 TO 4 PERCENT SLOPES
Corn (Silage) : Conservation Tillage - minimum residue
Swine -Lagoon liquid
Yearly Applied Amount: 0 ac in
Lb P205: 53.4 lb
Application Method: All other surface
3.67 t/ac/yr
0-9 ft
90
1.3
GOOD
OUTPUTS

NCANAT Version: 1.62
PLAT Results For: Edgecombe 6/25/2004 9:41:36 AM
Calendar Year:
County:
Producer Identifier:
Tract Number:
Field Number:
Soil Series:
Crop. -
Fertilizers:
applications
Soil Loss:
Receiving Slope Distance
Soil Test 0" - 4"
WV_Factor (DATABASE)
Hydrologic Condition:
PARTICULATE P = 6
SOLUBLE P = 4
L L _ -ATE P = 0
SOURCE P = 4
TOTAL P RATING W 14 (LOW)
INPUTS
2004
Edgecombe
Hanor
Shellbank 19A
WkB: WICKHAM SANDY LOAM, 0 TO 4 PERCENT SLOPES
Peanuts : Conservation Tillage - minimum residue
Swine -Lagoon liquid
Yearly Applied Amount: 1.259 ac in
Lb P2O5: 54.01 lb
Application Method: All other surface
3.67 t/ac/yr
0-9 ft
95
1.3
GOOD
OUTPUTS

NCANAT Version: 1.62
PLAT Results For: Edgecombe
6/25/2004 9:47:56 AM
Ca--ndar Year:
County:
Producer Identifier
Tract Number:
Field Number:
Soil Series:
Crop:
Fertilizers:
applications
Soil Loss:
Receiving Slope Distance
Soil Test 0" - 4"
WV_Factor (DATABASE)
Hydrologic Condition:
PARTICULATE P = 6
SOLUBLE P = 5
LL. ATE P = 0
SOURCE P - 9
TOTAL P RATING = 20 (LOW)
INPUTS
2004
Edgecombe
Hanor
Shellbank 19B
WkB: WICKHAM SANDY LOAM, 0 TO 4 PERCENT SLOPES
Corn (Silage) : Conservation Tillage - minimum residue
Swine -Lagoon liquid
Yearly Applied Amount: 3.292 ac in
Lb P205: 47.54 lb
Application Method: All other surface
3.67 t/ac/yr
0-9 ft
102
1.3
GOOD
OUTPUTS

NCANAT Version: 1.62
PLAT Results For:. Edgecombe 6/25/2004 9:48:09 AM
INPUTS
Ca_.ndar Year:
2004
County:
Edgecombe
Producer Identifier:
Hanor
Tract Number:
Field Number:
Shellbank 19C
Soil Series:
WkB: WICKHAM SANDY LOAM, 0 TO
4 PERCENT SLOPES
Crop:
Corn (Silage) : Conservation
Tillage - minimum residue
Fertilizers:
Swine -Lagoon liquid
Yearly Applied Amount:
3.226 ac in
Lb P205:
46.28 lb
Application Method:
All other surface
applications
Soil Loss:
3.67 t/ac/yr
Receiving Slope Distance
0-9 ft
Soil Test 0" - 4"
47
WV Factor (DATABASE)
1.3
Hydrologic Condition:
GOOD
OUTPUTS
PARTICULATE P - 3
SOLUBLE P = 2
L,_. ATE P = 0
SOURCE P = 8
TOTAL P RATING = 13
(LOW)

NCANAT Version: 1.62
PLAT Results For: Edgecombe 6/25/2004 9:48:21 AM
Ca_jndar Year:
County:
Producer Identifier:
Tract Number:
Field Number:
Soil Series:
Crop:
Fertilizers:
applications
Soil Loss:
Receiving Slope Distance
Soil Test 0" - 4"
WV_Factor (DATABASE)
Hydrologic Condition:
PARTICULATE P = 10
SOLUBLE P - 8
LL IATE P = 0
SOURCE P = 5
TOTAL P RATING = 23 (LOW)
INPUTS
2004
Edgecombe
Hanor
Shellbank 19D
WkB: WICKHAM SANDY LOAM, 0 TO 4 PERCENT SLOPES
Peanuts : Conservation Tillage - minimum residue
Swine -Lagoon liquid
Yearly Applied Amount: 1.967 ac in
Lb P205: 43.21 lb
Application Method: All other surface
3.67 t/ac/yr
0-9 ft
168
1.3
GOOD
OUTPUTS

NCANAT Version: 1.62
PLAT Results For: Edgecombe 6/25/2004 9:48:57 AM
C. ,ndar Year.
County:
Producer Identifier:
Tract Number:
Field Number:
Soil Series:
Crop:
Fertilizers:
applications
Soil Loss:
Receiving Slope Distance
Soil Test 0" - 4"
WV —Factor (DATABASE)
Artificial Drainage System:
Hydrologic Condition:
PARTICULATE P = 3
S(- `BLE P = 4
LEALHATE P = 0
SOURCE P = 0
DOTAL P RATING = 7 (LOW)
INPUTS
2004
Edgecombe
Hanor
Shellbank 20
Cn: CONGAREE SILT LOAM
Corn (Silage) : Conservation Tillage - minimum residue
Swine -Lagoon liquid
Yearly Applied Amount: 0 ac in
Lb P205: 53.4 lb
Application Method: All other surface
2.58 t/ac/yr
0-9 ft
57
1.25
NO
GOOD
OUTPUTS

NCANAT Version: 1.62
PLAT Results For: Edgecombe 6/25/2004 9:50:47 AM
INPUTS
C, :ndar Year: 2004
County: Edgecombe
Producer Identifier: Hanor
Tract Number:
Field Number: Shellbank 21
Soil Series: WkB: WICKHAM SANDY LOAM, 0 TO 4 PERCENT SLOPES
Crop: Corn (Silage) : Conservation Tillage - minimum residue
Fertilizers: Swine -Lagoon liquid
Yearly Applied Amount: 0 ac in
Lb P205: 53.4 lb
Application Method: All other surface
applications
Soil Loss: 3.67 t/ac/yr
Receiving Slope Distance 0-9 ft
Soil Test 0" - 4" 9
WV_Factor (DATABASE) 1.3
Hydrologic Condition: GOOD
OUTPUTS
PARTICULATE P = 1
SOLUBLE P - 0
Li iATE P = 0
SOURCE P - 0
TOTAL P RATING = 1 (LOW)

NCANAT Version: 1.62
PLAT Results For: Edgecombe
6/25/2004 9:54:01 AM
C Mndar Year:
County:
Producer Identifier:
Tract Number:
Field Number:
Soil Series:
Crop:
Fertilizers:
applications
Soil Loss:
Receiving Slope. Distance
Soil Test 0" - 4"
WV._Factor (DATABASE)
Hydrologic Condition:
PARTICULATE P 2
SOLUBLE P = 1
Ll :-IATE P = 0
SOURCE P = 2
TOTAL P RATING = 5 (LOW)
INPUTS
2004
Edgecombe
Hanor
Shellbank 22
WkB: WICKHAM SANDY LOAM, 0 TO 4 PERCENT SLOPES
Corn (Silage) : Conservation Tillage - minimum residue
Swine -Lagoon liquid
Yearly Applied Amount: 1.68 ac in
Lb P205: 18.75 lb
Application Method: All other surface
3.67 t/ac/yr
0-9 ft
31
1.3
GOOD
OUTPUTS

NCANAT Version: 1.62
PLAT Results For: Edgecombe 6/25/2004 9:56.26 AM
C, ;?ndar Year:
County:
Producer Identifier:
Tract Number:
Field Number:
Soil Series:
Crop:
Fertilizers:
applications
Soil Loss:
Receiving Slope Distance
Soil Test 0" -- 4"
WV_Factor (DATABASE)
Artificial Drainage System
Hydrologic Condition:
PARTICULATE P = 8
S' 'BLE P 1.3
LEACHATE P = 0
SOURCE P - 0
TOTAL P RATING = 21 (LOW)
INPUTS
2004
Edgecombe
Hanor
Shellbank 23
AaA: ALTAVISTA FINE SANDY LOAM, 0 TO 3 PERCENT SLOPES
Corn (Silage) : Conservation Tillage - minimum residue
Swine -Lagoon liquid
Yearly Applied Amount: 0 ac in
Lb P205: 53.4 lb
Application Method: All other surface
2.55 t/ac/yr
0-9 ft
135
1.3
NO
GOOD
OUTPUTS

l
Phosphorus Loss Assessment Tool Completion
Name of Facility: The Banor Col Inc. 'Whitakers Farm - Facility Number: n - 264021
Owner(s) Name: Greg soanyers, aperat_iams Manager Phone No: 800-882-7038
Mailing Address: 6717 HC 97 hest, Route 2, Box 117, Battleboro, NC 27809
Check the appropriate box below, and sign at the bottom:
®*No fields received a high or very high rating.
❑ Yes, the fields listed below received a high or very high rating:
-. Field Number Size (Acre Rating (High or Very Eligh)
Please use as many additional attachment forms (PLAT-A-10-31-03) as needed for additional fields.
By completing the above section and any additional attachments and by signing this form, the facility
owner and' Technical Specialist aelmowledge all application fields were evaluated using the Phosphorus
-.Loss Assessment Tool. All necessary'calculations'were completed to conduct the Assesfinent. A copy will
be kept .on site with the Certified Animal Waste M anagernent Plan.. Any futtire modifications must be
approved by 'a technical specialist and. -filed with the Soil and Water Conservation District prior to
irnplemeniation..'Waste plans with fields. having a: high or very high: rating will have to be modified to
address.phbsphorus loss by the next permit cycle beginning July, 2007.
.Owner.Name: GrWisconvers. QVheratUMSMang er ....
.Owner Signature: Date:
Technical Specialist Name; Larson M fl J
Technical Specialist Signature: Date: G
Affiliation: Phone No: 919-859-064 9
Submit this form to: CAR�l
Attn:'KelthLarick ��.�� •�......�•/ •,
Non -Discharge Complisnoe and Enforcement Unit -P r.•�Fi:SSl
dP
NC Divisiog of Water Quality
1617 Mail Service Center = G 5�
C
Raleigh, NC 276994617
i 0264. � j•
�p
PLAT-12,li.03 '•.�91y'`•FNG1 Ni y�•rL �
J
r+

NCANAT Version: 1.62
PLAT Results For: Nash
6/25/2004 10:27:29 AM
Calendar Year:
County:
Producer Identifier:
Tract Number:
Field Number:
Soil Series:
Crop:
Fertilizers:
applications
Soil Loss:
Receiving Slope Distance
Soil Test 0" - 4"
WV_Factor (DATABASE)
Soil Test 2$" - 32"
WV_Factor (DATABASE)
Hydrologic Condition:.
PARTICULATE P =
2
S(,) ._ ..sLE P =
1
LEACHATE. P -
12
SOURCE P =
0
TOTAL P RATING = 15 (LOW)
INPUTS
2004
Nash
Hanor
Whitakers 2
BoB: BONNEAU LOAMY SAND, 0
TO 4 PERCENT SLOPES
Fescue (Hay) .
Swine -Lagoon liquid
Yearly Applied Amount:
0 ac in
Lb P205:
53.4 lb
Application Method:
All other surface
0.452 t/ac/yr
0-9 ft
376
1.4
51
1.4
GOOD
OUTPUTS

NCANAT Version: 1.62
PLAT Results For: Nash 6/25/2004 10:28:22 AM
Calendar Year:
County:
Producer Identifier
Tract Number:
Field Number:
Soil Series:
Crop:
Fertilizers:
applications
Soil Loss:
Receiving Slope Distance
Soil Test 0" - 41,
WV Factor (DATABASE)
Hydrologic Condition:
PARTICULATE P - 1
SOLUBLE P = 0
Ll!..__,ATE P = 0
SOURCE P - 0
TOTAL P RATING = 1 (LOW)
INPUTS
2004
Nash
Hanor
Whitakers 3
BoB: BONNEAU LOAMY SAND, 0
TO 4 PERCENT SLOPES
Fescue (Hay) .
Swine -Lagoon liquid
Yearly Applied Amount:
0 ac in
Lb P205:
53.4 lb
Application Method:
All other surface
0.45 t/ac/yr
0-9 ft
101
1.4
GOOD
OUTPUTS

NCANAT Version. 1.62
PLAT Results For: Nash 6/25/2004 10:31:19 AM
INPUTS
Calendar Year:
2004
County:
Nash
Producer Identifier:
Hanor
Tract Number:
Field Number:
WH LPivot5
Soil Series:
BokB: BONNEAU LOAMY SAND, 0 TO
4 PERCENT SLOPES
Crop:
Corn (Silage) : Conservation
Tillage -- minimum residue
Fertilizers:
Swine -Lagoon liquid
Yearly Applied Amount:
5.52 ac in
Lb P205:
25.47 lb
Application Method:
All other surface
applications
Soil Loss:
1.63 t/ac/yr
Receiving Slope Distance
0-9 ft
Soil Test 0" - 4"
177
WV_Factor (DATABASE)
1.4
Soil Test 28" -- 32"
40
WV_Factor (DATABASE)
1.4
Hydrologic Condition:
GOOD
OUTPUTS
PARTICULATE P = 4
SG_.,,3LE P = 4
LEACHATE P = 12
SOURCE P - 2
TOTAL P RATING = 22 (LOW)

NCANAT Version: 1.62
PLAT Results For: Nash 6/25/2004 10:31:59 AM
INPUTS
Calendar Year: 2004
County: dash
Producer Identifier: Hanor
Tract Number:
Field Number: WH LPivot6
Soil Series: NoA: NORFOLK LOAMY SAND, 0 TO 2 PERCENT SLOPES
Crop: Corn (Silage) : Conservation Tillage - minimum residue
Fertilizers: Swine -Lagoon liquid
Yearly Applied Amount: 3.37 ac in
Lb P205: 32.46 lb
Application Method: All other surface
applications
Soil Loss: 1.05 t/ac/yr
Receiving Slope Distance 0-9 ft
Soil Test 0" - 4" 224
WVTFactor (DATABASE) 1.4
Hydrologic Condition: GOOD
OUTPUTS
PARTICULATE P = 3
SOLUBLE P = 6
LL_ _..MATE P = 0
SOURCE P - 4
TOTAL P RATING = 13 (LOW)

NCANAT Version: 1.62
PLAT Results For: Nash
6/25/2004 10:32:07 AM
Calendar Year:
County:
Producer Identifier:
Tract Number:
Field Number:
Soil Series:
Crop:
Fertilizers:
applications
Soil Loss:
Receiving Slope Distance
Soil Test 0" - 4"
WV_Factor (DATABASE)
Hydrologic Condition:
PARTICULATE P = 3
SOLUBLE P - 6
L'... _ .[ATE P - 0
SOURCE P = 2
TOTAL P RATING = 11 (LOW)
INPUTS
2004
Nash
Hanor
WH LPivot7
NoA: NORFOLK LOAMY SAND, 0 TO 2 PERCENT SLOPES
Corn (Silage) : Conservation Tillage - minimum residue
Swine -Lagoon liquid
Yearly Applied Amount: 2.431 ac in
Lb P205: 24.35 lb
Application Method: All other surface
1.05 t/ac/yr
0-9 ft
213
1.4
GOOD
OUTPUTS

NCANAT Version: 1.62
PLAT Results For: Nash
6/25/2004 10:32:30 AM
Cal—idar Year:
County:
Producer Identifier:
Tract Number:
Field Number:
Soil Series:
Crop:
Fertilizers:
applications
Soil Loss:
Receiving Slope Distance
Soil Test 0" - 4"
WV,Factor (DATABASE)
Soil Test 28" - 32"
WV Factor (DATABASE)
Hydrologic Condition:
PARTICULATE P = 6
SC,. LE P - 7
LEACHATE P = 10
SOURCE P = 1
TOTAL P RATING = 24 (LOW)
INPUTS
2004
Nash
Hanor
WH LPivot8
BoB: BONNEAU LOAMY SAND, 0 TO 4 PERCENT SLOPES
Corn (Silage) : Conservation Tillage - minimum residue
Swine -Lagoon liquid
Yearly Applied Amount: 3.066 ac in
Lb P2O5: 25.93 lb
Application Method: All other surface
1.63 t/ac/yr
0-9 ft
305
1.4
32
1.4
GOOD
OUTPUTS

NCANAT Version: 1.62
PLAT Results For: Nash
6/25/2004 10:34:40 AM
Calendar Year:
County:
Producer Identifier:
Tract Number:
Field Number:
Soil Series:
Crop:
Fertilizers:
applications
Soil Loss:
Receiving Slope Distance
Soil Test 0" - 4"
WV_Factor (DATABASE)
Soil Test 28" - 32"
WV —Factor (DATABASE)
Artificial Drainage System:
Hydrologic Condition:
PT __CULATE P = 1
SOLUBLE P = 4
LEACHATE P = 8
SOURCE P = 0
TOTAL P RATING - 13 (LOW)
INPUTS
2004
Nash
Hanor
WH SPivotl
Ra: RAINS FINE SANDY LOAM
Hybrid Bermudagrass (Hay)
Swine --Lagoon liquid
Yearly Applied Amount:
Lb P205:
Application Method:
0.36 t/ac/yr
0-9 ft
204
1.2
31
1.2
NO
GOOD
OUTPUTS
0.737 ac in
33.11 lb
All other surface

NCANAT Version: 1.62
PLAT Results For: Nash
6/25/2004 10:37:44 AM
Calendar Year:
County:
Producer Identifier:
Tract Number:
Field Number:
Soil Series:
Crop:
Fertilizers:
applications
Soil Loss:
Receiving Slope Distance
Soil Test 0" - 4"
WV —Factor (DATABASE)
Artificial Drainage System:
Hydrologic Condition:
PARTICULATE P = 1
S'r -ILE P = 3
LEACHATE P = 0
SOURCE P = 0
TOTAL P RATING = 4 (LOW)
INPUTS
2004
Nash
Hanor
WH,SPivot3
GoA: GOLDSBORO FINE SANDY LOAM, 0 TO 2 PERCENT SLOPES
Hybrid Bermudagrass (Hay)
Swine -Lagoon liquid
Yearly Applied Amount: 0.331 ac in
Lb P2O5: 35.05 lb
Application Method: All other surface
0.36 t/ac/yr
0-9 ft
192
1.3
NO
GOOD
OUTPUTS

NCANAT Version: 1.62
PLAT Results For: Nash 6/25/2004 10:44:51 AM
Calendar Year:
County:
Producer identifier:
Tract Number:
Field Number:
Soil Series:
Crop:
Fertilizers:
applications
Soil Loss:
Receiving Slope Distance
Soil Test 0" - 4"
WV Factor (DATABASE)
Soil Test 28" - 32"
WV Factor (DATABASE)
Artificial Drainage System
Hydrologic Condition:
P7 CULATE P = 2
SOLUBLE P = 6
LEACHATE P = 11
SOURCE P = 0
TOTAL P RATING = 19 (LOW)
INPUTS
2004
Nash
Hanor
Whitakers 19
Ra: RAINS FINE SANDY LOAM
Fescue (Hay) .
Swine -Lagoon liquid
Yearly Applied Amount
Lb P205:
Application Method:
0.36 t/ac/yr
0-9 ft
333
1.2
42
1.2
NO
GOOD
OUTPUTS
0 ac in
53.4 lb
All other surface

NCANAT Version.: 1.62
PLAT Results For: Nash
6/25/2004 10:45:35 AM
Calendar Year:
County:
Producer Identifier:
Tract Number:
Field Number:
Soil Series:
Crop:
Fertilizers:
applications
Soil Loss:
Receiving Slope Distance
Soil Test 0" - 4"
WV —Factor (DATABASE)
Soil Test 28" - 32"
WV Factor (DATABASE)
Artificial Drainage System:
Hydrologic Condition:
P: "CULATE P -
2
SOLUBLE P -
6
LEACHATE P -
10
SOURCE P =
0
TOTAL P RATING = 18 (LOW)
INPUTS
2004
Nash
Hanor
Wdhitakers 20
Ra: RAINS FINE -SANDY LOAM
Fescue (Hay) .
Swine -Lagoon liquid
Yearly Applied Amount:
Lb P205:
Application Method:
0.36 t/ac/yr
0-9 ft
355
1.2
39
1.2
NO
GOOD
OUTPUTS
0 ac in
53.4 lb
All other surface

NCANAT Version: 1.62
PLAT Results For: Nash 6/25/2004 10:46:17 AM
Calendar Year:
County:
Producer Identifier
Tract Number:
Field Number:
Soil Series:
Crop:
Fertilizers:
applications
Soil Loss:
Receiving Slope Distance
Soil Test 0" - 4"
WV_Factor (DATABASE)
Hydrologic Condition:
PARTICULATE P - 1
SOLUBLE P = 0
L1.. _ ..ATE P - 0
SOURCE P = 0
TOTAL P RATING = 1 (LOW)
INPUTS
2004
Nash
Hanor
Whitakers 21
BoB: BONNEAU LOAMY SAND, 0 TO 4 PERCENT SLOPES
Fescue (Hay)
Swine -Lagoon liquid
Yearly Applied Amount: 0 ac in
Lb P205: 53.4 lb
Application Method: All other surface
0.45 t/ac/yr
0-9 ft
116
1.4
GOOD
OUTPUTS

NCANAT Version: 1.62
PLAT Results For: Nash 6/25/2004 10:47:18 AM
Calendar Year:
County:
Producer Identifier
Tract Number:
Field Number:
Soil Series:
Crop:
Fertilizers:
applications
Soil Loss:
Receiving Slope Distance
Soil Test 0" - 4"
WV_Factor (DATABASE)
Soil Test 28" - 32"
WV —Factor (DATABASE)
Hydrologic Condition:
'PARTICULATE P = 2
SL. LE P = 1
LEACHATE P - 10
SOURCE P - 0
TOTAL P RATING = 13 (LOW)
INPUTS
2004
Nash
Hanor
Whitakers 22
BoB: BONNEAU LOAMY SAND, 0 TO 4 PERCENT SLOPES
Fescue (Hay) .
Swine -Lagoon liquid
Yearly Applied Amount: 0 ac in
Lb P205: 53.4 lb
Application Method: All other surface
0.45 t/ac/yr
0-9 ft
272
1.4
42
1.4
GOOD
OUTPUTS

NCANAT Version: 1.62
PLAT Results For: Nash
6/25/2004 10:48:01 AM
Cal-adar Year:
County:
Producer Identifier:
Tract Number:
Field Number.
Soil Series:
Crop:
Fertilizers:
applications
Soil Loss:
Receiving Slope Distance
Soil Test 0" -- 4"
WV —Factor (DATABASE)
Soil Test 28" - 32"
WV_Factor (DATABASE)
Hydrologic Condition:
PARTICULATE P = 2
S[,_ _E P = 1
LEACHATE P = 12
SOURCE P - 0
DOTAL P RATING = 15 (LOW)
INPUTS
2004
Nash
Hanor
Whitakers 23
BoB: BONNEAU LOAMY SAND, 0 TO 4 PERCENT SLOPES
Fescue (Hay) .
Swine -Lagoon liquid
Yearly Applied Amount: 1.145 ac in
Lb P205: 48.73 lb
Application Method: All other surface
0.45 t/ac/yr
0-9 ft
365
1.4
52
1.4
GOOD
OUTPUTS
e

NCANAT Version: 1..62
PLAT Results For: Nash
6/25/2004 10:48:41 AM
Calendar Year:
County:
Producer Identifier:
Tract Number:
Field Number:
Soil Series:
Crop:
Fertilizers:
applications
Soil Loss:
Receiving Slope Distance
Soil Test 0" - 4"
WV_Factor (DATABASE)
Artificial Drainage System:
Hydrologic Condition:
PARTICULATE P - 0
S' LE P - 1
LEACHATE P = 0
SOURCE P = 0
TOTAL P RATING = 1 (LOW)
INPUTS
2004
Nash
Hanor
Whitakers 24
Co: CONGAREE FINE SANDY LOAM, FREQUENTLY FLOODED
Fescue (Hay) .
Swine -Lagoon liquid
Yearly Applied Amount: 0 ac in
Lb P205: 53.4 lb
Application Method: All other surface
0.41 t/ac/yr
0-9 ft
48
1.25
NO
GOOD
OUTPUTS

NCANAT Version: 1.62
PLAT Results For: Nash
6/25/2004 10:49:03 AM
Calendar Year:
County:
Producer Identifier
Tract Number:
Field Number:
Soil Series:
Crop:
Fertilizers:
applications
Soil Loss:
Receiving Slope Distance
Soil Test .0" - 4"
WV —Factor (DATABASE)
Hydrologic Condition:
PARTICULATE P = 0
SOLUBLE P = 0
LL. _...1ATE P = 0
SOURCE P = 0
TOTAL P RATING = 0 (LOW)
INPUTS
2004
Nash
Hanoi
Whitakers 25
BoB: BONNEAU LOAMY SAND, 0 TO 4 PERCENT SLOPES
Fescue (Hay) .
Swine -Lagoon liquid
Yearly Applied Amount: 0 ac in
Lb P2O5: 53.4 lb
Application Method: All other surface
0.45 t/ac/yr
0-9 ft
1
1.4
GOOD
OUTPUTS

NCANAT Version: 1.62
PLAT Results For: Nash 6/25/2004 10:49:36 AM
Calendar Year:
County:
Producer Identifier:
Tract Number:
Field Number:
Soil Series:
Crop:
Fertilizers:
applications
Soil Loss:
Receiving Slope Distance
Soil Test 0" - 4"
WV_Factor (DATABASE)
Hydrologic Condition:
PARTICULATE P = 0
SOLUBLE P = 0
Lh.__AATE P = 0
SOURCE P - 0 .
TOTAL P RATING = 0 (LOW)
INPUTS
2004
Nash
Hanor
Whitakers 26
BoB: BONNEAU LOAMY SAND, 0 TO 4 PERCENT SLOPES
Fescue (Hay) :
Swine -Lagoon liquid
Yearly Applied Amount: 0 ac in
Lb P205: 53.4 lb
Application Method: All other surface
0.45 t/ac/yr
0-9 ft
75
1.4
GOOD
OUTPUTS

Phosphorus Loss Assessment Tool Completion
Name of Facility: The Hanor Co— Inc. ffultiplier(-Daa hter Nucleus) Facility NumbMIM 233058
Owner(s) Name: Greg smnpers, operations manager Phone No: 800-882-7038
Mailing Address: 6717 NC 97 best, Route 2, Boi 117, Battleboro, NC 27809
Check the appropriate box below, and sign at the bottom:
❑'No fields received a high or very high rating_
Gi Yes, the fields listed below received a high or very high rating:
Field Number Size {Acres)~ Rating (High or Very J igh)
B4 �. 0-76
Please use as many additional attachment forms (FLAT:A-10-31-03) as needod for additional fields.
By completing the above section 'and any additional attachments and by signing this form, the facility
owner and Technical Specialist acknowledge all application fields were evaluated using -the Phosphorus
Lass Assessment Tool. All necessary calculations were completed to conduct the Assessment A copy will
be kept .on site with the Certified Animal Waste Management Plan.. Any future modifications must be
approved by a technical specialist and. -filed with, the Soil and Water Conservation District prior to
implementation... Waste plans with fields. having a high or very high rating will have to be modified to
address.phosphorus loss by the next permit cycle beginning July, 2007.
.Owner, Name- Gr
.Owner Signature:
Technical Specialist
Technical Specialist
21
Affiliation: Phone No:_gig=sg-0669
Submit this form to: .. .
Attn:'Keith Larick
Non•Dicclwge Complianoe and Enforcement Un
NC Division of Water Quality
1617 Mail Service Center
"sigh, NC 27699-1617
PLAT 12,ii-03
6

NCANAT Version: 1.62
PLAT Results For: Edgecombe 6/25/2004 9:57:45 AM
CaL-ndar Year:
County:
Producer Identifier:
Tract Number:
Field Number:
Soil Series:
Crop:
Fertilizers:
applications
Soil Loss:
Receiving Slope Distance
Soil Test 0" - 4"
WV Factor (DATABASE)
Artificial Drainage System:
Hydrologic Condition:
PARTICULATE P = 1
S" _nLE P = 2
LEACHATE P = 0
SOURCE P - 0
TOTAL P RATING = 3 (LOW)
INPUTS
2004
Edgecombe
Hanor
DN 1
GoA: GOLDSBORO FINE SANDY LOAM, 0 TO 2 PERCENT SLOPES
Peanuts : Conservation Tillage - minimum residue
Swine -Lagoon liquid
Yearly Applied Amount: 0 ac in
Lb P205: 53.4 lb
Application Method: All other surface
1.38 t/ac/yr
0--9 ft
52
1.3
NO
GOOD
OUTPUTS

NCANAT Version: 1.62
PLAT Results For: Edgecombe
6/25/2004 9:58.26 AM
Calendar Year:
County:
Producer Identifier:
Tract Number:
Field Number:
Soil Series:
Crop:
Fertilizers:
applications
Soil Loss:
Receiving Slope Distance
Soil Test 0" - 4"
WV Factor (DATABASE)
Hydrologic Condition:
PARTICULATE P - 2
SOLUBLE P = l
LL. _ -.j.ATE P - 0
SOURCE P = 0
TOTAL P RATING = 3 (LOW)
INPUTS
2004
Edgecombe
Hanor
DN 2
NOB: NORFOLK LOAMY SAND, 2 TO 6 PERCENT SLOPES
Peanuts : Conservation Tillage - minimum residue
Swine -Lagoon liquid
Yearly Applied Amount: 0 ac in
Lb P205: 53.4 lb
Application Method: All other surface
4.42 t/ac/yr
0--9 ft
35
1.4
GOOD
OUTPUTS

NCANAT Version: 1.62
PLAT Results For: Edgecombe 6/25/2004 10:01:01 AM
Caiendar Year:
County:
Producer Identifier
Tract Number:
Field Number:
Soil Series:
Crop:
Fertilizers:
applications
Soil Loss:
Receiving Slope Distance
Soil Test 0" - 4"
WV_Factor (DATABASE)
Hydrologic Condition:
PARTICULATE P = 3
SOLUBLE P 7
LL _ _,ATE P = 0
SOURCE P = 0
TOTAL P RATING = 10 (LOW)
INPUTS
2004
Edgecombe
Hanor
DN 3
NoA: NORFOLK LOAMY SAND, 0 TO 2 PERCENT SLOPES
Peanuts : Conservation Tillage - minimum residue
Swine -Lagoon liquid
Yearly Applied Amount: 0 ac in
Lb P2O5: 53.4 lb
Application Method: All other surface
1.11 t/ac/yr
0-9 ft
187
1.4
GOOD
OUTPUTS

NCANAT Version: 1.62
PLAT Results For: Edgecombe 6/25/2004 10:02:20 AM
Calendar Year:
County:
Producer Identifier:
Tract Number:
Field Number:
Soil Series:
Crop:
Fertilizers:
applications
Soil Loss:
Receiving Slope Distance
Soil Test 0" - 4"
WV,,.,Factor (DATABASE)
Hydrologic Condition:
PARTICULATE P =
13
SOLUBLE P =
8
LL__-,IATE P =
0
SOURCE P =
0
TOTAL P RATING = 21 (LOW)
INPUTS
2004
Edgecombe
Hanor
DN 4
NoB: NORFOLK LOAMY SAND, 2 TO 6 PERCENT SLOPES
Corn (Silage) : Conservation Tillage - minimum residue
Swine -Lagoon liquid
Yearly Applied Amount: 0 ac in
Lb P205: 53.4 lb
Application Method: All other surface
4.42 t/ac/yr
0-9 ft
210
1.4
GOOD
OUTPUTS

NCANAT Version: 1.62
PLAT Results For: Edgecombe
6/25/2004 10:05:02 AM
Calendar Year:
County:
Producer Identifier:
Tract Number:
Field Number:
Soil Series:
Crop:
Fertilizers:
applications
Soil Loss:
Receiving Slope Distance
Soil Test 0" - 4"
WV Factor (DATABASE)
Hydrologic Condition:
PARTICULATE P W 3
SOLUBLE P - 7
LL___..ATE P = 0
SOURCE P - 5
TOTAL P RATING = 15 (LOW)
INPUTS
2004
Edgecombe
Hanor
DN 6
NOA: NORFOLK LOAMY SAND, 0 TO 2 PERCENT SLOPES
Corn (Silage) : Conservation Tillage - minimum residue
Swine -Lagoon liquid
Yearly Applied Amount: 4.23 ac in
Lb P205: 26.74 lb
Application Method: All other surface
1.11 t/ac/yr
0--9 ft
178
1.4
GOOD
OUTPUTS

NCANAT Version: 1.62
PLAT Results For: Edgecombe
6/25/2004 10:06:46 AM
Caiendar Year:
County:
Producer identifier
Tract Number:
Field Number:
Soil Series:
Crop:
Fertilizers:
applications
Soil Loss:
Receiving Slope Distance
Soil Test 0" - 4"
WV Factor (DATABASE)
Hydrologic Condition:
PARTICULATE P - 1
SOLUBLE P T 0
Li _.iATE P = 0
SOURCE P W 0
TOTAL P RATING = 1 (LOW)
INPUTS
2004
Edgecombe
Hanor
DN 7
NoB: NORFOLK LOAMY SAND, 2 TO 6 PERCENT SLOPES
Corn (Silage) : Conservation Tillage - minimum residue
Swine -Lagoon liquid
Yearly Applied Amount: 0 ac in
Lb P205: 53.4 lb
Application Method: All other surface
4.42 t/ac/yr
0-9 ft
12
1.4
GOOD
OUTPUTS

NCANAT Version. 1.62
PLAT Results For: Edgecombe 6/25/2004 10:07:22 AM
Calendar Year:
County:
Producer Identifiear
Tract Number:
Field Number:
Soil Series:
Crop:
Fertilizers:
applications
Soil Loss:
Receiving Slope Distance
Soil Test 0" -- 4"
WV Factor (DATABASE)
Hydrologic Condition:
PARTICULATE P = 1
SOLUBLE P = 2
LL.._..ATE P - 0
SOURCE P = 5
TOTAL P RATING = 8 (LOW)
INPUTS
2004
Edgecombe
Hanor
DN 8
NoA: NORFOLK LOAMY SAND, 0 TO 2 PERCENT SLOPES
Corn (Silage) : Conservation Tillage - minimum residue
Swine -Lagoon liquid
Yearly Applied Amount: 2.529 ac in
Lb P205: 45.63 lb
Application Method: All other surface
1.11 t/ac/yr
0-9 ft
58
1.4
GOOD
OUTPUTS

NCANAT Version: 1.62
PLAT Results For: Edgecombe 6/25/2004 10:08:52 AM
Calendar Year:
County:
Producer identifier:
Tract Number:
Field Number:
Soil Series:
Crop:
Fertilizers:
applications
Soil Loss:
Receiving Slope Distance
Soil Test 0" - 4"
WV Factor (DATABASE)
Artificial Drainage System:
Hydrologic Condition:
PARTICULATE P = 1
S(- 'LE P - 2
LEACHATE P = 0
SOURCE P = 0
TOTAL P RATING = 3 (LOW)
INPUTS
2004
Edgecombe
Hanor
DN 9
GoA: GOLDSBORO FINE SANDY LOAM, 0 TO 2 PERCENT SLOPES
Corn (Silage) : Conservation Tillage - minimum residue
Swine -Lagoon liquid
Yearly Applied Amount: 0 ac in
Lb P205: 53.4 lb
Application Method: All other surface
1.38 t/ac/yr
0-9 ft
47
1.3
NO
GOOD
OUTPUTS

NCANAT Version: 1.62
PLAT Results For: Edgecombe 6/25/2004 10:09:36 AM
Calendar Year:
County:
Producer Identifier:
Tract Number:
Field Number:
Soil Series:
Crop:
Fertilizers:
applications
Soil Loss:
Receiving Slope Distance
Soil Test 0" - 4"
WV —Factor (DATABASE)
Hydrologic Condition:
PARTICULATE P = 1
SOLUBLE P - 0
Li,. .ATE P = 0
SOURCE P = 0
TOTAL P RATING = 1 (LOW)
INPUTS
2004
Edgecombe
Hanor
DN 11
NoB: NORFOLK LOAMY SAND, 2 TO 6 PERCENT SLOPES
Cotton : Conservation Tillage -- minimum residue
Swine -Lagoon liquid
Yearly Applied Amount: 0 ac in
Lb P205: 53.4 lb
Application Method: All other surface
4.42 t/ac/yr
0--9 ft
8
1.4
GOOD
OUTPUTS

NCANAT Version: 1.62
PLAT Results For: Edgecombe 6/25/2004 10:10:04 AM
INPUTS
Calcndar Year:
2004
County:
Edgecombe
Producer Identifier:
Hanor
Tract Number:
Field Number:
DN 12
Soil Series:
NoA: NORFOLK LOAMY SAND, 0 TO 2 PERCENT SLOPES
Crop:
Corn (Silage) : Conservation
Tillage - minimum residue
Fertilizers:
Swine -Lagoon liquid
Yearly Applied Amount:
0 ac in
Lb P205:
53.4 lb
Application Method:
All other surface
applications
Soil Loss:
1.11 t/ac/yr
Receiving Slope Distance
0-9 ft
Soil Test 0" -- 4"
100
WV -,Factor (DATABASE)
1.4
Hydrologic Condition:
GOOD
OUTPUTS
PARTICULATE P - 2
SOLUBLE P W 4
Li- .ATE P = 0
SOURCE P - 0
TOTAL P RATING = � 6 (LOW)

NCANAT Version: 1.62
PLAT Results For: Edgecombe 6/25/2004 10:10:24 AM
Ca. Aar Year:
County:
Producer Identifier:
Tract Number:
Field Number:
Soil Series:
Crop:
Fertilizers:
applications
Soil Loss:
Receiving Slope Distance
Soil Test 0" - 4"
WV_Factor (DATABASE)
Hydrologic Condition:
PARTICULATE P = 8
SOLUBLE P - 5
Lh.. ATE P - 0
SOURCE P = 0
DOTAL P RATING = 13 (LOW)
INPUTS
2004
Edgecombe
Hanor
DN 13
NoB: NORFOLK LOAMY SAND, 2 TO 6 PERCENT SLOPES
Corn (Silage) : Conservation Tillage - minimum residue
Swine -Lagoon liquid
Yearly Applied Amount: 0 ac in
Lb P205: 53.4 lb
Application Method: All other surface
4.42 t/ac/yr
0-9 ft
122
1.4
GOOD
OUTPUTS

NCANAT Version: 1.62
PLAT Results For: Edgecombe 6/25/2004 10:11:58 AM
Calendar Year:
County:
Producer Identifier
Tract Number:
Field Number:
Soil Series:
Crop:
Fertilizers:
applications
Soil Loss:
Receiving Slope Distance
Soil Test 0" - 4"
WV Factor (DATABASE)
Hydrologic Condition:
PARTICULATE P = 0
SOLUBLE P = 0
Li,._-.iATE P = 0
SOURCE P - 0
TOTAL P RATING = 0 (LOW)
INPUTS
2004
Edgecombe
Hanor
DN 14
NoB: NORFOLK LOAMY SAND, 2 TO 6 PERCENT SLOPES
Corn (Silage) : Conservation Tillage - minimum residue
Swine -Lagoon liquid
Yearly Applied Amount: 0 ac in
Lb P205: 53.4 lb
Application Method: All other surface
4.42 t/ac/yr
0-9 ft
0
1.4
GOOD
OUTPUTS

NCANAT Version: 1.62
PLAT Results For: Edgecombe 6/25/2004 10:13:08 AM
INPUTS
Calendar Year:
2004
County:
Edgecombe
Producer Identifier:
Hanor
Tract Number:
Field Number:
DN 15
Soil Series:
NoB: NORFOLK LOAMY SAND, 2 TO
6 PERCENT SLOPES
Crop:
Corn (Silage) : Conservation
Tillage - minimum residue
Fertilizers:
Swine -Lagoon liquid
Yearly Applied Amount:
0 ac in
Lb P205:
53.4 lb
Application Method:
All other surface
applications
Soil Loss:
4.42 t/ac/yr
Receiving Slope Distance
0-9t
Soil Test 0" - 4"
3
WV —Factor (DATABASE)
1.4
Hydrologic Condition:
GOOD
OUTPUTS
PARTICULATE P = 0
SOLUBLE P = 0
LL.. {ATE P = 0
SOURCE P = 0
TOTAL P RATING = 0 (LOW)

NCANAT Version: 1.62
PLAT Results For: Edgecombe 6/25/2004 10:14:15 AM
Cait.idar Year:
County:
Producer Identifier
Tract Number:
Field Number:
Soil Series:
Crop:
Fertilizers:
applications
Soil Loss:
Receiving Slope Distance
Soil Test 0" - 4"
WV_Factor (DATABASE)
Hydrologic Condition:
PARTICULATE P = 2
SOLUBLE P = 5
LL. ATE P = 0
SOURCE P - 0
TOTAL P RATING = 7 (LOW)
INPUTS
2004
Edgecombe
Hanor
DN B1
NOA: NORFOLK LOAMY SAND, 0 TO 2 PERCENT SLOPES
Corn (Silage) : Conservation Tillage - minimum residue
Swine -Lagoon liquid
Yearly Applied Amount: 0 ac in
Lb P205: 53.4 lb
Application Method: All other surface
1.11 t/ac/yr
0--4 ft
141
1.4
GOOD
OUTPUTS

NCANAT Version: 1.62
PLAT Results For: Edgecombe 6/25/2004 10:15:11 AM
Cal -'cedar Year:
County:
Producer Identifier:
Tract Number:
Field Number:
Soil Series:
Crop:
Fertilizers:
applications
Soil Loss:
Receiving Slope Distance
Soil Test 0" - 4"
WV -Factor (DATABASE)
Artificial Drainage System
Hydrologic Condition:
PARTICULATE P -
5
Sr --ILE P =
10
LEACHATE P =
0
SOURCE P =
0
TOTAL P RATING = 15 (LOW)
INPUTS
2004
Edgecombe
Hanor
DN B 2
GoA: GOLDSBORO FINE SANDY LOAM, 0 TO 2 PERCENT SLOPES
Corn (Silage) : Conservation Tillage - minimum residue
Swine -Lagoon liquid
Yearly Applied Amount: 0 ac in
Lb P205: 53.4 lb
Application Method: All other surface
1.38 t/ac/yr
0-9 ft
210
1.3
NO
GOOD
OUTPUTS

NCANAT Version: 1.62
PLAT Results For: Edgecombe' 6/25/2004 10:16:34 AM
Cai—idar Year:
County:
Producer Identifier
Tract Number:
Field Number:
Soil Series:
Crop:
Fertilizers:
applications
Soil Loss:
Receiving Slope Distance
Soil Test 0" -- 4"
WV^Factor (DATABASE)
Artificial Drainage System:
Hydrologic Condition:
PARTICULATE P = 3
S" LE P - 6
LEACHATE P = 0
SOURCE P - -0
TOTAL P RATING = 9 (LOW)
INPUTS
2004
Edgecombe
Hanor
DN B3
GoA: GOLDSBORO FINE SANDY LOAM, 0 TO 2 PERCENT SLOPES
Corn (Silage) : Conservation Tillage - minimum residue
Swine -Lagoon liquid
Yearly Applied Amount: 0 ac in
Lb P205: 53.4 lb
Application Method: All other surface
1.38 t/ac/yr
0-9 ft
128
1.3
NO
GOOD
OUTPUTS

NCANAT Version: 1.62
PLAT Results For: Edgecombe 6/25/2004 10:18:26 AM
Calcndar Year:
County:
Producer Identifier
Tract Number:
Field Number:
Soil Series:
Crop:
Fertilizers:
applications
Soil Loss:
Receiving Slope Distance
Soil Test 0" - 4"
WV Factor (DATABASE)
Soil Test 28" - 32"
WV Factor (DATABASE)
Artificial Drainage System
Hydrologic Condition:
PT ^_ULATE P =
4
SOLUBLE P -
88
LEACHATE P =
4
SOURCE P =
0
INPUTS
2004
Edgecombe
Hanor
DN B4
BB: BIBB SOILS
Corn (Silage) : Conservation Tillage - minimum residue
Swine -Lagoon liquid
Yearly Applied Amount: 0 ac in
Lb P205: 53.4 lb
Application Method: All other surface
.98 t/ac/yr
0-9 ft
219
0.9
14
0.9
NO
GOOD
OUTPUTS
TOTAL P RATING = 96 (HIGH)

NCANAT Version: 1.62
PLAT Results For: Edgecombe 6/25/2004 10:20:27 AM
Calendar Year:
County:
Producer Identifier:
Tract Number:
Field Number:
Soil Series:
Crop:
Fertilizers:
applications
Soil Loss:
Receiving Slope Distance
Soil Test 0" - 4"
WV_Factor (DATABASE)
Hydrologic Condition:
PARTICULATE P - 9
SOLUBLE P = 5
LE.—iATE P - 0
SOURCE P = 0
TOTAL P RATING = 14 (LOW)
INPUTS
2004
Edgecombe
Hanor
DN B5
NoB: NORFOLK LOAMY SAND, 2 TO 6 PERCENT SLOPES
Corn (Silage) : Conservation Tillage - minimum residue
Swine -Lagoon liquid
Yearly Applied Amount: 0 ac in
Lb P205: 53.4 lb
Application Method: All other surface
4.42 t/ac/yr
0-9 ft
135
1.4
GOOD
OUTPUTS

NCANAT Version: 1.62
PLAT Results For: Edgecombe 6/25/2004 10:21:31 AM
Ca-endar Year:
County:
Producer Identifier
Tract Number:
Field Number:
Soil Series:
Crop:
Fertilizers:
applications
Soil Loss:
Receiving Slope Distance
Soil Test 0" -- 4"
WV Factor (DATABASE)
Hydrologic Condition:
PARTICULATE P =
11
SOLUBLE P =
7
LL. MATE P =
0
SOURCE P W
0
TOTAL P RATING = 18 (LOW)
INPUTS
2004
Edgecombe
Hanor
DN B6
NoB: NORFOLK LOAMY SAND, 2 TO 6 PERCENT SLOPES
Corn (Silage) : Conservation Tillage = minimum residue
Swine -Lagoon liquid
Yearly Applied Amount: 0 ac in
Lb P205: 53.4 lb
Application Method: All other surface
4.42 t/ac/yr
0--9 ft
181
1.4
GOOD
OUTPUTS

NCANAT Version: 1.62
PLAT Results For: Edgecombe 6/25/2004 10:24:07 AM
INPUTS
Ca --radar Year:
2004
County:
Edgecombe
Producer Identifier:
Hanor
Tract Number:
Field Number:
DN B7
Soil Series:
NoA: NORFOLK LOAMY SAND, 0 TO
2 PERCENT SLOPES
Crop:
Corn (Silage) : Conservation
Tillage - minimum residue
Fertilizers:
Swine -Lagoon liquid
Yearly Applied Amount:
4.204 ac in
Lb P205:
34.23 lb
Application Method:
All other surface
applications
Soil Loss:
1.11 t/ac/yr
Receiving Slope Distance
0-9 ft
Soil Test 0" - 4"
215
WV Factor (DATABASE)
1.4
Hydrologic Condition:
GOOD
OUTPUTS
PARTICULATE P 3
SOLUBLE P = 8
LL. ATE P = 0
SOURCE P = 7
TOTAL P RATING = 18 (LOW)

NCANAT Version: 1.62
PLAT Results For: Edgecombe 6/25/2004 10:25:19 AM
Ca_ .idar Year:
County:
Producer Identifier
Tract Number:
Field Number:
Soil Series:
Crop:
Fertilizers:
applications
Soil Loss:
Receiving Slope Distance
Soil Test 0" - 4"
WV_Factor (DATABASE)
Hydrologic Condition:
INPUTS
2004
Edgecombe
Hanor
DN B8
NoA: NORFOLK LOAMY SAND, 0 TO 2 PERCENT SLOPES
Corn (Silage) : Conservation Tillage - minimum residue
Swine -Lagoon liquid
Yearly Applied Amount: 14.363 ac in
Lb P205: 28.3 lb
Application Method: All other surface
1.11 t/ac/yr
0-9 ft
135
1.4
GOOD
OUTPUTS
PARTICULATE P = 2
SOLUBLE P = 5
Li ATE P = 0
SOURCE P - 19
TOTAL P RATING _ 26 (MEDIUM)

NCANAT Version: 1.62
PLAT Results For: Edgecombe 6/25/2004 10:26:15 AM
Ca. .radar Year:
County:
Producer Identifier
Tract Number:
Field Number:
Soil Series:
Crop.
Fertilizers:
applications
Soil Loss:
Receiving Slope Distance
Soil Test 0" - 4"
WVIFactor (DATABASE)
Hydrologic Condition:
PARTICULATE P = 2
SOLUBLE P = 4
LL- ATE P = 0
SOURCE P - 5
TOTAL P RATING = 11 (LOW)
INPUTS
2004
Edgecombe
Hanor
DN Robbins
NOA: NORFOLK LOAMY SAND, 0 TO 2 PERCENT SLOPES
Corn (Silage) : Conservation Tillage - minimum residue
Swine -Lagoon liquid
Yearly Applied Amount: 2.151 ac in
.Lb P205: 49.6 lb
Application Method: All other surface
1.11 t/ac/yr
0-9 ft
98
1.4
GOOD
OUTPUTS

NORTH CAROLINA DEPARTMENT OF
ENVIRONMENT AND NATURAL RESOURCES
DIVISION OF WATER QUALITY
RALEIGH REGIONAL OFFICE
Division of Water Quality
June 2, 2000
CERTIFIED MAIL
RETURN RECEIPT REQUESTED
Mr. Jim Arnold
The Hanor Company, Inc.
876 Country Club Road
Rocky Mount, North Carolina 27804
Subject: Notice of Deficiency
(Hanoi DN-Facln
fCOC—AWS330058�
Edgecombe-County,
Dear Mr. Arnold:
On May 3, 2000, Mr. Buster Towell of the Raleigh Regional Office conducted an
inspection of the subject swine operation. The purpose of this inspection is to
determine compliance with the State's animal waste management rules. The
inspection revealed the following deficiency:
There was no current waste analysis available during the inspection. The last
analysis on site was taken in August of 1999. Application records revealed that
land application had occurred to fall crops and your Waste Management Plan
requires that a waste analysis be taken within 60 days of application.
Please respond to this Notice within fourteen days of receipt.The Raleigh Regional
Office appreciates your cooperation in correcting this matter ,and if you have any
questions regarding this Notice please call Buster Towell at [phone].
Sincerely,
Kenneth Schuster, P.E.
Regional Water Quality Supervisor
cc: Edgecombe Health Department
Mr. A,B. Whitley, Edgecombe Soil & Water Conservation District
Ms. Margaret O'Keefe, RRO-DSWC
DWQ Nondischarge Compliance Group R
RRO Files
1628 MAIL SERVICE CENTER, RALEIGH, NORTH CAROLINA 27699.1628
PHONE [phone]o FA% 919-571-4719
AN EQUAL OPPORTUNITY / AFFIRMATIVE ACTION EMPLOYER - 50% RECYCLED/10% POST -CONSUMER PAPER

State of North Carolina
Department of Environment
and Natural Resources
Division of Water Quality
James B. Hunt, Jr., Governor
Bill Holman, Secretary
Kerr T. Stevens, Director
The Hanor Company
Hanor Multiplier
876 Country Club Rd
Rocky Mount NC 27804
Dear The Hanor Company:
M9�'AA
17
A"A
1 •
Adjmh
NCDENR
NORTH GAROLINA DEPARTMENT OF
ENVIRONMENT AND NATURAL RESOURCES
December 30, 1999
, Mhl f
Subject: Fertilizer Application Recordkeeping
Animal Waste Management System
Facility Number 33,58
Edgecombe County,
This letter is being sent to clarify the recordkeeping requirement for Plant Available Nitrogen (PAN)
application on fields that are part of your Certified Animal Waste Management Plan.
In order to show that the agronomic loading rates for the crops being grown are not being exceeded, you
must keep records of all sources of nitrogen that are being added to these sites. This would include nitrogen
from all types of animal waste as well as municipal and industrial sludges/residuals, and commercial fertilizers.
Beginning January 1, 2000, all nitrogen sources applied to land receiving animal waste are required to
be kept on the appropriate recordkeeping forms (i.e. IRR1, IRR2, DRY1, DRY2, DRY3, SLUR], SLUR2,
SLD l , and SLD2) and maintained in the facility records for review. The Division of Water Quality (DWQ)
compliance inspectors and Division of Soil and Water operation reviewers will review all recordkeeping during
routine inspections. Facilities not documenting all sources of nitrogen application will be subject to an
appropriate enforcement action.
Please be advised that nothing in this letter should be taken as removing from you the responsibility or
liability for failure to comply with any State Rule, State Statute, Local County Ordinance, or permitting
requirement.
If you have any questions regarding this letter, please do not hesitate to contact Ms. Sonya Avant of the
DWQ staff at [phone] ext. 571.
Sincerely,
Kerr T. Stevens, Director
Division of Water Quality
cc: Raleigh Regional Office
Edgecombe County Soil and Water Conservation District
Facility File
1617 Mail Service Center, Raleigh, North Carolina 27699-1617 Telephone [phone] Fax [phone]
An Equal Opportunity Affirmative Action Employer 50% recycled/10% post -consumer paper

1715-- 4:�O5"�
WVVr
Agri-MsteTechnology, Inc.
700-108 Blue Ridge Road
Raleigh, North Carolina 27606
Phone. [phone]
Fax: (919) 8Z9-1507
Fax No. 57/-y7lg
33-;5g
.e*-A6, c..
From
Date : ? :3l°7+l `yDl�-ti
No. of Pages:_
(including Cover sheet)
Remarks: ❑ Urgent ❑ For Your Review ❑ Reply ASAP 11 Please Comment
Message:
N C,4 C!7 � Lj n! 1 F) O A)
Thank You
"Concepts in Agricultural. Bvoroduct UdL-ation"
b0iTO'd L 6T6 ZAI `�T000NN03.1 EIIStifrk-I�JOd 9Z:9T L66T-20--doW
`
a

Agd*AisteTechnology, lnc,
700-108 Blue Ridge Road
Raleigh, North Carolina 27606
Phone: [phone]
Fax: [phone]
MEMORANDUM
March 3, 1997
TO: Mr. Buster Towell, Division Of Water Quality
FROM: Bryan Staley, ETT
SUBJECT: Boar Stud Lagoon Certification For The Hanor Company, Inc: -Daughter
Nucleus Site
Enclosed please find the lagoon capacity and Iagoon liner certification for the Boar Stud
facility at the Hanor Company's Daughter Nucleus site. Both the lagoon capacity and liner
were certified on November 16, 1996. Don't hesitate to call if you have any questions
regarding this certification,
boauT4sz
"'Concepts in Agricultural. Byproduct Utilization"
b8i�0'd L0 STS 0NI`A90-10NHD3l 31SUM—INOU 92:9T L65T—z0-8Uw

Lagoon Capacity Certification
Agri -Waste Technology, Inc. has inspected the lagoon at The Hanor Company, Inc. Boar Stud
operation in 1ldgeeombe County, North Carolina and certifies that it was constructed so as to
meet the required lagoon volume capacity. Table 5 summarizes the lagoon as it was
constructed.
Table 5: Lagoon Parameters (as constructed)
Dimensions at
Length (ft)
Width (ft)
Depth (ft)
Side Slope
Top Bcrm
196
189
10.60
3:1
Max. Liquid Level
190
1 183
9.60
1 3:1.
Maximum Liquid Capacity
277083 W
esign Capacity
248,693 W
I _ _ 11/16/96
(Name) (Date)
.L'Tesident of A to Technol
(Title) r (Company)
PO
R AL
1 10264
•.,,N M. 5a�
fr�� 9�7
t7o/20,d �,0 S 6ti6
DN I ` A9O-lONHD3i 31SUM- I dS0

10. Lagoon Certification
Agri -Waste Technology, Inc. has inspected the lagoon liner at The Manor Company, Inc.
Daughter Nucleus Boar Stud operation in Edgecombe County, North Carolina. The lagoon was
visually inspected to assure that it was . constructed in accordance with the design parameters.
Ire addition the lagoon liner was tested by USE Lining Technology, Inc. testing laboratories to
assure compliance with the liner specifications-
L. M. SWI&y. Jr. .1111619-6
(Name) (Date)
President _ . __ of Ag1jL-]Yaste Ted pgy' Tnc _ ..,
(Title) (Company)
4 C Ro I'P, 101,
SE AL
10264
r,�-VVN Nt SAE �.
MIMI
43
b0ih0 ' d LOST 6EB 6 T 6 DN 1 ` J,J010NHD31 31SOM- I ZDU 9z = 9T L661-20-2ak: bw
.tea

of Soil and Water Conservation E3 Other Agency
of Water Quality
Routine
Date of Inspection
Facility Number 3'
Time of Inspection 24 hr.
0 Registered 0 Certified U<pplied for Permit [3 Permitted 0 Not Operational Date Last -Operated:
Farm Name:.. %fv�. .._/!!.!: .!......�.!...�.....� ........... Count•:..G. .... C.... ........... .......................
Owner Name: ...:✓._....�....(�..�' f3"'�/ Phone No:.../...�..f....... j.... �.3_ ....................
h
FacilityContact:
_7' � Go l�
.........i!........................./......J :................ Title:........r.�..^......../.......................................... Phone No: ...................................................
Mailing Address: �,7;_..... TY....�1••Gt: .... P..............It? (!�7 MO.ee.. �6!/�. 2�0! ...................:...... ........... .
Onsite Representative:.�ll.4..rl.........UY.LI..e.....:..................................... Integrator::........ wt?.�Z.................................
Certified Operator ;.......... f A'! .....�rt//d............................. Operator Certification Number; ........ ,.................................
Location of Farm:
Latitude Longitude 0• �'
Design ,•, Current f
Swm ` Capacity ;Population
o Feeder ��
t r.
Potiltry.Capacity
❑ Layer
Design Current �.
Population Cattle,- M
❑Dairy
Design .=Current
Capacity Population',
kt
ee o Finish b
JLJ Non -Layer I
I JLJ Non Dairy
EkFarrow to Wean p 0a.
;4
❑ Farrow to Feeder
10 Other
❑ Farrow to Finish
Total DesignCapacity
❑ Gilts
.
..
.,
oars p I
z -•
Total SSLW
'
Numbof er Lagoons / Holding Ponds
❑ Subsurface Drains Present ❑ Lagoon Area
❑Spray Field Area
❑ No Liquid Waste Management S stem
�.
,..,..4
,
t
General
1. Are there any buffers that need maintenance/improvement?
2. Is any discharge observed from any part of the operation?
Discharge originated at: ❑ Lagoon ❑ Spray Field ❑ Other
a. If discharge is observed, was the conveyance man-made?,
b. If discharge is observed, did it reach Surface Water? (If yes, notify DWQ)
c. If discharge is observed, what is the estimated Flow in gaVmin?
d. Does discharge bypass a lagoon system? (If yes, notify DWQ)
3. Is there evidence of past discharge from any part of the operation?
4. Were there any adverse impacts to the waters of the State other than from a discharge?
5. Does any part of the waste management system (other than lagoons/holding ponds) require
maintenance/improvement?
6. Is facility not in compliance with any applicable setback criteria in effect at the time of design?
7. Did the facility fail to have a certified operator in responsible charge?
7/25/97
❑ Yes Now
ElYes CPNo
❑ Yes No
❑ Yes No
❑ Yes NNo
❑ Yes .CI N
❑ Yes
❑ Yes No
❑ Yes No
❑Yes..
es No
Continued on back

Facj Iity Number: —
8. Are there lagoons or storage ponds on site which need to be properly closed? ❑ Yes No ,
Structures (I,a -,00tts Iioldin Ponds Plush Pits etc.
9. Is storage capacity (freeboard plus storm storage) less than adequate? ❑ Yes No
,,Structure I Structure 2 Structure 3 Structure 4 tructure 5 Structure 6
Identifier: 942 riu►SP,.� — C_ � � irh ..1-
................. t`.I n....,................!...,/?..r.........�0. P..�,f ........:.....
Freeboard (ft): ,.......,t..J�. el
............ �' `..1..................... ............. !..........I............... .......... t.......................,.................................,.
10. Is seepage observed from any of the structures? ❑ Yes ; 4o
11. Is erosion, or any other threats to the integrity of any of the structures observed? ❑ Yes 'o
12. Do any of the structures need maintenancelimprovement? ❑ Yes No
(If any of questions 9-12 was answered yes, and the situation poses
an immediate public health or environmental threat, notify DWQ)
13. Do any of the structures lack adequate minimum or maximum liquid level marker~? El Yes o Waste Application
14. Is there physical evidence of over application? ❑ Yes E No
(If in excess of WMP, or runoff entering waters of the State. notify DWQ)
15. Crop type .'.........! .E✓ �D.r �?.$s�......&.._f,........... .................................................................................................................................j��o
..... _.
16.,Do the receiving crops differ with those designated in the Animal Waste Management Plan (AWMP)? ❑ Yes �No
17. Does the facility have a lack of adequate acreage for land application? ❑ Yes
18. Does the receiving crop need improvement? ❑ Yes Na
19. Is there a lack of available waste application equipment? ❑ Yes
20. Does facility require a follow-up visit by same agency? ❑ Yes N
21. Did Reviewer/Inspector fail to discuss review/inspection with on -site representative? [J Yes No
22. Does record keeping need improvement? ❑ Yes ; o
For Certified or Permitted Facilities Only
23. Does the facility fail to have a copy of the Animal Waste Management Plan readily available? ❑ Yes
24. Were any ad ' Tonal problems noted which cause noncompliance of the Certified AWMP? ❑Yes
25. W any additional problems noted which cause noncompliance of the Permit'' ❑ Yes /No
[fJ No.violations or deficiencies were noted during this visit. You4ill receive no further
:�;�correspotidenceahoitt�this:visit:•:•�.�:�: ;�:���.• �:•��: �.�:�=-:•�•.•��:�::.:.�...�..:�...:.:.:.�...
Cotnments'(re fer to,question #) #Explain any YES answers and/(iir a'nv recommendaitons or any other convhrr nts
Use tirawmgs of faeiltty to"better ezpldin sttuahons (use additional pages as neeessarv}
J
n 7125197
Reviewer/Inspector Name ,
Reviewer/Inspector Signature: Date: Z27JN

Revised January 22, 1999
JUSTIFICATION & DOCUMENTATION FOR MANDATORY WA DETERMINATION
Facility Number ?- - �-,?
Farm Name: i44A.10 OL D`_ A✓
On -Site Representative: _J-o&-oco ��
Inspector/Reviewer's Name: wZ1.Pi�,
Date of site visit: 31 iT7
Date of most recent WUP:�
Operation is flagged for a wettable
acre determination due to failure of
Part11 eligibility item(s) F9 F2 F3 F4
Operation not required to secure WA
determinate this time based on
exemption E1 E2 E3 E4
Annual farm PAN deficit: 3 )? y pounds
Irrigation System(s) - circle #: 1. hard -hose traveler; 2. center -pivot system; 3. linear -move system;
4. stationary sprinkler system w/permanent pipe; 5. stationary sprinkler system w/portable pipe;
6. stationary gun system wlpermanent pipe; 7. stationary gun system w/portable pipe
PART I. WA Determination Exemptions (Eligibility failure, Part 11, overrides Part I exemption.)
E1 Adequate irrigation design, including map depicting wettable acres, is complete
and signed by an I or PE.
E2 Adequate D, and D2/D3 irrigation operating parameter sheets, including map
depicting wettable acres, is complete and signed by an I or PE.
E3 Adequate D, irrigation operating parameter sheet, including map depicting
wettable acres, is complete and signed by a WUP.
E4 75% rule exemption as verified in Part 111. (NOTE: 75 % exemption cannot be
applied to farms that fail the eligibility checklist in Part 11. Complete eligibility
checklist, Part II - F1 F2 F3, before completing computational table in Part 111).
PART II. 75% Rule Eligibility Checklist and Documentation of WA Determination
Requirements. WA Determination required because operation fails one of the eligibility
requirements listed below:
F1 Lack of acreage which resulted in over application of wastewater (PAN) on spray
field(s) according to farm's last two years of irrigation records.
F2 Unclear, illegible, or lack of information/map.
F3 Obvious field limitations (numerous ditches; failure to deduct required
buffer/setback acreage; or 25% of total acreage identified in CAWMP includes
small, irregularly shaped fields - fields less than 5 acres for travelers or less than
2 acres for stationary sprinklers).
F4 WA determination required because CAWMP credits field(s)'s acreage in excess
of 75% of the respective field's total acreage as noted in table in Part 111.

Revised January 22, 1999
Facility Number
Part 111. Field by Field Determination of 75% Exemption Rule for WA Determination
TRACT
NUMBER
FIELD
NUMBER' 2
TYPE OF
IRRIGATION
SYSTEM
TOTAL
ACRES
CAWMP
ACRES
FIELD
%
COMMENTS3
FIELD NUMBER' - hydrant pull zone or point numbers may be used in place of field numbers depending on CAWMP
and type of irrigation system. If pulls, etc. cross more than one field, inspector/reviewer will have to combine fields to
calculate 75% field by field determination for exemption if possible; otherwise operation will be subject to WA
determination.
FIELD NUMBER' - must be clearly delineated on map.
COMMENTS' - back-up fields with CAWMP acreage exceeding 75% of its total acres and having received less than 50%
of its annual PAN as documented in the farm's previous two years' (1997 & 1998) of irrigation records, cannot serve as the
sole basis for requiring a WA Determination. Back-up fields must be noted in the comment section and must be accessible
by irrigation system.

u
Division of.Soil and Water Conservation - O cration=Review t!
p f
[,j. D on of Soil and Water
Conservation - Compliance inspection f5 T
© Other A enc - Operation C°mpIiance'Lispection rvwon of Water alit a t.r Quality -
ICYRoutine O Complaint O Follow-nn of DWO inspection O Follow-up of DS%VC review O Other I
Fa 'lily Number Date of lnspection
,,,.tea, Time of lnspectior€ 24 hr. (hh:mm)
Crf crmitted [] Certified [] Conditionally Certified © Registered JE3 Not OperaaUona] Date Last Operated:
I+'arrn Name: �W6 2 (�u�tU7 n k Gi �S County:.....�rL�`.�......................... .......................
Owner Name:.... ..#L-- kI D IZ Xl C r Phone No; ....11............................'.....................................................
Facility Contact: `S CI�Th l .I'itle: Phone No:
Mailing Address; . a7. ...GoLc............. ....�iCy..CI�r�J .O............� 1 `.`j.... ....Q.... ...l........... C..........-�7.. d..................................
Onsite Representative: ..Jo 1" 4/Vil1':A ........ Integrator•:....ljwak..0.�..........................................
Certified Operator:........ T&)A:.!........... atJe.G....................................................... Operator Certification Number:..........................................
Location of Farm: Z �- p J
.............................................................................................................................................................................................................................I............................ 11V
Latitude �•�� Longitude �•°°
Design Current
Swine Capacity Population
❑ Wean to Feeder
U
❑ Feeder to Finish
❑ Farrow to Wean
7 0 0
❑ Farrow to Feeder
❑ Farrow to Finish
❑ Gilts
❑ Boars
17 p
Design Current Design Current
Poultry Capacity Population Cattle Capacity Population
❑ Layer (] Dairy
❑ Non -Layer ❑ Non -Dairy
❑ Other
Total Design Capacity
Total SSLW
Number of Lagoons ❑ Subsurface Drains Present ❑ Lagoon Area ❑ Spray Field Area
Holding Ponds / Solid Traps ❑ No Liquid Waste Management System
Discharkcs & Stream Impacts
1. Is any discharge observed from any part of the operation (If yes, notify DWQ)?
Discharge originated at: ❑ Lagoon ❑ Spray Field ❑ Other
a. If discharge is observed, was the conveyance roan -made?
h. If discharge is observed. did it reach: ❑ Surface Waters ❑ Waters of the State
c. If discharge is observed, what is the esihnatcd Ilow in galhnin?
d. Does discharge bypass a lagoon system?
2. Is there evidence of past discharge from any part of the operation'?
3. Were there any adverse impacts to the waters of the State other than from
a discharge? .
Waste Collection &'Treatment
4. Is storage capacity (freeboard plus storm storage) less than adequate?
Structure 2 Structure 3
Struc•ture 4
pStrui:ture
Identifier: v p14�f GD SKr I f" 13 �
��jO
Freeboard (inches): ...................... �}
Q +l tr ......1
L—
r�
/p
Structure 5
jow Al
❑ Yes
❑ Yes IGT 0
❑ Yes Ld'tvo
❑ Yes 0<co
❑.Yesji
❑ Yes X
❑ Yes No
Structure 6
...............2'J ..........1...1................... .�...............
116/99 Continued on back

Facility Nd nber: A — j Date of Inspection
5. Are there any immediate threats to the integrity of any of the structures observed? (ic/ trees, severe erosion,
seepage, etc.)
6. Are there structures on -site which are not properly addressed and/or managed through a waste management or
closure plan?
(If any of questions 4-6 was answered yes, and the situation poses an
immediate public health or environmental threat, notify DWQ)
7. Do any of the structures need maintenance/improvement?
8. Does any pact of the waste management system other than waste structures require maintenance/improvement?
9. Do any stuctures lack adequate, gauged markers with required top of dike, maximum and minimum
liquid level elevation markings?
Waste Application
10. Are there any buffers that need nrrintenanec/improvement?
11. Is there evidence of ovjer application? ❑ Ponding ❑ Nitrogen
12. Crop type 4G.'t.�+.."./....P_7..2,............................... I..............................
13. Do the receiving crops differ with those designated in the Certified Animal Waste Management Plan (CAWMP)?
14. Does the facility lack wettable acreage for land application? (footprint)
15. Does the receiving crop need improvement?
16. Is there a lack of adequate waste application equipment?
ired Records & Documents
17. Fail to have Certificate of Coverage & General Permit readily available?
18. Does the facility fail to have all components of the Certified Animal Waste Management Plan readily available'?
(ie/ WUP, checklists, design, maps, etc,)
19. Does record keeping need improvement? (ic/ irrigation, freeboard, waste analysis & soil sample reports)
20. Is facility not in compliance with any applicable setback criteria in effect at the time of design?
21. Did the facility fail to have a certified operator in responsible charge?
22. Fail to notify regional DWQ of emergency situations as required by General Permit?
(ie/ discharge, freeboard problems, over application)
23. Did Reviewe nspcctor fail to discuss review/inspection with on -site representative?
24. Do cility require a follow-up visit by same agency`?
jq-.N,oA"'1U'tio"'S'-OW deficiencies ,were noted. daring Ois-visit.. —6u vnifrereive no further. .
eorrespgiidence;tiboiit;this visit.; ;11 •;•:.;.;..;.; ; ; ; ; ;•;. ;.:•; ; ; :.;•;.;. ;•
IS
❑ Yes No
❑ Yes
[]Yes o
❑ Yes
❑ Yes eNo
❑ Yes No
❑ Yes o
[]Yes o
[:]Yes No
❑ Yes 0 Its o
❑ Yes , 1�0
❑ Yes 2, o
❑ YesO
❑ Yes
❑ Yes No
❑ Yes o
❑ Yes N
❑ Yes o
❑ Yes No
Comments (refer to question#). Explain any YES answers and/or any. recommendations or any other. comments.:.l c ti::f
Use drawings of.facility to better explain situations. {use additional pages as
r•
Reviewer/inspector Name
Reviewer/inspector Signature: �,� f (�d}��/!/> Date: I 1-5—Z 11/6/99

f�( Division of Soil and Water Conservation - Operation Review
/© Divisioni of Soil and Water Conservation - Compliance Inspection
0 Div>Isiot sof Water Quality - Compliance Inspection
13 Other'Agency - Operation Review
12 Routine 0 Complaint 0 Follow-up of DWQ inspection Q Follow-up of DSWC review Q Other
Facility Number 3 �
❑ Permitted ❑ Certified 0 Conditionally Certified 13 Registered
Date of I11Spec0011
Time of Inspection GCI 24 hr. (hh:mm)
^�
0 Not O mrational Date Last Operated:
FarmName:......an/................................................................... C:ounty`:.....��tll�C'!���.4................. ...... .................
Owner Name: Phone No:
Facility Contact: ..............................................................................Title......................... .. Phone No:
........................................................................................
MailingAddress............................................................................................................................................................................................................ ..........................
Onsite Representative: trt .. Irate rotor:..Nav4 l.........................................................
Certified Operator ...ram... [ ...... �'L e/,(/ .................. Operator CertiFicatiun iVumber:.a, . .. �.. . ; .`;.......
Location of Farm:
Latitude a=' '4 Longitude �° �' �•
Design Current
Swine Capacity Population
❑ Wean to Feeder
❑ Feeder to Finish
❑ Farrow to Wean
❑ Farrow to Feeder
❑ Farrow to Finish
❑ Gilts
❑ Boars
Design Current Design Current
Poultry Capacity Population Cattle Capacity Population
❑ Layer ❑ Dairy
❑ Non -Layer ❑ Non -Dairy
❑ Other
Total Design Capacity
Total SSLW
Number of Lagoons ❑ Subsurface Drains Present ❑ Lagoon Area JE1 Spray Field Area
Holding Ponds / Solid Traps ❑ No Liquid Waste Management System
I)ischart:1. & Strean> Impacts
1. Is any discharge observed from any part of the operation? ❑ Yes j]/iSio
//
Discharge originated al: El Lagoon El Spray Field El Other
a. If discharge is observed, was the convevance man-made'' ❑ Yes VNo
b. If discharge is observed, did it reach Watcr of'the State? (11'yes, notify DWQ) ❑ Yes �/No
c. If discharge is observed. what is the estimated flow in gal/min'?
d. Docs discharge bypass a lagoon system? (Ii'ycs, notify DWQ) ❑ Yes No
2. Is there evidence of past discharge from any part of the operation?
❑Yes /yj No
3. Were there any adverse impacts or potential adverse impacts to the Waters
of the State other than
from a discharge?
ElYes ❑ No
Waste Collection & 'Treatment
4. Is storage capacity (Freeboard plus storm storage) less than adequate?
❑ Spillway
❑ Yes o
Structure I Structure 2 Structure 3
ldentifior: ¢oA,,t S�,Q ii✓25C/L �ii�
Structure 4
�OLtJ
Sir icture 5
,irlrs/�-
Structure b
tirSH
Frcchc7arcl (incficsl: ....... ..........................�1.—............
....... ............ ........ 1, ...................
................ ...................
..per.......
5. Are there any immediate threats to the integrity of :any of the structures observed? (iel trees, severe erosion, ❑ Yes �lflo
seepage, etc.) //
3/23/99 Corrlirured r� r hack

s
(facility Number:3 Date of Inspection
6. Are there structures on -site which are not properly addressed and/or managed through a waste management or closure plan? Yes X�0
(If any of questions 4-6 was answered yes, and the situation poses an
immediate public health or environmental threat, notify DWQ)
7. Do any of the structures need maintenance/improvement? Yes ❑ No
8. Does any part of the waste management system other than waste structures require maintenance/improvement? [:]Yes XNo
9. Do any stuctures lack adequate, gauged markers with required maximum and minimum liquid level
elevation markings? ❑ Yes 15FINO
Waste Annlication
10.
Are there any buffers that need maintenance/improvement?
❑ Yes o
11.
Is there evidence of over. application? ❑Excessive Ponding ❑PAN
Q❑H
o
12.
Crop type J` A-1 5,1- Z 4d)t rL---,
13.
Do the receiving crops defer w't those d ign��d in the Certified Animal Waste Management Plan
(CAWMP)? /Yes
❑ No
14.
a) Does the facility lack adequate acreage for la0pplication?
❑ Yes
1:240
b) Does the facility need a wettable acre determination'?
❑ Yes
0
7r-lxl
c) This facility is pended for a wettable acre determination?
❑ Yeso
15.
Does the receiving crop need improvement?
❑ Yes
R'110
16.
Is there a lack of adequate waste application equipment?
❑ Yes
Required
17.
Records & DSienments
Fail have Certificate Coverage & General Permit
INO
to of readily available?
❑ Yes
18.
Does the facility fail to have all components of the Certified Animal Waste Management Plan readily available?
(ie/ WUP, checklists, design, maps, etc.)
Yes
❑ No
19.
Does record keeping need im rove ent? (ie/ irrigation, freeboard, waste analysis & soil sample reports)
:4 Pum P1,V6-
ZYes
❑ No
20.
Is facility not in compliance with any applicable setback criteria in effect at the time of design?
❑ Yes
.21No
21.
Did the facility fail to have a actively certified operator in charge?
❑ Yes
o
22,
Fail to notify regional DWQ of emergency situations as required by General Permit?
(ie/ discharge, freeboard problems, over application)
❑ Yes
ONO
23.
Did Reviewer/Inspector fail to discuss review/inspection with on -site representative?
❑ Yes
24.
Does facility require a follow-up visit by same agency?
❑ Yes
IFNo
No
25.
Were any additional problems noted which cause noncompliance of the Certified AWMP?
❑ Yes
7No
Io violaticjns;o� clef cien6i -§ •rrxere poled. dirriitg tltis:visit'. • ;Ypil will •reegive 06 further • : -
.ctirres�oridei & Abr ' this .visit_
' ". -. •. '. r1 i'N'±1"'! F I1 .• 4 h IN "" _ !
1 i .L -
Comments (refer to question #) (Explain any.,YES answers and/or any recommendattons;or�any other,comments
Use`drawtn `of facili iib,titei.rlexa.ate 'ane�esa.."ri}iF� �'tl�=�,.f a V.
.46'r I:{;
i
40,2 A.
} (z4yl/'�
A c�Ao k)C 7 cv/��E�T L2oPP/�v�
?izI�c C 1 .1J,51�,� tr
,?~ / Li I A le r QeA-C 4- e N E r Z
TP coertk /Irn � G.-I rrl+ TD GVia"'C$rVT &'k-jup,
I `� • /y1/ s /,v 4­ l¢7 e uoAI Cti 1j rZOj "� CS ;*,2 `i N4 T- C tt� d �' _ An a4)0 in i*A/ T - S' POIAv5
Reviewer/Inspector Name r�-- F _ ( " _ r / ' / /`—
Reviewer/Inspector Signature: aq.,,,h Date: &J 3d l I -7�

[' Facility Number: —
--7/
Date of luspection
Addiiipipal COf11I11et1LSaI1(lIOTDI'aWIII$$:.,
F- d ,) d f h � N/13 urz , f, s Cb 2Y F i*t cz� rf clr7,
e--�O / 3 0A.) /---/ez rgj S- ) ) ID 0-6 w
f'rC n5 �sf 1 v 5'u rvL, /1-a,,, 4 C +
pl 'W weft N j.crrmC--,�r 61 F JCj Ad(�orLE
4/30/97

Facility Number:Date of Inspection
Odor Issues
26. Does the discharge pipe from the confinement building to the storage pond or lagoon fail to discharge at/or below ❑ Yes No
liquid level of lagoon or storage pond with no agitation?
27. Are there any dead animals not disposed of properly within 24 hours? ❑ Yes No
28. Is there any evidence of wind drift during land application? (i,e. residue on neighboring vegetation, asphalt, ❑ Yes No
roads, building structure, and/or public property) /
29, Is the land application spray system intake not located near the liquid surface of the lagoon? ❑ Yes No
30. Were any major maintenance problems with the ventilation fan(s) noted? (i.e. broken fan belts, missing or
or broken fan blade(s), inoperable shutters, etc.) ❑ Yes fNo
31. Do the animals feed storage bins fail to have appropriate cover? ❑ Yes ❑'No
3/23/99

State of North Carolina 'T
Department of Environment
and Natural ResourcesA4J;J
Division of Water Quality
dft
James B. Hunt, Jr., Governor A
Wayne McDevitt, Secretary D C G I V R
A. Preston Howard, Jr., P.E., Director
May 4, 1998
John College
Daughter Nucleus
876 Country Club Road
Rocky Mount NC 27804
Subject: Certificate of Coverage No. AWS330058
Daughter Nucleus
Swine Waste Collection, Treatment,
Storage and Application System
Edgecombe County
Dear John College:
In accordance with your application received on May 28, 1997, we are forwarding this Certificate
of Coverage (COC) to Farm No. 33-0058, authorizing the operation of an animal waste collection,
treatment, storage and land application system in accordance with the State's General Permit (attached).
This approval shall consist of the operation of this system including, but not limited to, the management
of animal waste from the Daughter Nucleus Farm, located in Edgecombe County, with an animal
capacity of no greater than 7680 Wean to Feeder, 8640 Feeder to Finish, 2500 Farrow to Wean, and 170
Boar Studs and the application to the land as specified in the Certified Animal Waste Management Plan
(CAWMP).
The COC shall be effective from the date of issuance until December 31, 2001. Pursuant to this
COC, you are authorized and required to operate the system in conformity with the conditions and
limitations as specified in the General Permit, the facility's CAWMP, and this COC, with no discharge of
wastes to surface waters. An adequate system for collecting and maintaining the required monitoring
data and operational information must be established for this farm. Any increase in waste production
greater than the certified design capacity or increase in number of stocked animals above the number
authorized by this COC will require a modification to the CAWMP and this COC and shall be completed
prior to actual increase in either wastewater flow or number of animals.
Please be advised that any violation of the terms and conditions specified in this COC, the General
Permit or the CAWMP may result in the revocation of this COC. -
Upon notification by the Division of this COC's expiration, you shall apply for its renewal. This
request shall be made within 30 days of notification by the Division.
P.O. Box 29535, Raleigh, North Carolina 27626-0535 Telephone [phone] FAX [phone]
An Equal Opportunity Affirmative Action Employer 50% recycled/ 10% post -consumer paper

Certificate of Coverage AWS330058
Daughter Nucleus
Page 2
This COC is not automatically transferable. A nametownership change application must be
submitted to the DWQ prior to a name change or change in ownership.
If any parts, requirements, or limitations contained in this COC are unacceptable, you have the
right to apply for an individual non -discharge permit by contacting the engineer listed below for
information on this process. Unless such a request is made within 30 days, this COC shall be final and
binding.
The subject farm is located in the Raleigh Regional Office. The Regional Office Water Quality
Staff may be reached at [phone]. If you need additional information concerning this COC or the
General Permit, please contact J R Joshi at [phone] ext. 353.
Sincerely,
A. Preston Howard, Jr., P.E.
cc: (Certificate of Coverage only for all cc's)
Edgecombe County Health Department
Raleigh Regional Office, Water Quality Section
Edgecombe County Soil and Water Conservation District
Permit File
IKAY `61998 ; J
DEHNR RALEIGH REGIONAL GFF I

State of North Carolina
Department of Environment,
Health and Natural Resources
Division of Water Quality
James B. Hunt, Jr., Governor
Wayne McDevitt, Secretary
A. Preston Howard, Jr., P.E., Director
March 20, 1998
John College
Hanor Multiplier
876 Country Club Road
Rocky mount, NC 27804
71.rYVA
D E N R
Subject: Farm No. 33-58
Additional Information Request
Hanor Multiplier
Animal Waste Operation
Edgecumbe County
Dear Mr. College:
The Non -Discharge Permitting Unit has completed a preliminary engineering review of the
revised waste utilization plan for the combined application. Additional information is required before we
can continue our review.
The waste utilization plan contains 87.4 acres of land cropped to sorghum overseeded by a rye
crop. The average amount of PAN utilized per acre on this farm ranges from 473 to 495 lbs./acre/year,
which appears high for the primarily loamy sand and sandy loam soils. Please provide additional
reference / documentation to justify the basis for these application rates and realistic yield expectations
for the crop and soil types given.
Please reference the subject farm number when providing the requested information. All -
information should be signed, and submitted to my attention by April 20, 1998 at the address below.
Please note that failure to provide this additional information on or before the above requested date can
result in your application being returned as incomplete.
If you have any questions regarding this request, please call me at [phone], extension
06191
cc.4ZE Ii igh-Regiona Ol ff'ce, Water Quality
Permit File
P.O. Box 29535, Raleigh, North Carolina 27626-0535
An Equal Opportunity Affirmative Action Employer
Sincerely,
J.R. Joshi
Soil Scientist
Non -Discharge Permitting-Uriit� t .
Telephone [phone] FAX [phone]
50% recycled/ 10% post -consumer paper

a
ine O Complaint O Follow-tiv of ❑1VO ins
Facility Number
© Registered 0 Certified © Applied for Permit © Permitted
FarmName; ..............D. %.......................................................
Follow-up of DSWC review Q Other
Date of Inspection
Tinu• of Inspection ' 24 hr. (hh:mm)
0 Not Operational Date Last Operated:..........
.............. County:... VKGzg.M.......................................
Owner Name: .................................................. Phone No:
FacilityContact: .............................................................................. Title:................................................................ Phone No:...................................................
]Mailing Address:...................................................................
Onsite Rep resentativ. .,U....... .............................................. Integrator: ........ M4.N%�, ...... Certified Operator;............................................................................................................... Operator Certification Number:..................
Location of Farm:
Latitude �, 14 Longitude �• �� �"
Design Current Design y;Currents f� u-Destgn ;Current
"Swine, Capacity ,Population Poultry ' :Capacity' Population Cattle. x Capactty"Populatton ,
❑ Wean to Feeder ❑ Layer ; ❑ Dairy
f ]Feeder to Finish 10Non-Layer ❑ Non -Dairy
❑ Farrow to Wean`
❑ Farrow to Feeder ❑Other ;
❑ Farrow to Finish Total Dt'Sig[1 Capacity'-,
❑ Gilts a
El Boars Total SSLW
r
General
1. Are there any buffers that need maintenance/improvement? ❑ Yes eNo
2. Is any discharge observed from any part of the operation? ❑ Yes fa No
Discharge ori;inated at: ❑ Lagoon ❑ Spray Field ❑ Other l
a. If discharge is observed, was the conveyance man-made?
b. If discharge is observed, dill it reach Surface Water? (If yes, notify DWQ)
c. If discharge is observed, what is the estimated flow in gaVrnin?
d. Does discharge bypass a lagoon system'? (If yes, notify DWQ)
3. Is there evidence of past discharge from any part of the operation?
4. Were there any adverse impacts to the waters of the State other than from a discharge?
5. Does any part of the waste management system (other than lagoons/holding ponds) require
maintenance/improvement?
6. Is facility not in compliance with any applicable setback criteria in effect at the time of design?
El Yes ('No
❑ Yes ? No
❑ Yes No
❑ Yes No
❑ Yes No
❑ Yes} No
❑ Yes No
❑ Yes No
7. Did the facility fail to have a certified operator in responsible charge?

R
Facility Number:
8. Are there lagoons or storage ponds on site which need to be properly closed.'
Structures (Lagoons,llolding Ponds, Flush Pits, etc.
9. Is storage capacity (freeboard plus storm storage) less than adequate?
Structure 1 Structure 2 Structure 3 Structure 4 Structure 5
Identifier 0.r. h �!!- ... ?.Y �r ��..On.r�J�.... .... �i...............
�. ............ .
Freeboard (ft): ................... .......
...................................�.�...,..................
10. Is seepage observed from any of the structures.'
11. Is erosion, or any other threats to the integrity of any of the structures observed?
12. Do any of the structures need maintenance/improvement?
(If any of questions 9-12 was answered yes, and the situation poses
an immediate public health or environmental threat, notify DWQ)
13. Do any of the structures lack adequate minimum or maximum liquid level markers?
Waste Application
14. is there physical evidence of over application?
(If in excess of WMP, or runoff entering /waters of the State, notify DWQ)
15. Crop type .il%�Ii .lV .I......�Q.a'v.........................................................................................................
❑ Yes
❑
❑ Yes
Struct
IVNo
❑ Yes]
No
ElYes
I
Yes
❑ No
❑ Yesr
No
❑ Yes �N0
................. r........ ....
I& Do the receiving crops differ with those designated in the Animal Waste Management Plan (AWMP)? ' No
/ATM " 1 `i'� il)o 0,
17. Does the facility have a lack of adequate acreage for land application? ❑ Yes XNo
18. Does the receiving crop need improvement?
19. Is there a lack of available waste application equipment?
20. Does facility require a follow-up visit by same agency?
21. Did Reviewer/Inspector fail to discuss review/inspection with on -site representative?
22. Does record keeping need improvement?
For Certified or Permitted Facilities Only
23. Does the facility fail to have a copy of the Animal Waste Management Plan readily available?
24. Were any additional problems noted which cause noncompliance of the Certified AWMP?
25. Were any additional problems noted which cause noncompliance of the Permit?
No'violations:or. deficiencies.were;notedduringthis: visit.;:You:will receive•no•f&tlier•:
correspondence atioiet this.visit:
❑ Yes o
❑ Yes �No
❑ Yes A*'N0
❑ Yes P"N" o
❑ Yes 0'*No
❑ Yes }" 01
❑ Yes ZNo
❑ Yes INO
r lk jN5 r nC r a i s chL.s— TO A t>Jw Pet ir-l� V t S crf-�-T-LV
G r9,4j
� SS��S yf7� C'ou 5T72 vc.�tr,,J
FUAsr- 5#' FcT�wlf.} �-,��r 9C 5��7 Luup ' ���pti�
- _TN PPfd 4-Cc Ss OF /L�rrovt��
.I.-- Sew_ S
-7 7/25/97 H
Reviewer/Inspector Name
Reviewer/inspector
Date:

Routine O Comulaiii( O Follmr-tit) of D1
Facility Number_ 2=
[3 Registered 13 Certified © Applied for Permit 0 Permitted
FarmName :.......... �......................................................
Follow-up of DSWC review- O Other �
Date of Inspection 5
Time of Inspection { 24 hr. (hh:mm)
0 Not Operational Date Last Operated:
rir r
County:....
OwnerName:........................................................................................... ................................ Phone No:.......................................................................................
Facility Contact :...............................................................
.... Title: ..................... Phone No:
MailingAddress: ...................... .................................................................. .....................................................................
Onsite Representative:.....N.,7d.tk.:k)......... ............................. Intel;rator:....... ......................................................
Certified Operator................................................................................................................ Operator Certification Numberc.........................................
Location jof Farm:
C
ME
Latitude • ' iL Longitude • 6 �
Design,;. Current, x . Design
; Swiute Capacity ::1?opplation Poultry Capacity PopulattoW Catt:
❑ Wean to Feeder
❑ Feeder to Finish
❑ Farrow to Wean
❑ Farrow to Feeder
❑ Farrow to Finish
❑ Gilts
❑ Boars
Number of:.Lagoons / Holding Pc}nds' ❑ Subsurface Drains Present ❑ t agoon Area ID Spray Field Area
n
No Liquid Waste Management System
General
1. Are there any buffers that need maintenance/improvement?
2. Is any discharge observed from any part of the operation?
Discharge originated at: ❑ Lagoon ❑ Spray Field ❑ Other
a. If discharge is observed, was the conveyance man-made?
b. If discharge is ob efvcd, did it reach Surface Water? (if yes. notify DWQ)
c. If discharge is observed, what is the estimated flow in gaUmin?
d. Does discharge bypass a lagoon system? (If yes, notify DWQ)
3. Is there evidence of past discharge from any part of the operation?
4. Were there any adverse impacts io the waters of the State other than from a discharge?
5. Does any part of the waste management system (other than lagoons/holding ponds) require
maintenance/improvement?
6. Is facility not in compliance with any applicable setback criteria in effect at the time of design?
7, Did the facility fail to have a certified operator in responsible charge?
❑ Yesto
❑ Yes �NO
❑ Yes 'gNo
❑ Yes VNo
❑ Yes ICJ No
❑ Yes (�No
❑ Yes o
ElYes No
❑ Yes No
❑ Yes No
l:

Facility Number:
8. Are there lagoons or storage ponds on site which need to be properly closed'' ❑ Yes ❑l�lo
Structures (I agoons,llolding Ponds.. -Flush Pits, etc.) ((
9. Is storage capacity (freeboard plus storm storage) less than adequate? ❑ Yes d1X10
�Structure l Structure 2 Structure 3 Structure 4 Structure 5 Structure 6
Identifier:4.`Y.t?o.......�.1'Gf.E.jt.f''.... �` W'•?,6s�1. h���.+,/�l /�r�,Crfl.
VV U 11111�� U 0' _ _
... t...... mil........
Freeboard(lt)........ ....................................... �............. 7L..,.............. ....................................
.................................................................... .........
10. Is seepage observed from any of the structures?
1 1. Is erosion, or any other threats to the integrity of any of the structures observed?
12. Do any of the structures need maintenance/improvement?
(If any of questions 9-12 was answered yes, and the situation poses
an immediate public health or environmental threat, notify DWQ)
13. Do any of the structures lack adequate minimum or maximum liquid level markers?
Waste Application
14. Is there physical evidence of over application?
(If in excess of W�MP, or runoff entering waters of the State, notify DWQ)
15. CrorA
p type t�-C1_.... /..CK4/...(V ................................... ...............................................................................................................
16, Do the receiving crops differ with those designated in the Animal Waste Management Plan (AWMP)?
17. Does the facility have a lack of adequate acreage for land application?
IS. Does the receiving crop need improvement?
19. Is there a lack of available waste application equipment?
20. Does facility require a follow-up visit by same agency?
21. Did Reviewer/Inspector fail to discuss reviewlinspection with on -site representative?
22. Does record keeping need improvement`?
For Certified or Permitted Facilities Only
23. Does the facility fail to have a copy of the Animal Waste Management Plan readily available?
24. Were any additional problems noted which cause noncompliance of the Certified AWMP?
25. Were any additional problems noted which cause noncompliance of the Permit?
No.violatiohs or def"iciencie's.were.noted- during this:visit. You:will recei've-no:ftirther,:;
coeresOondence A out this.visit'.
❑ Yes P 10
❑ Yes Pio
❑ Yes
❑ Yes 'o
❑ Yes �No
❑ Yes R No
❑ Yes PNo
❑ Yes VNo
❑ Yes e1No
❑ Yes RNo
❑ Yes dNo
❑ Yes CrNo
❑ Yes 7;No
o
❑ Yes
El Yes 7o
lNEI-j %19-6-tbrtl tii,1_c /UOT ,(1C6YJ p9Yr�1,-'r bnT.� �',/�%
rV Aklf-� F_-4 R G G cts 77�-C s `I Cyfk
7125/97
Reviewer/Inspector Name
Reviewer/Inspector Signature"e/Gyye_l f G� Date:

State of North Carolina
Department of Environment
and Natural Resources
Division of Water Quality
James B. Hunt, Jr., Governor
Wayne McDevitt, Secretary
A. Preston Howard, Jr., P.E., Director
June 8, 1998
The Hanor Company, Inc.
Daughter Nucleus Farm
876 Country Club Road
Rocky Mount NC 27804
D E N R
Subject: Certificate of Coverage No. AWS330058
Daughter Nucleus Farm
Swine Waste Collection, Treatment,
Storage and Application System
' Edgecombe County
Dear The Hanor Company, Inc.:
In accordance with your request received on May 8, 1998, we are forv/arding this Certificate of
Coverage (COC) to The Hanor Company, authorizing the operation of an animal waste collection,
treatment, storage and land application system in accordance with the State's General Permit (attached).
This approval shall consist of the operation of this system including, but not limited to, the management
of animal waste from the Daughter Nucleus Farm, located in Edgecombe County, with an animal
capacity of no greater than 7680 Wean to Feeder, 8640 Feeder to Finish, 2500 Farrow to Wean, and 170
Boar Studs and the application to the land as specified in the Certified Animal Waste Management Plan
(CAWMP).
The COC shall be effective from the date of issuance until December 31, 2001, shall hereby void
Certificate of Coverage No. AWS330058 dated May 4, 1998, and shall be subject to the conditions and
limitations as specified therein. Pursuant to this COC, you are authorized and required to operate the
system in conformity with the conditions and limitations as specified in the General Permit, the facility's
CAWMP, and this COC, with no discharge of wastes to surface waters. An adequate system for
collecting and maintaining the required monitoring data and operational information must be established
for this farm. Any increase in waste production greater than the certified design capacity or increase in
number of stocked animals above the number authorized by this COC will require a modification to the
CAWMP and this COC and shall be completed prior to actual increase in either wastewater flow or
number of animals.
Please be advised that any violation of the terms and conditions specified in this COC, the General
Permit or the CAWMP may result in the revocation of this COC.
P.O. Box 29535, Raleigh, North Carolina 27626-0535 telephone [phone] FAX [phone]
An Equal Opportunity Affirmative Action Employer 50% recycled/ 10% post -consumer paper

Certificate of Coverage AWS330058
Daughter Nucleus
Page 2
If any parts, requirements, or limitations contained in this COC are unacceptable, you have the
right to apply for an individual non -discharge permit by contacting the engineer listed below for
information on this process. Unless such a request is made within 30 days, this COC shall be final and
binding.
The subject farm is located in the Raleigh Regional Office. The Regional Office Water Quality
Staff may be reached at [phone]. If you need additional information concerning this COC or the
General Permit, please contact J R Joshi at [phone] ext. 353.
Sincerely
4
xA. Preston Howard, Jr., P.E.
cc: (Certificate of Coverage only for all cc's)
Edgecombe County Health Department
Raleigh Regional Office, Water Quality Section
Edgecombe County Soil and Water Conservatio
Permit File - '
i District {
�~

State of North Carolina Department of Environment, Health and Natural Resources3�ANr
Division of Water Quality
Non -Disc Etar;e Permit Application Form / Survey
(THIS FOR.V ML AY BE PHOTOCOPIED FOR USE AS AN ORIGINAL,)
General Permit - Liquid Animal Waste Operado ns
The following questions have been completed utilizing inf aiion_ o J le with the
-ti
Division. Please review the information for completenes and ake a N corrections
which are appropriate. If a question has not been compl ted y s e Divi on please
complete as best as possible. Do not leave any qu sti n nswer d.
Application Date: !J
I. REQUIRED ITEMS CHECKLIST
Please indicate chat you have included the Following required items by signing your initials in t s va-provided nn[.to each
item. _
1. One completed and signed original and one copy of the application for General Permit - Animal f I r
Waste Operations:
2. T-o copies of a general location map indicating the location of the animal waste facilities and
field locations where animal waste is disposed: H ;
i
3. Two copies of the CLrtiFed animal Waste Maria;ement Plan (CAVV.MP). If the facility does V
not have a CA%Ly[P. one must be completed prior to submittal of a general permit application
for animal waste uperacions.
ti
II. GENERAL INFOWMATION:
I. Farm's name: -(anor M. uIti21ier
2. Print Land Owner's name: The Hanor Company _
3. Land Owner's :.Mailina address: $76 Countryy ( lu-b,Rd
City: apgkv MountZip: 27804
Telephone Number: 919- 4- 4QJ
4. County where farm is located: Edgecombe
5. Farm Location (Directions from nearest major higbway. Please include SR numbers for state roads. Please include a copy
of a county road map with the location of the farm identified): SRt45T . R It"v
6. Print Farm Managers name (if different from Land Owner): John College
7. Lessee's / Integrator's name (if applicable; please circle which type is listgd):
33 - 58 Cp�,..io�' hL��f 3'?jam 5 �I Gi +1� S3 ' S
FORM: A WO-G-E 2/26/97
Page I of 3
l

III. OPERATION INFORMATION:
1. Farm No.: 33 - S 6
2. Operation Description: opa[atipR
F er t
7 _ e�ide '_nachy
Is the above information correct" a yes; Eno,
3
4
S
6
-p,
If no, correct below using the design capacity of the facility
Tvne of Swine Type of Poultry N
0 Wean to Feder K d 0 Layer
0 Feeder to Finish 0 Non -Laver
0 Farrow to Wean (# sow) 0 Turkey
Tvne of Cattle No. of .Animal<
0 Dairy
0 Beef
0 Farrow to Feeder (n sow)
0 Farrow to Finish sow) ?Sock
Type of F __-col, ,... !ht: f-, 1 SfrGat No of An;—Zis
�x LLj
Acreage cleared and available for application: y _ ; Required ,acreage (as listed in the CAW'NIP): i i
Number of Lagoons: l ; Total Capacity: _ 61_8�16,4 A)6- -- Cubic Feet (ft3)
`umber of Storage Ponds: ; Total Capacity:
Is animal waste being applied on any Feld which has subsurface drains?
Are subsurface drains present in the vicinity of or under the lagoon?
IV. APPLICANT'S CERTIFICATION:
Cubic Feet (Ft3)
YES or NO (please circle one)
YES or�N (please circle one)
(Land Owner's name listed in question II.2). attest that
this application for Y2: f .l��/ r r �G r/ N� (Farm name listed in question U.1)
has been reviewed by me and is accurate and complete E6 the best of my knowledge. I understand that if all required parts of this
application are not completed and that if quired supporting information and attachments are not included, this application package
will be retw*d to me as incorpWete.
Signature
Date �
V . MANAGER'S CERTIFICATION: (complete only if different from the Land Owner)
I,
(Manager's name listed in question II.6), attest that this
application for ` //; ( (Farm name listed in question II.1)
has bwn revic ed by the and is accurate and complete to the best of my knowledge. I understand that if all required parts of this
application are not completed and that if all required supporting information and attachments are not included, this application package
will be returned as iacomolete.
Signature
/�A
Date c�2 5
THE COMPLETED APPLICATION PACKAGE. INCLUDING ALL SUPPORTING INFORMATION AND MATERIALS,
SHOULD BE SENT TO THE FOLLOWING ADDRESS:
NORTH CAROLINA DIVISION OF WATER QUALITY
WATER QUALITY SECTION
PERIMITS AND ENGINEERING UNIT
POST OFFICE BOX 29535
RALEIGH, NORTH CAROLINA 27626-0535
TELEPHONE NUMBER: [phone]
FORM: AWO-G-E 2/26/97 Page 2 of 3

'- Fax #: [phone]
Telephone: [phone]
' APPIAN CONSULTING ENGINEERS
841 S. Wesleyan Blvd.
P.O. Box 7966
R cky Mount, NorthMCIfina 27804-0966
GENTLEMEN:
WE ARE SENDING YOU THE FOLLOWING:
❑ Prints/Plana ❑ Estimates
❑ Permit Applications ❑ Change order
THESE ARE TRANSMITTED as checked below.
❑ For approval ❑ Bid Tabulation Distribuifo
❑ For your use ❑ Approved permits for your
❑ As requested ❑ For Review and Comment
r
LETTE4. OF TRANSMITTAL
LEA. r
Deliver to:
0 Contracts Q Spec' icatfo s
❑ Bid Proposal A,_ ❑ Addressee Signature required,
No substitute signaturesi
❑ Substitute Signature allowed
n ❑ Boundary Survey needed -see attached
filest ecords ❑ Easement needed -see attached Received'by: • ^
❑ Topographical survey needed - see attached Hand delivered by:
❑ Forward to Appian your Performance Bond, Labor an ate s a p rance Certificates Date: l -
For our signature, than return to Appian/
I
f"f
❑ For your processing with:
ZZ
❑ Permit Applications ❑ Plans C] Specifications "' -
❑ Appian Chk M in the amount of S
'9 f7
❑ �.
❑ Financial Responsibility form
❑ As discussed
REMARKS
I

AmIMAL WASTE MANAGEMENT PLAN CERTIFICATION FOR NEW OR EXPANDED FEEDLOTS
Please return the completed form to the Division of Environmental Management at the address an the
reverse side of this form.
Name of farm (Please print): Hanor Multiplier
Address: 876 Country -Club Road, Rocky Mount, NC 27804
Phone Number _(919) 443-7038
County:�FegPremhP
Farm location: Latitude and Longitude: 36003' 17" /771 38' 04"(required). Also, please attach a copy of a
county road map with location identified.
Type of operation (swine, layer, dairy, etc.): Swine Sow Farm - Secondary_ -Lagoon
Design capacity (number of animals): 2500 1 c -
Average size of operation (12 month population avg.): 2500
Average acreage needed for land application of waste (acres): 36 Ac Coastal Bermuda
TECHNICAL SPECIALIST CERrncATioN
As a technical specialist designated by the North Carolina Soil and Water Conservation Commission pursuant to
15A NCAC 6F .0005, 1 certify that the new or expanded animal waste management system as installed for the
farm named above has an animal waste management plan that meets the design, construction, operation and
maintenance standards and specifications of the Division of Environmental Management and the USDA -Soil
Conservation Service and/or the North Carolina Soil and Water Conservation Commission pursuant to 15A NCAC
2H.0217 and 15 A NCAC 6F .0001-.0005. The following elements and their corresponding minimum criteria have
been verified by me or other designated technical specialists and are included in the plan as applicable: minimum
separations (buffers); liners or equivalent for lagoons or waste storage ponds; waste storage capacity; adequate
quantity and amount of land for waste utilization (or use of third party); access or ownership of proper waste
application equipment; schedule for timing of applications; application rates; loading rates; and the control of the
discharge of pollutants from stormwater runoff events less severe than the 25-year, 24-hour storm.
Name of Technical Specialist (Please Print):^ Bobby L. Joyner, .P. E.
Affiliation: Agpian Consulting Engineers, P.A.
Address (Agency): P.Q. Bax 7966. Rocky Mount. NC 27804
A Phone Number. [phone]
Signature:, �' Date: January 10, 1995
OWNER/MANAGER
I (we) understand the operation and maintenance procedures established in the approved animal waste
management plan for the farm named above and will implement these procedures. I (we) know that any
additional expansion to the existing design capacity of the waste treatment and storage system or construction of
new facilities will require a new certification to be submitted to the Division of Environmental Management before
the new animals are stocked. I (we) also understand that there must be no discharge of animal waste from this
system to surface waters of the state either through a man-made conveyance or through runoff form a storm
event less severe than the 25-year, 24-hour storm. The approved plan will be filed at the farm and at the office of
the local Soil and Water Conservation District.
Name of Land Owner (Please Print):
Signature: Date:
Name of Manager, if different from owner (Please Print):! �• �o17r�� �� •_ _ _ _
Signature: Date:-�
Note: A than a in land ownership requires notification or a new certification Of the approved plan is changed) to
be submitted to the Division of Environmental Management within 60 days of a title transfer.
DEM USE ONLY:ACNEW#
ACE P-38

\j
JOGIC a or I., �11
4
L%U L411 16,011,
LUZ dl.d HA
'T,
LW
N7
\1 Litt I
1114
J. I tu MR
Liu
tAntliono
toy, 4)) 4 to.
.13 LiusP "IS
UJI
LA!
U U ITS
Vill
cgmtwm of ".50.Ac, 1151'6.,. J. 1,
X L. _o A-Goom of -.1 It •lat
IDGICO." C011LT Wool p Uft", 11
UU QU
J.1L, 4.1
C
LIU
10
.6 Lug Lm
LM
Las
Ile
f LLU
uh
Sol
Ub
ub
LL-3 JA L112 LIEI ID
9 tz" 1.141
LLU
VI Lm
iI
I J�A LJA-
Fill.
ma
64
uu LIU 3
ROCK luk
POP u 3
uu im
LIU
au
Cs.
IARBORCY uv
L 3t L
ALU UU tumb L
uu M
Sot tu. o
U" )D-
an ., IiL
LW
uu
,10 O. 0
U11
Lu .1 01
LU2

'ANIMAL WASTE MANAGEMENT PLAN CERTIFICATION FOR NEW OR EX r
Please return the completed form to the Division of Environmental Management
reverse side of this form.
Name of farm (Please print): Hanor Multiplier
Address:_ 876 Country Club Road, Rocky Mount. N
Phone Number: (gig) 441-7ngg
County: Edaecombe
Farm location: Latitude and Longitude: 36003' 07" /77° 38' 12"(required). Also, please attach a copy of a
county road map with location identified.
Type of operation (swine, layer, dairy, etc.): Swine Feeder Farm — _Secondary Lagoon
Design capacity (number of animals): 8640
Average size of operation (12 month population avg.): 8640
Average acreage needed for land application of waste -(acres): 54 (Coastal Bermuda
TEcHNicA L SPECIALIST CERTIFICATION
As a technical specialist designated by the North Carolina Soil and Water Conservation Commission pursuant to
15A NCAC 6F .0005, 1 certify that the new or expanded animal waste management system as installed for the
farm named above has an animal waste management plan that meets the design, construction, operation and
maintenance standards and specifications of the Division of Environmental Management and the USDA-Soi[
Conservation Service and/or the North Carolina Soil and Water Conservation Commission pursuant to 15A NCAC
2H.0217 and 15 A NCAC 6F .0001-.0005. The following elements and their corresponding minimum criteria have
been verified by me or other designated technical specialists and are included in the plan as applicable: minimum
separations (buffers); liners or equivalent for lagoons or waste storage ponds; waste storage capacity; adequate
quantity and amount of land for waste utilization (or use of third party); access or ownership of proper waste
application equipment; schedule for timing of applications, application rates; loading rates; and the contra[ of the
discharge of pollutants from stormwater runoff events less severe than the 25•year, 24-hour storm.
Name of Technical Specialist (Please Print): Bobby L. Joyner, P. E. _
Affiliation: Appian Consulting Engineers, P.A.
Address (Agency): P.Q. Box_ 7966 . SoCky Mount .._,N C 2 7804
_�4_ a _„ Phone Number [phone]_
Date: January 10, 1995
OWNER/MANAGER
I (we) understand the operation and maintenance procedures establis
management plan for the farm named above and will implement these
additional expansion to the existing design capacity of the waste treatment
new facilities will require a new certification to be submitted to the Division
the new animals are stocked. I (we) also understand that there must be ni
system to surface waters of the state either through a man-made convey
event less severe than the 25-year, 24-hour storm. The approved plan will t
the local Soil and Water Conservation District.
Name of land Owner (Please Print):
Signature: Date:
Name of Manager, if different from owner (Please Print): fie
Signature: �nd Date:
waste
it any
.Ion of
)efore
:n this
storm
rice of
Note: A change4n land ownership requires notification or a new certification (if the approved plan is changed) to
be submitted to the Division of Environmental Management within 60 days of a title transfer.
DEM USE ONLY:ACNEW#
ACE P-38

ANIMAL WASTE MANAGEMENT PLAN CERTIFICATION FOR NEW OR Q
Please return the completed form to the Division of Environmental Management
reverse side of this form.
Name of farm (Please print): Hanor Multiplier
Address: 876 Country Club Road, Rocky Mount, NC 27804
Phone Number.
County: FrICIgr_am6
Farrn locat �� ude: 36° 03' 17" 177" 38' 04"(required). Also, please attach a copy of a
county raa� tified.
Type of op 0� +? ry, etc.):_ Swine Sow Farm -Secondary Lagoon
Design cap s): 2500 T — -
Average si. h population avg.): 2500
Average ac pplication of waste•(acres): 36 Ac ( Coastal Bermuda)
TEcHNlcA. 4 77ON
As a techni I by the North Carolina Soil and Water Conservation Commission pursuant to
15A NCAC _ the new or expanded animal waste management system as installed for the
farm named above has an animal waste management plan that meets the design, construction, operation and -
maintenance standards and specifications of the Division of Environmental Management and the USDA -Soil
Conservation Service and/or the North Carolina Soil and Water Conservation Commission pursuant to 15A NCAC
2H.0217 and 15 A NCAC 6F .0001-.0005. The following elements and their corresponding minimum criteria have
been verified by me or other designated technical specialists and are included in the plan as applicable: minimum
separations (buffers); liners or equivalent for lagoons or waste storage ponds; waste storage capacity; adequate
quantity and amount of land for waste utilization (or use of third party); access or ownership of proper waste
application equipment; schedule for timing of applications; application rates; loading rates; and the control of the
discharge of pollutants from stormwater runoff events less severe than the 25-year, 24-hour storm.
Name of Technical Specialist (Please Print): Bobby L. Joyner, P. E.
Affiliation: Appian Consulting Engineers, P.A.
Address (Agency): E-Q-_BgX 7966. Rocky Mount, NC__ 27804
,Q _ Phone Number. (919) 972 -7703
Date: January 10, 1995
OWNER/MANAGER
I (we) understand the operation and maintenance procedures establisl
management plan for the farm named above and will implement these
additional expansion to the existing design capacity of the waste treatment a
new facilities will require a new certification to be submitted to the Division o
the new animals are stocked. I (we) also understand that there must be no
system to surface waters of the state either through a man-made conveya
event less severe than the 25-year, 24-hour storm. The approved plan will be
the local Soil and Water Conservation District.
Name of Land Owner (Please Print):
Signature: Date:
Name of Manager, if different m owner (Please Print): tl
Date: ,nn
vaste
any
3n of
:fore
this
:arm
.e of
Note: A chanke in land ownership requires notification or a new certification Of the approved plan is changed) to
be submitted to the Division of Environmental Management within 60 days of a title transfer.
DEM USE ONLY:ACNEWA
ACE P-38

ANIMAL WASTE MANAGEMENT PLAN CERTIFICATION FOR NEW OR EXPANDED FEEDLOTS
Please return the completed form to the Division of Environmental Management at the address on the
reverse side of this form.
Name of farm (Please pri
Address:.._ 876 Couni
Hanor Multiplier
Phone Number. [phone]
County: _EE gecombe
Farm location: Latitude and Longitude: 36003' 36" /770 38' 30"(required). Also, please attach a copy of a
county road map with location identified.
Type of operation (swine, layer, dairy, etc.): Swine Nurser
Design capacity (number of animals): 7680
Average size of operation (12 month population avg.): 7680
Average acreage needed for land application of waste (acres):
TECHNICAL SPECIALIST CERTIFICATION
As a technical specialist designated by the North Carolina Soil and Water Conservation Commission pursuant to
15A NCAC 6F '.0005, 1 certify that the new or expanded animal waste management system as installed for the
farm named above has an animal waste management plan that meets the design, construction, operation and
maintenance standards and specifications of the Division of Environmental Management and the USDA -Soil
Conservation Service and/or the North Carolina Soil and Water Conservation Commission pursuant to 15A NCAC
2H.0217 and 15 A NCAC 6F .0001-.0005. The following elements and their corresponding minimum criteria have
been verified by me or other designated technical specialists and are included in the plan as applicable: minimum
separations (buffers); liners or equivalent for lagoons or waste storage ponds; waste storage capacity; adequate
quantity and amount of land for waste utilization (or use of third party); access or ownership of proper waste
application equipment; schedule for timing of applications; application rates; loading rates; and the control of the
discharge of pollutants from stormwater runoff events less severe than the 25-year, 24-hour storm.
Name of Technical Specialist (Please Print): Bob_b)�L. __12yner, P.E.
Affiliation: Al2pian Consulting EnginegrS,. P,A,
Address (Agency}:r P Q x 7966. Rocky Mount, NC 77anu _
Date:_3/13,(95 - _-
I (we) understand the operation and maintenance procedures established in the approved animal waste
management plan for the farm named above and will implement these procedures. I (we) know that any
additional expansion to the existing design capacity of the waste treatment and storage system or construction of
new facilities will require a new certification to be submitted to the Division of Environmental Management before
the new animals are stocked. I (we) also understand that there must be no discharge of animal waste from this
system to surface waters of the state either through a man-made conveyance or through runoff form a storm
event less severe than the 25-year, 24-hour storm. The approved plan will be filed at the farm and at the office of
the local Soil and Water Conservation District.
Name of Land Owner (Please Print):
Signature: Date:
Name of Manager, if different from owner (Please Print): TID,
Signature: �' Date: ePS-,7d2-q.5
Note: A cha ge in land ownership requires notification or a new certification (if the approved plan is changed) to
be submitted to the Division of Environmental Management within 60 days of a title transfer.
DEM USE ONLY:ACNEW#
ACE P-38

• '1
JUN-24-1996 13:36 AGRI-WASTE TECHNOLOGY+INC 919 829 1597 P-06/07
t LL I I(—q.IIkj1 LiV1.L1�Jiri11 Y
DN Farris
Edgecombe County, North Carolina
SninT M0'rk7
Church
� o
a
jJj W
U •
�w
V �
N
1
Field Key
Field
Ac
1
6.9
2
14.9
3
18.3
4
35.5
5
14.6
6
36.2
7
6.6
8
39.9
9
0.4
11
7.'7
12
26.4
13
5.2
14
4.9
197.7 ex. _
Total:
1� /1z� '. Yainagd
1+rfr+r itch
I o Oak ,
14
Ia s U J
T . �-
widbw
G >lnons Pond Dam
GRAPHIC SCALE
(m rest)
I inoh 5 L7W IL
N
Wind Roac rsn
Y.uw pens[ .1 W. p%
el(p� y di0 hao� umledl..Gd W E
N
Legend
—•— Road/Highway
#
Buiding
The Hanor Com an Enc.
Streomdg=z
,
.����• Property Line
Lagoon
DN Ferra Site Map
Structure
Drains• pitchecombe
County. NC °nTrees
Pond
rcbn0iu[7. is
F,,
A.� `rAMMyrF+�.JN
.
iCD—yenr Flood
Plain
7R,—lee qn.. tlgj. xH..a
s+ � Me rnps
® ►da nnp ra..idor
n,.r,d YrSwamp
X.��.�Hawser,
DN3A—SM

producer:
Location:
Address:
Telephone:
Type operation:
?;umber of Animal Units
4,&,40 0- M v(,rtPc f e-z
.,ter �v s 04
r
-7G Bo
waste from your animal facility ruust' be land applied at a
specified rate to prevent pollution of surface and/or ground water.
The plant nutrients in the animal waste should be used to reduce the
amount. of commercial fertilizer required for the crops on the fields
where the waste is to be applied. This waste should be analyzed
before each application cycle and annual soil tests are encouraged
so that all plant nutrients can be balanced for realistic yields of
the crops to be grown.
Several factors are important in implementing your waste utilization
plan in order to maximize the fertilizer value of the waste and to
ensure that it" is applied in an environmentally safe manner'. Always
apply waste based on the needs of the crop to be grown and the
nutrient content of the waste. Do not apply more nitrogen than the
crop can utilize. Soil types are important as they have different
infiltration rates and leaching potential. Waste shall not be
applied to land eroding at greater than 5 tons per acre per year.
Do not apply waste on saturated soils or on land when the surface is
frozen. Either of these conditions may result in runoff to surface
waters. Wind conditions should also be considered to avoid drift
and downwind odor problems. To maximize the value of nutrients for
crop production and :to reduce the potential for pollution, the waste
should be applied. to a growing crop or not mare than 30 days prior
to planting. Injecting the waste or disking will conserve nutrients
and reduce odor problems.
The acres needed to apply the animal waste is based on typical
nutrient content for this type of facility. Acreage requirements
may be more or less based on the waste analysis report from your
waste management facility.
Amount of waste produced per vear
7G6a
A9t
g4p . :�
animal units X
y�
17,43 8, &(oc
/year
ga (ion 5
Amount of
nitrogen produced
per year
&Bo
o,
Z5� a
'T
8Co¢o
animal units X
3-7
lbs . N/year
-A
` 30
waste/animal unit/year =
lbs. N/animal unit/year
Applying the above amount of waste is a big job. You should plan
time and have appropriate equipment to apply the waste in a timely
manner.
Page 10
20plo eEDuC,TtDO Due 7-0 SE601-cDA" L-Ar-,oO&J
13500 )C 0. 00 10 800 16 s iJ / Y ee
I q-ro-r�4 30 �5 i b s� � •�'
` I��Z y- o• Sa 15f39 R �� AI Ilrn/

■ n
The following acreage will be needed for waste application based on
the crop to be grown and surface application:
Table 1: ACRES OWNED BY PRODUCER
Tract field Soil Crop Real. Lbs. N ,iz� Lbs. 11 Month of
Type Yield Per AC Utilized Application
797
,5Gi7¢
1JoAffP1+9�Dd
i0r5%4L
�UU
I �i.8
ZU ��
Qr�t ! DGT•
�4{P
G 7
fog
rwµ�4
cPt s QG
30ca
156. 5
- 550
Ape,(, /O,--r-
Total Table 1 12Z6,.3
67, B90
Table 2:
ACRES WITH
AGREEMENT
OR LONG TERM LEASE
Tract Field Soil
Crop Real.
Lbs. N
Acres Lbs. N Month of
# Type
Yield
Per Ac
Utilized Application
Total Table 1
220.3
Total Table 2
Total.
zz� . 3
Amount of N Produc3le
i 1I S
Deficit�"�5��
6,7, 93qa
+�3.
G 6qU
30
-
37, 5Ds
Your facility is designed for 1e'days of temporary storage and
needs to have the temporary storage removed every �0 months.
Page 11

Where owners of animal operations do not have adequate amounts of
land to apply the waste, the producer must provide a written
agreement whereby another landowner has agreed to land apply or
allow land application on his or her land.
Call the Soil Conservation Service or Soil and Water Conservation
District office after you receive the waste analysis report to
obtain the amount per acre to apply and the application rate prior
to applying the waste.
:arrative operation:
I ✓l C u C14- Q, ! p er j-i ✓n t 1,A n o
aIIowS 4-h2. r4p- ur -ion off' 44�,c. or-eiif) c-)•n-F cxC rirfrogii1 +r-> b-e - i- ic.L�
t o rc ore 4-i 1 a v) GAd e 1 Q-
See attached map showing the fields to be used for the disposal of
waste water.
Application of waste by Irrigation
Field
No.
Soil Type
Crop
Application
Rate(In/Hr)
Application
Anount(In.)'
1�0
dhra4
O.
3 a
G 7
GoA oS
es L-
0.4
Page 12

d
1
WASTE MANAGEMENT PLAN AGREEMENT
I agree to carry out this waste management plan according to the
terms of the agreement. Failure to comply with the waste management
plan will automat' lly require any cost share funds to be refunded
to their source.
Producer: Date:
I understand that Mr./Mrs. W N 1A does not have
a rtp le land tv ap p ,i.y the aliiiilol waste produced from :Z 1;�, }"ier animal
operation. I have agreed to utilize the waste produced from the
operation and agree to carry out this waste management plan on land
that I own or operate. .
Recipient Landowner: N /A Date:
System Designer: Date: !Z 95
SWCD Representative:: Date:
Design Approval: l.t. �~ Date: 2L `t5
Page 13

State of North Carolina
Department of Environment, Health and Natural Resources
Division of Water Quality
Non -Discharge Permit Application Form / Survey
(THIS FORM MAY BE PHOTOCOPIED FOR USE AS AN ORIGINAL)
General Permit - Liquid Animal Waste Operations
The following questions have been completed utilizing information on file with the
Division. Please review the information for completeness and make any corrections
which are appropriate. If a question has not been completed by the Division, please
complete as best as possible. Do not leave any question unanswered.
Application Date:
I. - REQUIRED ITEMS CHECKLIST
Please indicate that you have included the following required items by signing your initials in the space provided next to each
item.
Applicants Initials
1. One completed and signed original and one copy of the application for General Permit - Animal
Waste Operations;
2. Two copies of a general location map indicating the location of the animal waste facilities and
field locations where animal waste is disposed; ' (� .
3. Two copies of the Certified Animal Waste Management Plan (CAW -MP). If the facility does
not have a CAWI P, one must be completed prior to submittal of a general permit application + i
for animal waste operations. - —
II. GENERAL INFORMATION:
1. Farm's name. Hanor Multiplier
2. Print Land Owner's name: The HanQr Company
3. Land Owner's Mailing address: 876 Country Club Rd
City: _Rocky Mount NC Zip: 27804
Telephone Number: -44 - E= ' ( `� 7 . 0 & c1
4. County where farm is located: EdMombe,
5. Farm Location (Directions from nearest major highway. Please include SR numbers for state roads. Please include a copy
of a county road map with the location of the farm identified): SkVM7 5R %'t{C)�
6. Print Farm Managers name (if different from Land Owner): John College
7. Lessee's / Integrator's name (if applicable; please circle which type is listed):
33 - 58 C r, 33 . SCI r, (56 G fiA
FORM: AWO-G-E 2/26/97 Page 1 of 3
v

III. OPERATION INFORMATION:
I. FarmNo.:-:H33-59
2. Operation Description: o erp ation
Feeder to Finish
9792 -Certified DesigyCa ityIs the above information correct? 0 yes;. If no, correct below using the design capacity of the facility
Type of Swine No. of Animals Type of Poulta No. of Animals Type of Cattle No. of Animals
0 Wean to Feeder 0 Layer 0 Dairy
0 Feeder to Finish 0 Non -Layer 0 Beef
0 Farrow to Wean (# sow) r_( S60 0 Turkey
0 Farrow to Feeder (# sow)
0 Farrow to Finish (# sow)
O:her Type of L. , ..stock un the fa u.. No. of Anirr.»is;,
3. Acreage cleared and available for application: 89.2 ; Required Acreage (as listed in the CAWMP): _89,2_ _
4. Number of Lagoons: ; Total Capacity: —2968437 �� �� �^ Cubic Feet (ft3)
Number of Storage Ponds: ; Total Capacity: Cubic Feet (ft3)
5. Is animal waste being applied on any field which has subsurface drains? YES or !N (please circle one)
6. Are subsurface drains present in the vicinity of or under the lagoon? YES or�N (please circle one)
IV. APPLICANT'S CERTIFICATION:
I,U2 (Land Owner's name listed in question II.2), attest that
this application for YZ 92 3 (Farm name listed in question LI.1)
has been reviewed by me and is accurate and complete td the best of my knowledge. I understand that if all required parts of this
application are not completed and that if all required supporting information and attachments are not included, this application package
will be returfl-d to me as incomplete. n /7
Signature
Date F� j
V . MANAGER'S CERTIFICATION: (complete only if different from the Land Owner)
I,
(Manager's name listed in question II.6), attest that this
application for ��r=,-trqlz� (Farm name listed in question II.1)
has been reviewed by me and is accurate and complete to the best of my knowledge. I understand that if all required parts of this
application are not completed and that if all required supporting information and attachments are not included, this application package
will be returned as incomplete.
Signature
THE
Date 0 ` ✓9'
APPLICATION PACKAGE, INCLUDING ALL SUPPORTING INFORMATION AND MATERIALS,
SHOULD BE SENT TO THE FOLLOWING ADDRESS:
NORTH CAROLINA DIVISION OF WATER QUALITY
WATER QUALITY SECTION
PERMITS AND ENGINEERING UNIT
POST OFFICE BOX 29535
RALEIGH, NORTH CAROLINA 27626-0535
TELEPHONE NUMBER: [phone]
FORM: AWO-G-E 2/26/97 Page 2 of 3

producer: 4buo e, MU(,rrPcr gF
Location: tD( P6--1RF CAU. r!-,
Address: f37L OU A'a PMIL-P
Telephone:
Type Operation: 5, 1 For Sowl
Number of Animal Units: Soo I7-522 / 8&40
_ne waste from your animal facility must be land applied at a
specified rage to prevent pollution of surface and/or around rater.
The plant nutrients in the animal waste should be used to reduce the
amount of commercial fertilizer required for the crops on the fields
where the waste is to be applied. This waste should be analyzed
before each application cycle and annual soil tests are encouraged
so that all plant nutrients can be balanced for realistic yields of
the crops to be grown.
Several factors are important in implementing your waste utilization
plan in order to maximize the fertilizer value of the waste and to
ensure that it' is applied in an environmentally safe manner. Always
apply waste based on the needs of the crop to be grown and the
nutrient content of the waste. Do not apply more nitrogen than the
crop can utilize. Soil types are important as they have different
infiltration rates and leaching potential. Waste shall not be
applied to land eroding at greater than 5 tons per acre per year.
Do not apply waste on saturated soils or on land when the surface is
frozen. Either of these conditions may result in runoff to surface
waters. Wind conditions should also be considered to avoid drift
and downwind odor problems. To maximize the value of nutrients for
crop production and .to reduce the potential for pollution, the waste
should be applied to a growing crop or not more than 30 days prior
to planting. Injecting the waste or disking will conserve nutrients
and reduce odor problems.
The acres needed to apply the animal waste is based on typical
nutrient content for this type of facility. Acreage requirements
may be more or less based on the waste analysis report from your
waste management facility.
Amount of waste produced p1r.year
7050 J 4
g4a. animal units X 9z7 waste/animal unit/year =
i� 453���0 _ S4s/Year -
Amount of nitrogen produced per year
G80 p.
xso 0
animal units X 5 lbs. N/animal unit/year =
1,61 lbs . N/year
Applying the above amount of waste is a big job. You should plan
time and have appropriate equipment to apply the waste in a timely
manner. ._' .
Page 10 .
* 20'4 S5e-'O"b,&Z"f
1350o )c o. 80= 1 a80a !h5 �! /Y�. 30, 206
198-7z y o. Sa = 1589 R �� �! /41n.

The following acreage will be needed for waste application based on
the crop to be grown and surface application:
Table 1: ACRES OWNED BY PRODUCER
Tract Field Soil Crop Real. Lbs. N hq=an Lbs. to Month of
Type Yield Per l:c Utilized ?pplicati.on
-]47
Z, 3,4
15G 7 'Il.lofA
�aasrlc
pa.IuDd
n+*•.c(a
!!
(0&151A
c Arms
50UC> I G7•
12 U� �J�U
Ij
dP[uc.
�o NO
1 G 7
fro +3
Total Table 1
ZZ60.3
0, B90
Table 2: ACRES WITH AGREEMENT OR LONG TERM LEASE
Tract Field Soil Crop Real. Lbs. N Acres Lbs. N month of
Ir Type Yield Per Ac Utilized Application
Total Table 1
ZZG .3
Total Table 2
Total#
Amount of N Produce
,31� 115
D e f i c i t'LVV5
G7 fro
30 385
3 11 50S
Your facility- is designed for 1eij 'days of temporary storage and
needs to have the temporary storage removed every I months.
Page 11

0
T 7q7
IffCa4,1,
0. ioLA-) 2 ton off' +?n - -fi Y1 {^rp -✓
e ,
renr-G rAore 4nap, attc6k vo-iI (e -�' ,� ,-.i
See attached map showing the fields to be used for the disposal of
waste water.
Application of Waste by Irrigation
Field
No.
Soil Type
Crop
Application
Rate(In/Hr)
Applications
Amount(In.)
14o A
A-srdL a
O•
, 5 o
7 L'S
6oA L16B
62,6s c. acaw
0.4
1.50
Page 12

WASTE MANAGEMENT PLAN AGREEMENT
I agree to carry out this waste management plan according to the
terms of the agreement. Failure to comply with the waste management
plan will automat i fly require an`! cost share funds to be refunded
to their source. A
Producer: -12LZL Date: �g /w
I understand that Mr./Mrs. N 1A does not have
ample 1ailu tc apply the dfiimdl waS%.c prL.uiiCeu frva<< his/ ]'icr animal
operation. I have agreed to utilize the waste produced from the
operation and agree to carry out this waste management plan on land
that I own or operate.
Recipient Landowner: fK4
Date:
System Designer: �r,,.,S� Date: l2 5
SWCD Representative: Date:
Design, Approval: Date:
Page 13

Fax #: [phone] '
Telephone: [phone]
'APPIAN CONSULTING ENGINEERS
841 S. Wesleyan Blvd.
P.O. Box 7966
R cky Mount, North C r line 27804-0966
r ?
GENTLEMEN:
WE ARE SENDING YOU THE FOLLOWING.
f] Prints/Plans ❑ Estimates ❑ Contracts IDS
❑ Permit Applications ❑ Change order ❑ Bid Proposal "
r..
LETTEir. OF TRANSMITTAL
L�JIMA
THESE ARE TRANSMITTED as checked below:
❑ For approval ❑ Bid Tabulation Distribution ❑ Boundary Survey needed - see attached
❑ For your use ❑ Approved permits for your filmlrecords ❑ Easement needed -see attached
❑ As requested ❑ For Review and Comment ❑ Topographical survey needed -see attached
❑ Forward to Appian your Performance Bond, Labogaalerl s an rance Certificates
For our signature. then return to Appian/
❑ For your processing with.
❑ Permit Applications ❑ Plans ❑ Specifications
❑ Appian Ghk # in the amount of S
Ci
Deliver to:
❑ Addressee Signature required,
No substitute signatures)
❑ Substitute Signature allowed :.
`J
Received by:
Hand delivered by:
_i
Date:
..,U
■
���fi=rl ■ � � ■ e /� i
r� �;f ��
PIZ

ANIMAL WASTE MANAGEMENT PLAN C4ERTIFICATION FOR NEW OR EXPANDED FEEDLOTS
Please return the completed form to the Division of Environmental Management at the address on the
• reverse side of this form.
Name of farm (Please print): Hanor Multiplier
Address: 876 Country Club Road, Rocky Mount
Farm location: Latitude and Longitude: 360 03' 17" /770 38'
county road map with location identified.
Phone Number. (919) 443-7Q38
County: Edgecnmhe
04"(required). Also, please attach a copy of a
Type of operation (swine, layer, dairy, etc.): Swine Sow Farm - Secondary Lagoon
Design capacity (number of animals): 2500 �1;o �
Average size of operation (12 month population avg.): 2500
Average acreage needed for land application of waste (acres): 36 Ac -(Coastal Bermuda)
TECHMCAL SPECIALIST CERTIFICATION
As a technical specialist designated by the North Carolina Sail and Water Conservation Commission pursuant to
15A NCAC 6F .0005, 1 certify that the new or expanded animal waste management system as installed for the
farm named above has an animal waste management plan that meets the design, construction, operation and
maintenance standards and specifications of the Division of Environmental Management and the USDA -Soil
Conservation Service and/or the North Carolina Soil and Water Conservation Commission pursuant to 15A NCAC
2H.0217 and 15 A NCAC 6F .0001-.0005. The following elements and their corresponding minimum cri#eda have
been verified by me or other designated technical specialists and are included in the plan as applicable: minimum
separations (buffers); liners or equivalent for lagoons or waste storage ponds; waste storage capacity; adequate
quantity and amount of land for waste utilization (or use of third party); access or ownership of proper waste
application equipment; schedule for timing of applications; application rates; loading rates; and the control of the
discharge of pollutants from stormwater runoff events less severe than the 25-year, 24-hour storm.
Name of Technical Specialist (Please Print): Bobby L. Joyner, _P. E.
Affiliation: Al2pian Consulting Engineers, P.A.
Address (Agency):Rocky Mount, NC 27804
/I . Phone Number.(9191,972-7703
Date: January 10, 1995
(we) understand the operation and maintenance procedures established in the approved animal waste
management plan for the farm named above and will implement these procedures. I (we) know that any
additional expansion to the existing design capacity of the waste treatment and storage system or construction of
new facilities will require a new certification to be submitted to the Division of Environmental Management before
the new animals are stocked. I (we) also understand that there must be no discharge of animal waste from this
system to surface waters of the state either through a man-made conveyance or through runoff form a storm
event less severe than the 25-year, 24-hour storm. The approved plan will be filed at the farm and at the office of
the local Soil and Water Conservation District.
Name of Land Owner (Please Print):
Signature: Date:
Name of Manager, if different from owner (Please Print): o
Of
Signature: Date: Ad
Note: A chan a in land ownership requires notification or a new certification (if the approved plan is changed) to
be submitted to the Division of Environmental Management within 60 days of a title transfer.
DEM USE ONLY:ACNEW#
ACE P-38

Was,
Val
I.J "I
300),
ulz
Ila Ck
Z, LW
im
LM 1.112 Ae
MAP
LW
fftf%090
Lw 10 jai
10
ut? SITE
Lm
LW P
U&I
c9bdift" of stsil
0�9-0 A",
(lilt
IRT
4:111
un
Lin
LM
Lo Uki
L-21
Lm Liu LIU
SIP Lift
Liu
lift lumu
uu i's ou
uu
fill till
flit
UH
4)U
LIU
ROCKY MOU JU iuL
1.5
LM
IM Lul� till ib
FA Cy LW
U9
tumn
uu ;i, uu
SUL
Lis t:
un
.j im 10
IA V. 1.$
LM dcrvuu
'D N�I,sqj I Lj 13
iu
HIS

,.r
ANIMAL WASTE MANAGEMENT PLAN CERTIFICATION FOR NEW OR EX
7o-12101 "­7
Please return the completed farm to the Division of Environmental Management
reverse side of this form.
Name of farm (Please print): Hanor Multiplier
Address: 876 Country Club_ Road, Rocky Mount, NC 27804
Phone Number_(919) 44,;-7 qs
County: Edgecomb
Farm location: Latitude and Longitude: 36003' 0711/770 38' 1211(required). Also, please attach a copy of a
county road map with location identified.
Type of operation (swine, layer, dairy, etc.): Swine Feeder Farm - Secondary Lagoon
Design capacity (number of animals): s64n
Average size of operation (12 month population avg.): 8640 _
Average acreage needed for land application of waste. (acres): 54 _(_Coastal Bermuda)
TECHNICAL SPECIALIST CERTIFICATION
As a technical specialist designated by the North Carolina Soil and Water Conservation Commission pursuant to
15A NCAC 6F .0005, 1 certify that the new or expanded animal waste management system as installed for the
farm named above has an animal waste management plan that meets the design, construction, operation and
maintenance standards and specifications of the Division of Environmental Management and the USDA -Soil
Conservation Service and/or the North Carolina Soil and Water Conservation Commission pursuant to 15A NCAC
2H.0217 and 15 A NCAC 6F .0001-.0005. The following elements and their corresponding minimum criteria have
been verified by me or other designated technical specialists and are included in the plan as applicable: minimum
separations (buffers); liners or equivalent for lagoons or waste storage ponds; waste storage capacity; adequate
quantity and amount of land for waste utilization (or use of third party); access or ownership of proper waste
application equipment; schedule for timing of applications; application rates; loading rates; and the control of the
discharge of pollutants from stormwater runoff events less severe than the 25-year, 24-hour storm.
Name of Technical Specialist (Please Print): Bob_ by__L._Joyner, P.E. _
Affiliation: Appian Consulting Engineers, P.A. _
Address (Agency): P.O. Box 7966. Rocky Mount. NC 27804 _
_ _44 _..._ ,Q Phone Number._ [phone]
OWNER/MANAGER
event IeSti SCVUrC Uldrl Lilo 6o-year, z4-nour storm. i ne apprvveu plan will i
the local Soil and Water Conservation District.
Name of Land Owner (Please Print):
Signature: Date:
Name of Manager, if different from owner (Please Print):M H 13
Signature: Date: 9 G -r� _ SCj
_
Note: A change in land ownership requires notification or a new certification (f the approved plan is changed) to
be submitted to the Division of Environmental Management within 60 days of a title transfer.
OEM USE ONLY:ACNEWS
ACE P-38

ANIMAL WASTE MANAGEMENT PLAN CERTIFICATION FOR NEW OR E)
c3lease return the completed form to the Division of Environmental Management
reverse side of this form.
Name of farm (Please print): Hanor Multiplier
Address: 876 Country Club Road, Rocky Mount, NC 27804
Phone Number: (9191 443-ZQ38
County:_eigQcomhe
Farm locat �� ude: 36° 03' 17" 177° 38' 04"(required). Also, please attach a copy of a
county roa, i1 11fied.
Type of op O"b ry, etc.): Swine Sow Farm - Secondary Lagoon
Design cap 3 s): 2500
Average si. h population avg.): 2500
Average ac pplication of waste,(acres): 36 Ac (Coastal Bermuda
TTECHNICA. 4 TION
As a techni I by the North Carolina Soil and Water Conservation Commission pursuant to
15A NCAC - the new or expanded animal waste management system as installed for the ..
farm named above has an animal waste management plan that meets the design, construction, operation and
maintenance standards and specifications of the Division of Environmental Management and the USDA -Soil
Conservation Service and/or the North Carolina Soil and Water Conservation Commission pursuant to 15A NCAC
2H.0217 and 15 A NCAC $F .0001-.0005. The following elements and their corresponding minimum criteria have
been verified by me or other designated technical specialists and are included in the plan as applicable: minimum
separations (buffers); liners or equivalent for lagoons or waste storage ponds; waste storage capacity; adequate
quantity and amount of land for waste utilization (or use of third party); access or ownership of proper waste
application equipment; schedule for timing of applications; application rates; loading rates; and the control of the
discharge of pollutants from stormwater runoff events less severe than the 25-year, 24-hour storm.
Name of Technical Specialist (Please Print): Bobby L. Joyner, P. E.
Affiliation: Appian Consulting Engineers, P.'A.-
Address (Agency): __P- -0— Qgx 7966. Rocky Mount._ _NC _ 27804
Phone Number: [phone]
jary 10, 1995
I (we) understand the operation and maintenance procedures establisl
management plan for the farm named above and will implement these
additional expansion to the existing design capacity of the waste treatment a
new facilities will require a new certification to be submitted to the Division o
the new animals are stocked. I (we) also understand that there must be no
system to surface waters of the state either through a man-made conveys
event less severe than the 25-year, 24-hour storm. The approved plan will be
the local Soil and Water Conservation District.
Name of Land Owner (Please Print):
Signature: Date:
vaste
any
,3n of
afore
this
:omm
�e of
Name of Manager, if different from owner (Please Print): er
Signature: Date: 4.4 —qS
Note: A chap a in land ownership requires notification or a new certification (f the approved plan Is changed) to
be submitted to the Division of Environmental Management within 60 days of a title transfer.
DEM USE ONLY:ACNEW#
ACE P-38

ANIMAL WASTE MANAGEMENT PLAN CERTIFICATION FOR NEW OR EXPANDED FEEDLOTS
Please return the completed form to the Division of Environmental Management at the address on the
reverse side of this form.
Name of farm (Please print)
Hanor Multiplier
Phone Number, [phone]
County: Edgecom_ e
Farm location: Latitude and Longitude: 36003' 36" 1770 38' 30"(required). Also, please attach a copy of a
county road map with location identified.
Type of operation (swine, layer, dairy, etc.): Swine Nursery
Design capacity (number of animals): 7680
Average size of operation (12 month population avg.):
Average acreage needed for land application of waste (acres):_ -(Cngra! Rpr-m,A-1
TECHNICAL SPECIALIST CERTIFICATION
As a technical specialist designated by the Noah Carolina Soil and Water Conservation Commission pursuant to
15A NCAC 6F .0005, 1 certify that the new or expanded animal waste management system as installed for the
farm named above has an animal waste management plan that meets the design, construction, operation and
maintenance standards and specifications of the Division of Environmental Management and the USDA -Soil
Conservation Service and/or the North Carolina Soil and Water Conservation Commission pursuant to 15A NCAC
2H.0217 and 15 A NCAC 6F .0001-.0005. The following elements and their corresponding minimum criteria have
been verified by me or other designated technical specialists and are included in the plan as applicable: minimum
separations (buffers); liners or equivalent for lagoons or waste storage ponds; waste storage capacity; adequate
quantity and amount of land for waste utilization (or use of third party); access or ownership of proper waste
application equipment; schedule for timing of applications; application rates; loading rates; and the control of the
discharge of pollutants from stormwater runoff events less severe than the 25-year, 24-hour storm.
Name of Technical Specialist (Please Print): Bobby L. Joyner, P. E.
Affiliation: Appian Consulting Engineers. P.A. _
Address (Agenc ):
Phone Number. 919 972-7703
Date: ' / 1 a /g S
OWNEWMANAGER
I (we) understand the operation and maintenance procedures established in the approved animal waste
management plan for the farm named above and will implement these procedures. I (we) know that any
additional expansion to the existing design capacity of the waste treatment and storage system or construction of
new facilities will require a new certification to be submitted to the Division of Environmental Management before
the new animals are stocked. I (we) also understand that there must be no discharge of animal waste from this
system to surface waters of the state either through a man-made conveyance or through runoff form a storm
event less severe than the 25-year, 24-hour storm. The approved plan will be filed at the farm and at the office of
the local Soil and Water Conservation District.
Name of Land Owner (Please Print):
Signature: Date:
Name of Manager, if different from owner (Please Print): M _
J
Signature: Date: e6-;a-�-s _
or
Note: A cha ge in land ownership requires notification or a new certification (if the approved plan is changed) to
be submitted to the Division of Environmental Management within 60 days of a title transfer.
OEM USE ONLY:ACNEW#
ACE P-38

LOCKO-1 tjj
0.4
LJ) 41 Was.
LLLL Ald HW
IT.9uvgC,
ILIA 0
LLIA to
LW Ull
2p LW 4/
IM
um ULI
IAMISOMO
631
IP %
IJII
LIOCKO-U 13) !!U I>
Wit
U U
C-
un
UPI
C"tawd Of s 6c-ma In i. N
Ix9W�Lg;
_U IDCICGai mov..4
4 Ital till 7. tLu Ull
Ub Sp LI
uu
4.p
-Os
LLIS Lai usi
L-91
un Lin LIES
W,..dok.
WL "n usi
LLU
I't
N U&I Ulu
LL
.a . . i
,marl t1j! % LL12 LLU 4.3 LUJ
14 y,f..
.F� , i. i I uu
- "
IA VIA Lut t
Ir
JIM
ws I uu
ROCKY MOIL T IN
4111
4
im LLU
ML
Ll
TA4' LW
N Ukt
Im t UU UL. LLIJ "IZ
Lu- LILU
ip U"
LU
IUL du
A A
LIM
M

Y / frr•" r5 _ Ir•r
o-•.Y+�,�7nrTi,07aliSi�� __ iLi i 1
• y. grYrrru]
-fir ... ate\`+� / • „ k\ �s .'' .r,, a C' Aa%iow
oti
M � +i•
0:1'a NOlivindOJ'D] X9YN � `� n,•r1�.,9 Zf , /� '•' •"� Zt °.,7 // /'�
110'9i dod �] 3BI10]2903 •9r cc t Zf� wr] _ IZ4 �,• \ �' /�
01[IO
WNW
m NOV wow *29 2 r•a 1 r & g
1 It ..• f `� rrll s7nYarN 8
g ; ... W i
+ `-� ��, 1 a Y+'�rw' YIN.. 'Irq •;r /pS..1�7i[r�V
�+
3013N0'J aerr F +ln �sq`) $ • 7 gra+rq . .4' i ..a
vrl
�r •as � a' �rJ � /�/l' ;'/ � r� `K\ .'-°r �•� �r►���N7 ti6Z d
•rBsz tir Y.�.,p at:'1Y771 tort
i �"ir • .er !... � A _ .°� y
4. ILE / ♦ # • u.
1 S � •r..g 7Ylrlw �e1 ili ` / /C""".I Yr .M^�'°bl*' �+ �
r .w.rrr.7 r •e, o n"''ea iL d`` rr.r] 'N ,r, a` �y r n,Y rr•�1,.
to
/$i f �r�jJ / Y.•I�rp / / �'7 tila Yl• �_! �._!/ ��-- .. A IMI its {,� �Il.
IA3]NItlJ cw rmr a° )• '°°It'":
•7a s ..r \`�` rY °7Y'1 gyp:.
fWa°77Yr r"�.�� /.; M •`k 1�9° [rt'! dpl7prr ).,leer \
rob
.50
g P� n �y i " r Cr, C� ,mYn + -'\ •aajr .`CBI7.(r� . Ktiw r, *
wn
rra ` 1us -.. .r„F w i✓ pk vrt:erl..+� � r it '� t7r1oY1_• F
., rrrr ryI ,t_ '�' . 9� )i :� / I. d+19 / � !`�•. .r.•fY
•rlrYy ,� `r J� � * G 9�CiL _ 1 i�IW�r .�.� .,..1^ ���54
\'a 1Ls� R all
•X] INN
�, i"vi r \' �y1�\awl^\. `-•'�_r - _ _ t9 `• iyor .Cr+�,� ♦B�°s°rsl uiw .r-.
r°°".-y?41F`..r�'i ,u rn rw. �'�r�emo
\ i a \ � .� ra•" �r����.t � _ r� r--'1e r.; ``� aa.r�.r °�
nr �� •r \ � a �-, o a .'' .`\ / � `�'\' r`. � �: s "'1 1� •+.. / r'e/ r of ��'.
'L r '%y 3 F],rt..r r .rl � \� �� „ �� f� 4•d`•�1r*..` + _ _ I j . _ ,��'_\ 2' .. s�
.� ■■ i IEt •C
1
Y �i • _ �RriEEiZ ..—, �$� �_:q!�i 6v �^5 s . .o •�' �} \:. :�• W
Ct w., ML •r.s ' G !r � rrYp7r 1rt , Q / :. 'rrr, r.. r . � \ . I /� •.. I} , rr,�assoa,'
c.� 3
III _
[ rJIL
40
o i ,6 rTro��' ' � .p ` L rli_/ f + �+` Jr •^O'— d9Ci1.��.2 � �: �. ` .. _
r221 �L�� .>,l' der �� Ce a�]pr �••: .rrr s� Ya'°lni5 ��
1
/lam � �1� � • is ���99 r
1 ,� !1~ `• 1 � �r \{ /�Z ✓✓RLI � I• • c\rf �cr °iW i.'i i� G
�[��/ v _�' »ems _ �. •.
. ~`1•r' �'.�"_rJ rr � ° /�"�' 1 Sd31 YJ IX,F.�'z•.`-'. _
�^
--
..J i=. P

goj It
Tn,T "°`
am
aR'!9 NaISYRMPr'P3 NftiN +fib n.rwrq >+ w ; -^
DWI; i0i DD 19110719a1 y, ,,,, ' •°. if \, Z, \\ w E t IZ,6
I .fa'1
o.0 wMl 1 t44lZ°r° ! 61 '
`� � ... � • _I is � r•• , xrn
s�BlZ S m w. Ilrro r.., i 1r,,,. i.� S :S� xi•t•arC `! 'r
_ H�axN F � � � ^" thrt M'Sn •'i/@ �la�� +ice+���.._!•- •rll III � 5�
w�i Cr 'ter+' /�' : r r `r. \ .^rr r •+i .' ' :�/r; ~ too. ►p')• "° ,�, arth
` �eclw°� ��, • _ �1 �; •IiG2wv= ..�.•q .ipnx r62 , �Mh -- .
1 r, l `Qr ror i y A ; ■ ..war. \\ \f� '{, •'j r.� \ \ oi� E• S
' f 1 , r.., r I f �,1�' ..t y., r ba .' ,d�a• .cn� �-�`• r.ty• : + Y`^L^ .
- U.xn.xq � • Mt �,� �V f[ / �7'� �.1 :•4 w` r�..•in.• Ir.•, �
_ 1.+.11 � �'•"= � J � uroo YY.9 + rl . •.• iS w 11n .r.
w, ?` v ♦ M�.ee �\ ; r!�i ow! W �. Lf rj
ks�oxro + s \
-.INC 1 • o is ti is •n \ f 'T! °" .a V r"r' ; 31r
I �. S� „ �//' ". I ",c+ ,��ca _� �� S a, \11 ♦� ` . .eon
•r _r •.n . R 7v .•i!5 ' �:.
•l� ow..far r'Z', /.;a `�. s 'VW oo. Y6L1Iw! ,•'.0
�+ °7•.0 �. � x - _ r
..•.$ E: � j+ \� rrr, c.�t1 'yrr £� °r .Mr/ l �'-'\ �:•,i. '-e➢►RGr ,.� i• ',�
�- J j} '~+
,� !1J' . � .V1li• w � Ell
,6. IF•Yll t 4q •,w � / .� •.9' fiYD.l� w p
wn»r! .r, � !I P • SSS�L L _ � �•� dAB i • ram•:: .r,.1F �'.
\ .,, •�• r! .,.rid 73�5,�. .�� �f �.L e� IS .... rt I :.�: \6 �OryS�, B eau
•x� 11ix i 7 'y' .ti,1 / � \ .r T u �.r:, i � i : �4�an mr. h '
.Q... ,• ihue� �•:{ \s 11 � 'wit. `' S .o::�\o } •, �er�
.,. .. �-� \ �',�t'f�' r - r9 , %Cc .�I B: aicrs„oi« I,.1 .:'�7j �s „r �� +� c•
1r�� �r_3tiw}, �.' `.\ q\ g roa
It
\ j $ tLrl.,' I .•+ \ l �J�P�{�, ti'1%� r*`r �� �.' �� a,, `.��' rS�[' o •#
MOD
� \ f ' CAI. f7 1 „ .!�` •'�:'..�� aa•-•� r- a� -r \'. � � W 5,ixs...
AIr
dl �"�a1 4"';r_ •( .,.o Sf, I.Y 7r r n 5Q� ,., �IIL'r- ` �� + r� +/ '
15 •' i-tt � '�8J]� JI •'Y
.[J !6 fir° 4 i`fr, `� ..7 "'•7� r`
vO
'l r L, of . Is •' 7
W '
Go
'// r

The Hanor CO.MDany_
Daughter Nucleus Facility
+WALow Grort Sch°oi
1
1
ham.
1 1
1 !
f )
-'--��
GRAPHIC SCALE
- --)III
t
feet) '
II
ul1h = 3,000It.
ael. r The
HL11101' Company, I11C,
Daugl
Lur NLicleus FE1C111Ly
-tt.c.l�on.
Edgetouii.e
Co -. HC
L .l.:
°•+«96
1._.
Tethi.o$-#r, !Re
D,7 YL 2—
AV"Arre-1la:[e
7oa-loi wet xraat xwaa
r..l..r r,:
x,ltl�h. xc .7aoe
Irlrl
m..ma Mum4u:
FAX f+lr) "vszs - ISU7

The Hanor Corn an
�p y
Daughter Nucleus Facility
,
1 slat Hwy T l Rea IG°
T ..ship `per F hing U-1,
Gethsemane
/. I kill F i' l- i 1111 i t 1:
NII
Y1
•�� I �--ff� CKAPHIC SCALE
(lil feet,
Hutchins Cc cry /
Till• 1 TIt(: ilstior C:ompallyl lne+
`---- _ T.U. Z: Daughter NttCietlS I'ariiity
EdgecaluLr Co- NC arl iwl _I(.!1°0 .•�.
.1,r.-WaSIC TeNlnoiarr.
/ \ � 700-I1]1JU Klue KlJlle HUW y�4iJ nr�
..ate■ K•l4.10 NC tv 4
Yf�lw�]Il 1JI ) 040-1� °l�.lnl prm4.r:
YA! IY 14f 0!tl- 1h07

State of North Carolina
Department of Environment, Health and Natural Resources
Division of Water Quality
Non -Discharge Permit Application Form / Survey
(THIS FORM MAY BE PHOTOCOPIED FOR USE AS AN ORIGINAL)
General Permit - Liquid Animal Waste Operations
The following questions have been completed utilizing information on file with the
Division. Please review the information for completeness and make any corrections
which are appropriate. If a question has not been completed by the Division, please
complete as best as possible. Do not leave any question unanswered.
Application Date: OS- / 9 -I? �L
I. REQUIRED ITEMS CHECKLIST
Please indicate that you have inciuded the following required items by signing your initials in the space provided next to.each
item.
A2plicants Initials
1. One completed and signed original and one copy of the application for General Permit - Animal
Waste Operations;
2. Two copies of a general location map indicating the location of the animal waste facilities and
field locations where animal waste is disposed;
3. Two copies of the Certified Animal Waste Management Plan (CAWMP). If the facility does /
not have a CAWMP, one must be completed prior to submittal of a general permit application /
for animal waste operations.
II. GENERAL INFORMATION:
1. Farm's name: Hanor MultiRlier
2. Print Land Owner's name: The Hanor Company
3. Land Owner's Mailing address: �7( Country Qimb Rd
City: Rocky Mount NC I Zip: 27804
Telephone Number:..912-443-7Q3$ _
4. County where farm is located: Edttecombe
5. Farm Location (Directions from nearest major highway. Please include SR numbers for state roads. Please include a copy
of a county road map with the location of the farm identified): JLV S2 /CFO q
6. Print Farm Manager's name (if different from Land Owner): John -College
7. Lessee's / Integrator's name (if applicable; please circle which type is listed):
33-59
FORM: AWO-G-E 2/26/97 Page 1 of 3

III. OPERATION INFORMATION:
1. Farm No.: }U-51
' 2. Operation Description:.Eeeder operation
Feeder to Finish
8640 - Certified Design Capacity
• Is the above information correct? l yes; E::] no. If no, correct below using the design capacity of the facility
Type gf SwineNo, of Animals Tyne of Poultry N Animals type of Cattle No._of Animals
0 Wean to Feeder
0 Feeder to Finish
0 Farrow to Wean (# sow)
0 Farrow to Feeder (# sow)
0 Farrow to Finish (# sow)
0 Layer
0 Non -Layer
0 Turkey
n.r :k < T.T., ..F
vh u�.i T a � ��. v.r 1... �a.o w..On a �. •-'{t.:
0 Dairy
0 Beef
3. Acreage cleared and available for application. ; Required Acreage (as listed in the CAWMP): 54
4. Number of Lagoons:, X�Z ; Total Capacity:. r - +� r-�. 1 r� Cubic Feet (ft3)
Number of Storage Ponds: ; Total Capacity: _ Cubic Feet (ft3)
5. Is animal waste being applied on any field which has subsurface drains? YES o{please circle one}
6. Are subsurface drains present in the vicinity of or under the lagoon? YES or' N (please circle one)
IV. APPLICANT'S CERTIFICATION:
I, �L _ i9/UGA (,�o - (Land Owner's name listed in question II.2), attest that
this application for e, ,' (Farm name listed in question lL 1)
has been reviewed by me and is accurate and complete to the best of my knowledge. I understand that if all required parts of this
application are not completed and that if all required supporting information and attachments are not included, this application package
will be retupjed to me as incomplete. i/!
Date / �. /
V . MANAGER'S CERTIFICATION: (complete only if different.from the Land Owner)
I, /` If 6�—VA^^. ( D Q (Manager's name Iisted in question I1.6), attest that this
application for WaN0 P_ _MOL i,p0FR (Farm name listed in question Il.1)
has been reviewed by me and is accurate and complete to the best of my knowledge. I understand that if all required parts of this
application are not completed and that if all required supporting information and attachments are not included, this application package
will be returned as incomplete.
Signature
Date e2S - 12 ` 5 7^
THE COMPLETED APPLICATION PACKAGE, INCLUDING ALL SUPPORTING INFORMATION AND MATERIALS,
SHOULD BE SENT TO THE FOLLOWING ADDRESS:
NORTH CAROLINA DIVISION OF WATER QUALITY
WATER QUALITY SECTION
PERMITS AND ENGINEERING UNIT
POST OFFICE BOX 29535
RALEIGH, NORTH CAROLINA 27626-0535
TELEPHONE NUMBER: [phone]
FORM: AWO-GE 2/26/97 Page 2 of 3

Producer: o ✓✓ A4U(,rra(_r e-V_
Location: Ene EC_,- Be
Address: 87u-ml:4 C—a eze:E
�ot�M A'to.,, T ,.1 G V 8
Telephone:
Type operation: r �kdj
;,umber of Animal. Units: -7ra80 I Zroo / 8(,4033-58
I,r;e waste from your animal facility must lie land applied at a
:specified rage to prevent pollution of surface and/or ground water.
�'he plant nutrients in the animal waste should be used to reduce the
amount of commercial fertilizer required for the crops on the fields
where, the waste is to be applied. This waste should be analyzed
before each application cycle and annual soil tests are encouraged
so that all plant nutrients can be balanced for realistic yields 12�
the crops to be grown.
several factors are .important in implementing your waste utilizatidh
plan in order to maximize the fertilizer value of the waste and to.J
rensure that it is applied in an environmentally safe manner-. Always
apply waste based on the needs of the crop to be grown and the
nutrient content of the waste. Do not apply more nitrogen than the,.
crop can utilize. Soil types are important as they have different.,!.0
infiltration rates and leaching potential. Waste shall not be -'
applied to land eroding at greater than 5 tons per acre per year. "
Do not apply waste on saturated soils or on land when the surface is
frozen. Either of these conditions may .result in runoff to surface
waters. Wind conditions should also be considered to avoid drift
and downwind odor problems. To maximize the value of'nutrients for
crop production and.*to reduce the potential for pollution, the waste
should be applied to a growing crop or not more than 30 days prior
to planting. injecting the waste or disking will conserve nutrients
and reduce odor problems. -
The acres needed to apply the animal waste is based on typical
nutrient content for this type of facility. Acreage requirements
may be more or less based on the waste analysis' report from your
waste management facility.
i Amount. of _waste produced per.year
Z5•
' 8(040. animal units X 97_1 waste/animal unit/year =
17 15, &(oo /year
Sarr�,s
Amount of nitrogen produced per vear
loBO b.
ZSoo 5 .
Co animal units X Z, lbs. N/animal unit/year =
3G8~1 lbs. N/year
Applying the above amount of waste is a big job. You should plan
time and have appropriate equipment to apply the waste in a timely
I manner.
Page 10
20,0/Q 06PUGTtOr.i PUG To
13500 x 0.S0= ta80a yew
Tor&r- 30 385 s I.L
118`72 X O

The following acreage will be needed for waste application based on
the crop to be grown and surface application:
Table 1: ACRES OWNED BY PRODUCER
Tract Field Soil Crop Real. Lbs. N Lbs. N Month of
Type Yield Per. Ac utilized Appl.i.cation
-7 q-7
!, Z, 3,¢
5,�,7
OoQ
6w1-rAG
6i�"51A
G7. 8
�2-01-34-0
dPa4c, 0c-r.
�4
[, 7��
l�t'ul3d
Total Table 1
ZZ(a 3
1P7, 890
Table 2:
ACRES WITH
AGREEMENT
OR LONG TERM LEASE
Tract Field Soil
Crop Real.
Lbs. N
Acres Lbs. N Month of
# Type
Yield
Per Ac
Utilized Application
Total Table 1
ZZG .3
Total Table 2
Total ZZG'.3
Amount of N Produce
Def icitw�A+uJ
67 eqo
Y'
+�30 `��N 60A
4c ua
G7 890
36 385
37, 5D5
Your facility. is designed for 1t�o_'days of temporary storage and
Aneeds to have the temporary storage removed every months.
Page 11

where owners of animal operations do not have adequate amounts of
land to apply the waste, the producer must provide a written
agreement whereby another landowner has agreed to land apply or
allow land application on his or her land.
Call the Soil Conservation Service or Soil and Water Conservation
District office after you receive the waste analysis report to
oi:)tain the amount per acre to apply and the application rate prioz:
to applying the waste.
i:arzative Operation-
+��iJ�4�T^:!riRll�tJ-L�0U
7hzra Ly ore-JG1czv� aC � 10.�ci v0. t l�- Y rr+
1
T 7q7
1&4-&
See attached map showing the fields to be used for the disposal of
waste water.
Application of waste by Irrigation
Field
No.
Soil Type
Crop
Application
Rate(In/Hr)
Application
Amount(In.)
I,Z,3,¢,
NoA
.&9MUDA
r 3O
2, 3,
L 7
A oB
Page 12

WASTE MANAGEMENT FLAN AGREEMENT
I agree to carry out this waste management plan according to the
terms of the agreement. Failure to comply with the waste management
plan will automati lly require any cost share Funds to be refunded
to their source.
Producer: Date:
eI understand that Mr./Mrs. N 1A does not have
ample land l-c, apply the aiiliTial waste piouuGed li..vn. i7i5/}-i?r animal
operation. Z have agreed to utilize the waste produced from the
operation and agree to carry out this waste management plan on land
that x own or operate.
Recipient Landowner: N /A Date:
System Designer: Date: /Z 5
SWCD Representative: Date:
Design Approval: CL Date:
IPage 13

The Hanor Company_
Daughter Nucleus Facility
t Slat tHjwY 7 Red Hill
7,wnship `per F Nng Creek
Gethsemane r �— ` �' —\ \ Willow Grove School
/ � r
i MIL RERIMUER
�--�� GRAPHIC SCALE
?W sao A900
1
1 Hutchins C4rtery
1 �
1
/ 4 (In Feel)
e / 1 I inch = 3000 it.
/ 1
The Hanor Company, Inc,
"°` Daughter Nucleus facility
Edgecombe Co., NC on�ia.4 l 13 99 5e•1..
A• •4•0 __
((( + s Dr•.a by.
\ 1 Acre -haste TechnofoQy. !na -u, Y H.....
`Jjj"jIJ•�--• 700-I06 Blue 7e Road g-,wa by:
©®�� itale4gh, NC 27809
t919) A24-0014 pr••ica X�wkr:
r� (9,91 as9-tsot 1 MILE

Fax #: [phone]
• Telephone: [phone]
APPIAN CONSULTING ENGINEERS
• 841 S. Wesleyan Blvd.
P.O. Box 7966
R cky Mount, NorthMCVna 27804-0966
�
GENTLEMEN:
WE ARE SENDING YOU THE FOLLOWING:
❑ Prints/Plans ❑ Estimates
❑ Permit Applications ❑ Change order
THESE ARE TRANSMITTED as checked below.
❑ For approval ❑ Bid Tabulation Distributi
❑ For your use ❑ Approved permits for you
❑ As requested ❑ For Review and Comment
❑ Forward to Appian your Performance Bon
Far our signature, then return to Appian/
❑ For your processing with:
LETTEs. OF TRANSMITTAL
� .�*/ ON
Deliver to:
Contracts ❑ Spec' Icatio s
❑ Bid Proposal � r � ❑ Addressee Signature required.
No substitute signaturosl
❑ Substitute Signature allowed
on ❑ Boundary Surrey needed - see attached
r filaVmcords ❑ Easement needed -see attached Received by:
❑ Topographical surrey needed -see attached Hand delivered by:
d, Labor at ' a a rance Certificates Date:
❑ Permit Applications ❑ Plans ❑ Specifications
❑ Appian Chk It in the amount of $
❑ Financial Responsibility form
❑ As discussed
I COPIES I DATE I NO. I DESCRIPTION /% A •
REMARKS
COPY TO SIGNE .

ANIMAL WASTE MANAGEMENT PLAN CERTIFICATION FOR NEW OR EXPANDED FEEDLOTS
Please return the completed form to the Division of Environmental Management at the address on the
reverse side of this form.
Name of farm (Please print): Hanor Multiplier
Address: 876 Country Club Road, Rocky Mount
Phone Number (9191 443-7038
County: Fdgpr-nmhp
Farm location: Latitude and Longitude: 36003' 17t° /77° 38' 04"(required). Also, please attach a copy of a
county road map with location identified.
Type of operation (swine, layer, dairy, etc.): Swine Sow Farm - Secondary Lagoon
Design capacity (number of animals): 2500 a
Average size of operation (12 month population avg.): 2500
Average acreage needed for land application of waste (acres): 36 Ac ( Coastal Bermuda)
TECHNICAL SPEcmusr CERnFxAmN
As a technical specialist designated by the North Carolina Soil and Water Conservation Commission pursuant to
15A NCAC 6F .0005, 1 certify that the new or expanded animal waste management system as installed for the
farm named above has an animal waste management plan that meets the design, construction, operation and
maintenance standards and specifications of the Division of Environmental Management and the USDA -Soil
Conservation Service and/or the North Carolina Soil and Water Conservation Commission pursuant to 15A NCAC
2H.0217 and 15 A NCAC 6F .0001-.0005. The following elements and their corresponding minimum criteria have
been verified by me or other designated technical specialists and are included in the plan as applicable: minimum
separations (buffers); liners or equivalent for lagoons or waste storage ponds; waste storage capacity; adequate
quantity and amount of land for waste utilization (or use of third party); access or ownership of proper waste
application equipment; schedule for timing of applications; application rates; loading rates; and the control of the
discharge of pollutants from storrnwater runoff events less severe than the 25-year, 24-hour storm.
Name of Technical Specialist (Please Print): _ Bobby L. Joyner, P. E.
Affiliation: ARpian Consulting Engineers, P.A.
Address (Agency):Rocky Mount NC 27804
Phone Number:
I (we) understand the operation and maintenance procedures established in the approved animal waste
management plan for the farm named above and will implement these procedures. I (we) know that any
additional expansion to the existing design capacity of the waste treatment and storage system or construction of
new facilities will require a new certification to be submitted to the Division of Environmental Management before
the new animals are stocked. I (we) also understand that there must be no discharge of animal waste from this
system to surface waters of the state either through a man-made conveyance or through runoff form a storm
event less severe than the 25-year, 24-hour storm. The approved plan will be filed at the farm and at the office of
the local Soil and Water Conservation District.
Name of Land Owner (Please Print):.
Signature: Date:
Name of Manager, if different from owner (Please Print):. d N LI ._ l • (70 i ro . 2i .
Signature: Date: n ,4 -
Note: A Chan a in land ownership requires notification or a new certification (if the approved plan is changed) to
be submitted to the Division of Environmental Management within 60 days of a title transfer.
DEM USE ONLY:ACNEW#
ACE P-38

_ ..
ull
2
! urot p M t o L 1•rof'
L c
IListin el
I 1S11 Litt ti
is N1
Lin
urnuoto LM 41. i LIZA
k Id. 437
UM
SITENET LM
IctM14M o. 11.10.40 INS it n 1 e 1 may'•"1 , l a„ fl+ S \ ., lyt) `• •�•
I�t 7j IYGICOa.II [17w,71M 1 ` •.� ..Se ,O ti 13 '�7 ' (gill Ull . n -'Lill
0.0
AVIAN
l
S, L'li ,r l S .1 ,• r7 r 9 the .r 1 \ �•
i.
tin
ce
LIN � � 1 ` w...d°g. - ? ;Lill % Lnt Ill LM .
bit S01 LL4! i _. / f ` ? lilt
FAU s
Ll41 uv 7.0 t n lilt
Itn uu t•
.P .t 7 gill illl
sr+• tit: b �� 1 Gst 1.3 till
. � R.�- ►7 � ►y y 47 f.. .7 i � � C'tit 1 l Liu
i „„ gill R I wl O ^ ut.e /
tall
!iu - r.' : u:<
r 7•� pis! J '1 U&I n
+tr aut + u utl ,../ ct ��, . Liu -?/L f
.,
f, t 1..4wolel..s•b. C
' ROCKY MOU I.r Iry L� utl H.°r , upon
_ !d. t47 xc� - i.7 •. 7, ....4 nie°.� =s
I.fOF
'a�4t lilt �,� �I: •',_ ' lltt
17e utr_ 7
i ` �•_ •ter w r xnl • �_ � - -�.1�, I '�. �
• ll„ ` TARBORO / ew
! all 4�r .t 7• 1LL i - 'i ~�- .i,,� \ rot N.A.
� '7 ! kltt . .t • �.
3 J.Itt Lilt , !!1! _ \ tilt '" 1.1 1rLim-
-All .J Sill µ. =/ tl� • �5��
1' N11 .� •J li: Sw. / .�► L01 1151 i $ I. a 17•r . r7 . !]!S y.l•7 i7o1 n•�; J� .h:`::47 I+,�d' Ull
!t!1
/ 1 gill I� •� �i: t \ ., !14 '.r a.lia{. rb i:. '%'/•„ 1 IP r: - \•
Iv :=1 _ a.,,. / I•[ 7J
7C 1 '� fIa .•w I•W `YLM• .i.e
Lt' .Pi•, .� _ \ •a •.Q/.1.16� Lill
i .
lU•
illl �lLt I• �r �!!

1.T
ANIMAL WASTE MANAGEMENT PLAN CERTIFICATION FOR NEW OR EX i
Please return the completed form to the Division of Environmental Management a
reverse side of this form.
Name of farm (Please print): Hanor Multiplier
Address: 876 Country Club Road, Rocky Mount, NC 27804
Phone Number.
County: Edciecombe
Farm location: Latitude and Longitude: 36003' 0711/770 38' 1211(required). Also, please attach a copy of a
county road map with location identified.
Type of operation (swine, layer, dairy, etc.): Swine Feeder Farm - Secondary Lagoon
Design capacity (number of animals): 8640
Average size of operation (12 month population avg.): 8640
Average acreage needed for land application of waste, (acres): 54 ( Coastal Bermuda) _
TECHNICAL SPECIALIST CERTIFICATION
As a technical specialist designated by the North Carolina Soil and Water Conservation Commission pursuant to
15A NCAC 6F .0005, 1 certify that the new or expanded animal waste management system as installed for the
farm named above has an animal waste management plan that meets the design, construction, operation and
maintenance standards and specifications of the Division of Environmental Management and the USDA -Soil
Conservation Service and/or the North Carolina Soil and Water Conservation Commission pursuant to 15A NCAC
2H.0217 and 15 A NCAC 6F .0001-.0005. The following elements and their corresponding minimum criteria have
been verified by me or other designated technical specialists and are included in the plan as applicable: minimum
separations (buffers); liners or equivalent for lagoons or waste storage ponds; waste storage capacity; adequate
quantity and amount of land for waste utilization (or use of third party); access or ownership of proper waste
application equipment; schedule for timing of applications; application rates; loading rates; and the control of the
discharge of pollutants from stormwater runoff events less severe than the 25-year, 24-hour storm.
Name of Technical Specialist (Please Print): Bobby L. Joyner, P. E.
Affiliation: Appian Consulting Engineers, P.A.
Address (Agency): P.O. _Box 7966. Rocky Mount. NC 278n4 _
,,Q Phone Number:- (,919) 972-7703
Date: January 10, 1995
-----------------------------------
OWNER/MANAGER
I (we) understand the operation and maintenance procedures establis
management plan for the farm named above and will implement these
additional expansion to the existing design capacity of the waste treatment
new facilities will require a new certification to be submitted to the Division
the new animals are stocked. I (we) also understand that there must be n+
system to surface waters of the state either through a man-made convey
event less severe than the 25-year, 24-hour storm. The approved plan will t
the local Soil and Water Conservation District.
Name of Land Owner (Please Print):
(, waste
it any
ion of
Before
•n this
starrn
rice of
Signature: Date: n
Name of Manager, if different from owner (Please Print):aH Nj��.,n��
Signature: 4 ` Date: —
Note: A change 'n land ownership requires notification or a new certification (if the approved plan is changed) to
be submitted to the Division of Environmental Management within 60 days of a title transfer.
DEM USE ONLY.-ACNEW#
ACE P-38

ANIMAL WASTE MANAGEMENT PLAN CERTIFICATION FOR NEW OR Q
please return the completed form to the Division of Environmental Management
reverse side of this form.
Name of farm (Please print): Hanor Multiplier
Address: 876 Country Club Road, Rocky Mount, NC 27804
- Phone Number. 1919) 443-ZQ35 _
County: _�F QernmhP
Farm local -� ude: 36° 03' 17" 177° 38' 041°(required). Also, please attach a copy of a
county roa. '1 tified.
Type of op 03 ry, etc.): Swine Sow Farm - Secondary Lagoon
Design cap 3� s): 2500
Average si. h population avg.): 2500
Average at pplication of waste.(acres): 36 Ac ( Coastal Bermuda)
TECHNICA, 4TION
As a techni 1 by the North Carolina Soil and Water Conservation Commission pursuant to
15A NCAC the new or expanded animal waste management system as installed for the
farm named above has an animal waste management plan that meets the design, construction, operation and
maintenance standards and specifications of the Division of Environmental Management and the USDA -Soil
Conservation Service and/or the North Carolina Soil and Water Conservation Commission pursuant to 15A NCAC
2H.0217 and 15 A NCAC 6F .0001-.0005. The following elements and their corresponding minimum criteria have
been verified by me or other designated technical specialists and are included in the plan as applicable: minimum
separations (buffers); liners or equivalent for lagoons or waste storage ponds; waste storage capacity; adequate
quantity and amount of land for waste utilization (or use of third party); access or ownership of proper waste
application equipment; schedule for timing of applications; application rates; loading rates; and the control of the
discharge of pollutants from stormwater runoff events less severe than the 25-year, 24-hour storm.
Name of Technical Specialist (Please Print):_ Bobby L. _Jo ner, P. E.
Affiliation: A1212ian Consulting Engineers, P.A.
Address (Agency): P.Q. Fox 7966, Rocky Mount, NC ' 27804
it „f Phone Number [phone]
jary_10, 1995
I (we) understand the operation and maintenance procedures establisl
management plan for the farm named above and will implement these
additional expansions to the existing design capacity of the waste treatment
new facilities will require a new certification to be submitted to the Division o
the new animals are stocked. I (we) also understand that there must be no
system to surface waters of the state either through a man-made conveya
event less severe than the 25-year, 24-hour storm. The approved plan will be
the local Soil and Water Conservation District.
Name of Land Owner (Please print):
Signature: I Date:
vaste
any
in of
.fore
this
'orm
.e of
Name of Manager, if different from owner (Please Print): Li Y. (1a f Ie4-p, �
Signature: z5p Date: o A �A
Note: A chap a in land ownership requires notification or a new certification (if the approved plan is changed) to
be submitted to the Division of Environmental Management within 60 days of a title transfer.
OEM USE ONLY:ACNEW#
ACE P-38

ANIMAL WASTE MANAGEMENT PLAN CERTIFICATION FOR NEW OR EXPANDED FEEDLOTS
Please return the completed form to the Division of Environmental Management at the address on the
• reverse side of this form.
Name of farm (Please print):. Hanor Multiplier
` Address: 876 Country Club Road, Rocky Mount.. 77804
Phone Number._ [919) _ 44,3-7038
County:_ Edgecombe
Farm location: Latitude and Longitude: 36003' 36" 1770 38' 30"(required). Also, please attach a copy of a
county road map with location identified.
Type of operation (swine, layer, dairy, etc.): Swine Nursery .-
Design capacity (number of animals): 7680
Average size of operation (12 month population avg.):
Average acreage needed for land application of waste (acres):_ 1 ff GR s+� m11dny ,
TECHNICAL SPECIALIST CERTIFICATION
As a technical specialist designated by the North Carolina Soil and Water Conservation Commission pursuant to
15A NCAC 6F .0005, 1 certify that the new or expanded animal waste management system as installed for the
farm named above has an animal waste management plan that meets the design, construction, operation and
maintenance standards and specifications of the Division of Environmental Management and the USDA -Soil
Conservation Service and/or the North Carolina Soil and Water Conservation Commission pursuant to 15A NCAC
2H.0217 and 15 A NCAC 6F .0001-.0005. The following elements and their corresponding minimum criteria have
been verified by me or other designated technical specialists and are included in the plan as applicable. minimum
separations (buffers); liners or equivalent for lagoons or waste storage ponds; waste storage capacity; adequate
quantity and amount of land for waste utilization (or use of third party); access or ownership of proper waste
application equipment; schedule for timing of applications; application rates; loading rates; and the control of the
discharge of pollutants from stormwater runoff events less severe than the 25-year, 24-hour storm.
Name of Technical Specialist (Please Print): Bobby L. Joyner, P. E.
Affiliation: AQpian Consultina Engineers. P.A.
Address (Agency): P.Q. Box 7966- Rnck)4 Mount- NC 771M4
Phone Number. [phone]
Signature: Date: 3 / 13 /g
OWNER/MANAGER A
I (we) understand the operation and maintenance procedures established in the approved animal waste
management plan for the farm named above and will implement these procedures. I (we) know that any
additional expansion to the existing design capacity of the waste treatment and storage system or construction of
new facilities will require a new certification to be submitted to the Division of Environmental Management before
the new animals are stocked. I (we) also understand that there must be no discharge of animal waste from this
system to surface waters of the state either through a man-made conveyance or through runoff form a storm
event less severe than the 25-year, 24-hour storm. The approved plan will be filed at the farm and at the office of
the local Soil and Water Conservation District.
Name of Land Owner (Please Print):
Signature: Date:
Name of Manager, if different from owner (Please Print): �a N I l
Signature: l' Date: otS-�P2-4S
Note.- A cha ge in land ownership requires notification or a new certification Of the approved plan is changed) to
be submitted to the Division of Environmental Management within 60 days of a title transfer.
DEM USE ONLY:ACNEW#
ACE P-38

/ 1
.. l.ros• J2 r° .9 ,r.r r L 1` ,., t.,l carol•
G••u•nw. •.• M \ '.
LAI
U
• ` t!L _ Ulf 1 .4V
I{4mt{ao
�1.41r1 >
"0 Lw > to 1 eoGeco.+•, I„� � , lll, Jsli
!J 1 o
up
Lin
1 UPI , !fL• '' S `scar..
if"Itt P4 w ll.•o.,o lr{ilr 1 . \ b iJ 11_J '! 1'.n ► \� ,
V I .,o.o ,KMI a .... ly wlw —T , _ i, a t:l{ [� loc:co„1 cowl, Ir•l 1 `:
l� •y ... 111.1 , 4_ -L" Lilt
I� t, 1 1 tin ' 1 sp,lpll ` ' f '•!1 t : Is
_ IarrNe•
77
im
1My/ / ., .- J 1 / .1 I.
llsi
i l0. �,11WI•adal. ) F'Lag ("• mu 17y
e Lt!!
LM
I r•1 1 lot
i!$ 1a91 t
t to
d I OV _LM
iIA { V ^ ? fill 1.! tlk]
the LM 'O �� 1 14l 1� f.l a C•rl i ALW
.�, 'l , ihi' pin I LitLUL
UJU
'4 r.
E •wii9.r .� -:17 .•rw/ r.a �[� r /'4l`R R,
t d
'y 1 LJ kw tl,i w
ROCKY MOU 1.9 umA.l - „1. ;s ///�'..1°yR..a 't
� + -�_ tll! !l•1 1.1 I j:;':. ....•` i[ \� 1111
' " 19{ � • � [1. 1, 11 - !� - q ,r 'y ` :� � ...,+f..x� ..ir 1�Y / v
I .>H ..r 3iLi• I etu 111r: i �,� �. ! � � Is
a°a•� �' sf w f X-9 bwa ''F•wTi;,:S}'� 1 3� �f`
,., ttl• ,.1. '.. " rAR80Ri7 % 11L1
501 • J fO •: � � Y Vr - _ • J
! t + lilt Z **—'_I��tny:.:. {• � r/ �
w4 J.Ifi t lSli J W J� ` , ;�� f fill 1.{LM,� , •{ ~+ �/ !� • i�4+
Lu-
•r 511,•n1/ lit I1*8 . i . llli yu•/ ual r. • /^ 1.4 �yr ilil
►lsuJg .• >l
.,y • l.tii _ 1.{ 1 7.J �. ! .� :=i • .. r-o f"r \ � \�:. .\�•4 r '��'r:y'+'f
n \ .• fI{N !!!1 1.ft too+ i� flit wn '1 t • L''. •'. :+ / r.{ 1.1
` c• A I1�S r4y l � � J ;Y'•r t. •oo. y-
Y , llk9 �,. � • :� J.4y Ili . - 11r
1.

A.. t
JAN-14-1998 10:28 AGRI-WASTE TBCHNOLOGY,INC
919 829 1507 P.02/02
Animal Waste s.,fanagernent Plan Certification
Picase trrc Or print al( infa mnuan that does noc mouire a ."win stur_ t
Irxistsrta- 'or New'.... or.. Expanded (pie>ise circle one) -.-
General Information:
Narne of Faun;_ Daughter Nucleus �.� Facility No:
Owner(s) Name. Tb,, Hannr re mpgriprt Tnr _ . - _ ^ ...-. Phone 1' oO � k 93
Nlailitl; Address:
Farm Location: County F= is located in: Edgecombe
Latitude and Lon-inlde: 36°_ol, ov, 1 77v U i9t, Integrator:
Please attach a copy of a county road map with location identified and describe below (Be specific: road
n.vnes, directions, ttiilepost, cm.):I'rom Hunter Hill Rd take a left on BenvenUe Rd then ri hC
on Thorp Rd to 97 East. Travel a erox. 8 miles rurn, left on New Hoe Church Rd. Take
a left onto SPejaht:'s Chapel Rd. Entrance in approx. 6 miles on the right.
4oeM-rl
Type of Swine
No. of Animals
it Wean to Feeder
7,680 head e_
Z reader to Fwish
__ S 640 head
Z FUWw to wean
. 2 400 saw
4 Farrow to Feeder
0 Farrow to Fiaish
G Gilts
0 Boars
170 ea
Type of Poultry No. ofAn►maIs Type of Cat:fe No. of Atfmals
❑ Layer G Dairy
❑ Pullets ❑ Beef
Other Type of Livestock Number of Animals
Acreage Available for Applicadon, 12 A •onsit-e., 243 3 add.::_ RsimdAcre-ne: 195.9 .
land owae� by The -Hanor C76. Inc
Number of Lagoons / Sttux�c Ponds :;, 6 ^^ Total Ca}7aary: A ._8b3, b 11 Cubic Feet (ft3)
Are subsume drains pfescat on dm farm YES or NO (please circla one)
It YES: are subsurface drains presents the area of the LAGOON or SPRAY FMLD (please circle one)
##*+k�Y1ia�M#ik*�ir��M#+R+h***MI+a+M�kiM�#��M�Yw*w#k#*w�twir�YsreW**#srFaIeM�M�kr�M##i*+PiRR+Y�*sr*y�M�:�s#�M�i1��M�*i�+�
Owner t Manager Agreement
I (we) verify that all the above iaformadoa is corroct and wilt be updated upon changing. I (we) understand the operation
and tnn,aintanaace procedures established in the approved animal waste management plau rar rbe farm named above and will
implement these, procedures. I (we) lmow that any expansion to the existing design capacity of the wum treatment and
storage system or construction of new raciudes wilt require a new =%Lf ation to be submited to the Division of
Euvironatcaml Kwage ent before the new arsiutalt are stocked i (we) understand tint there must be no discharge of
animal wasre €tom the storage or appIlcadoa system to surface waters of the state either directly through a mars -made
conveyance or from a storm event Iris seven than the 33-year, 24-hour storm and theta must not be rue -off from the
application of anima, waste. I (we)'vndarstatad that runoff of pollumnrs from lowigiag and heavy use areas must ba
minimized asiag techrsic l standards developed by the Naztml Resou=s Conservadon Service. The approved plant will be
Glad at the Farm and at die office of Inc logs Soil and Weer Conservation District. I (we) know that any suodiF(;460n
must be approved by a Emb ical specialist and submitted to the Soil and Water Conservation District prior to
impiementadosi. A change is land ownenhlp requires written nadficarion to DEM or a new, certdticstion (if the approved
plan is c1=gad}V tsxrd0dayrSof a•cide-Issas€er_ --- --- -- ••
Name of
Sighattw
Maitre of
SiEnatun
r(if differen[ from 0Wner): John College
Date: t 1 3- 9
Date:12 - 0 3 . y-W,
AWC - August 1; 1997 1
TOTAL P.02

Animal Waste Management Plan Certification
(Please tvre or print all in(nmat:cn ti:at does not reuuire a sscna¢::reI
xtstin, ' or :.:New or: Expanded :: {pie:ise ctrcie.one
...
General Information:
Name of Farm: Daughter Nucleus Facility "No:
Owner(s) Name: The Nannr rnmpi4z -_Inr_ Phone L`1o:' i919) 444&_
Mailing Address:
Farm Location: County Fain is located in: Edgecombe
Latitude and Longitude: 36` ___03' or, / 77 '1W t2" Integrator:
Please attach a copy of a county road map with location identified and describe below (Be specific: road
names, dirccdons, milepost., etc.):From Hunter Hill Rd take a left on Benvenue Rd then 'right
on Thorp Rd to_97 East. Travel approx. 8-miles turn left on New Hope Church Rd. Take
a left onto Speight's Chapel Rd. Entrance in approx. 6 miles on the right.
ODeratlon Description:
'ype of Swine
No. of Animals
IM Wean to Feeder
7,860 head
C2 to Fetish
InZ
_Feeder
x'arrow to Wean
,.-2_,. 00 SOWe
0 Farrow to Feeder
0 Farrow to Finish
G Gilts
M Boars
170 ,dead
Type of Poulrry
0 layer
• Pallets
No. of Animals
Type of Ca::le No. of Animals
0 Dairy
0 Beef
Other Type of livesrock: Number of Anima►s.
Acreage Available for Application: s ' t e 4 24 3.3 add .-. Required Acreage: 195.9
land owned y The HanETr (:o., Inc.
Number of lagoons / Storage Ponds: 6 Torn! Capacity: 6 , 8 6 3 , 911Cubic Fect (h3)
Are subsurface drains present on the farm: YES or NO (please circle one)
If YES: are subsurface drains present in the area of the LAGOON or SPRAY FIELD (please circle one)
*a+R�**I,**,Ra,w*M,*w„kl,ihs,y,rir„hk k �,aM �e Mw Melt k�k****fit ae*aft**kr**k*MIe,le,�le,kM,.*�„I.s�es�e err a**are M k*k luhk+k M
Owner / Manager Agreement
I (we) verify that aLI the above information is correct and will be updated upon changing. I (we) understand the operation
and maintenance procedures established in the approved animal waste management plan for the farm named above and will
implement these procedures. I (we) imow that any expansion to the existing design rapacity of the waste treatment and
storage system or construction of new facilities will require a new certification to be submitted to the Division of
Environmental Management before the new animals are stocked. I (we) understand' that there must be no -discharge of
animal waste from the storage or application system to surface waters of the state either directly through a man-made
conveyance or from a storm event less severe than the 2.5-year, 24-hour storm and there must not be run-off from the
application of animal waste. I (we) understand that run-off of pollutants from lounging and heavy use areas must be
minimized using technical standards developed by the Natural Resources Conservation Service. The approved plan will be
filed at the farm and at the office of the local Soil and Water Conservation District. I (we) lmow that any modification
must be approved by a technical specialist and submitted to the Soil and Water Conservation District prior to
implementation. A change in land ownership requires written notification to DELI or a new. certification (if the approved
plan is chaa n 0 days of a-tide-wags€er. - - --
Name of LVQ Owner :_ ThanHanor Company, Inc .
Signatur
Name of
Signatur
r(if different from owner): John College
Date: I z '5- 9
Date: 2 - 0 3 -
AWC -- August I; 1997

SILO
`
prTLH
of
31
aughter
ueleus N
_ m
1
s~
Site
i C
EPr
MTEA—
! ..J. s
SPel9h1
a
Le�rlwcr
1 _ .•Jr
' J
1 '
••,
.24
�, -
!
's
.w
- C97,
ttGGETT
-41 pop
,Un
w—dWa
'' '.'AIN Aa
fAU
i Io
S _
L.-It
)
`� err
yts r
a
/
C.
97
Ila
r.0
^dart
' J -.�
4 •'
1121
✓ -
to
—
AI
Lw'
r ROCKY MOU T ° Fn►
RT
.
`
% AeW
Ai
tUU
'7
LZU
King.Lwre
�...
TARBORO'
For 0 el.
r '_'iJ , 11.~_
1.L•+
UU
I F srw ` ,,7 �1a2'. "
I
♦
: �'�
•/
' > >w�m��
°
Ilo1
7
Err
- Yam` 11• '. FE•S
"1^ `I00! i� '
I\\r'�fry Ili) '=f STD
/ •\� I•
'
i
FR. 1w 5V
IO�- `ram-rCI.1.IQ$
100E �S•
J G„�jl, �
�
r - � 4 ) ��..
0.7
F.s`-
'•
j; ua
• .. �! t!7! y
u
a
i1
.F
_1Q S
♦ �al�
l
Ire•
1.F �,•
I l,!
17 »'7
Roads Shown as of January' L 1990
Scale
1 inch = ? miles
0 112 1 2
IJN
MILESEdgecomble
County, PC'
(County Road leap
Quadrangle Locat-ion
NC OepL or Trenspor Lion
OLv. or Hlghreya - .IS Unli

Technical Specialist Certification
L As a technical specialist designated by the North Carolina Soil and Water Conservation Commission pursuant to 15A
NCAC 6F .0005. 1 certify that the animal waste mana,ement system for the farm named above has an animal waste
management plan that meets- or exceeds standards and specifications of the Division of Environmental Itanagement
(DEM) as specified in 15A NCAC 2H.0217 and the USDA -Natural Resources Conservation Service (MRCS) and/or the
North Carolina Soil and Water Conservation Commission pursuant to 15A NCAC 2H.0217 and 15A NCAC 6F .0001-
.0005. The following elements are included in the plan as applicable. While each category designates a technical specialist
who may sign each certification (SD, SI, WUP, RC, I), the technical specialist should only certify pans for which they are
technically competent.
II. -Certification of Design
A) Collection. Storage. Treatment System
Check the appropriate box
❑ Existing facility without retrofit (SD or WUP)
Storage volume is adequate for operation capacity; storage capability consistent with waste utilization
requirements.
3 New, expanded or retrofitted facility (SD)
Animal waste storage and treatment structures. such as but not limited to collection systems, lagoons and ponds,
have been designed to meet or exceed the minimum standards and specifications.
Name of Technical Specialist (Please Print):_ L.M. Safley, Jr.
Affiliation Agri —Waste Technology, Inc. Date Work Completed: 7/96
Address (Agency): 700-108 Blue Ridge Rd. , Ralei h,NC 27606 Phone No.: [phone]
Signature: Date:
*See_ Attachment 4 for certification.
B) Land Application Site (WUP)
The plan provides for minimum separations (buffers); adequate amount of land for waste utilization; chosen crop is
suitable for waste management; hydraulic and nutrient loading rates.
Name of Technical Specialist (Please Print): L. M. Saf ley
Affiliation Agri —Waste Technology, Inc. Date Work Completed:
Address (
Signature
C) Runoff Controls from Exterior Lots
Check the appropriate box
3 Facility without exterior lots. (SD or WUP or RC)
This facility does not contain any exterior lots.
le No.- (9019)829-0014__
�f�'
G Facility with exterior lots (RC)
Methods to minimize the run off of pollutants from lounging and heavy use areas have been designed in
accordance with technical standards developed by MRCS:
Name of Technical Specialist (Please Print):
Affiliation Agri —Waste Technology, Inc. Date Work Completed:
Address (Agency): 700-108 Blue Ridge Road, Raleigh, NC 27606 Phone No.: 919 829-0014
S ignamre: Date:
AWC -- August 1, 1997

D). Application and Handlim-, Equipment
Check the appropriate box
.� xi. tine nr ex nn inv facility with e.sisting waste li i n equipment (WUP or 0
Animal waste application equipment specified in the plan has been either field calibrated or evaluated in
accordance with existing design cbarts and tables and is able to apply waste as necessary to accommodate the
waste management plan: (existing application equipment can cover the area required by the plan at rates not to
exceed either the specified hydraulic or nutrient loading rates, a schedule for timing of applications has been
established; required buffers can be maintained and calibration and adjustment guidance are contained as part of
the plan).
9
Animal waste application equipment specified in the plan h be e
accommodate the waste management plant; (proposed plica
plan at rates not to exceed either the specified by
applications has been established; required buffers c�
contained as part of the plan). z.a.oFES$!(j�y'l
9
D New, expanded._titexistins facility without exi5dns iasaovl0-9tib1h ea
5nrav n. (WUP or i) 10264
Animal waste application equipment specified in th�,ptt'r h been
accommodate the waste management plan; (proposed SR
plan at rates not to exceed either the specified bydrau�.*f
applications has been established; required buffers can be Au p -1 i+ty 1
contained as part of the plan). 4
17
Name of Technical Specialist (Please Print): L. M. Saf ley. Jr ,
ent fhr sorry irrigation, (I)
°d to apply waste as necessary to
can cover the area required by the
t; rates; a schedule for timing of
*ion and adjustment guidance are
tD apply waste as necessary to
t cover the area required by the
rates; a schedule for timing of
on and adjustment guidance are
Affiliation -Agri -Waste Technology, Inc. Date Work Completed:
Address (
Signature
ie No.
E) Odor Control, Insect Control. Mortality Manatiement and Emergency Action Plan (SD.
S I. WUP. RC or D
The waste management plan for this facility includes a Wiste Management Odor Control Cbeckrkist, an Insect
Control Checklist- a Mortality Management Checklist and an Emergency Action Plan. Sources of both odors and
insects have been evaluated with respect to this site and Best Management Practices to Minimize Odors and Best
Management Practices to Control Insects have been selected and included in the waste management plan. Both the
Mortality Management Plan and the Emergency Action Plan are complete and can be implemented by this facility.
Name of Technical Specialist (Please Print): L. M. Saf ley, Jr. , PhD. , P.E.
Affiliation Agri -Waste Technology, Inc. Date Work Completed:
Address (Agency): 700-i 8 B1
Signature:
to NoXA
1 6 7
F) Written Notice of New or Expanding„
Swine Farm
The following signature block Is only to be used for new or expanding swine farms that begin construction after June
21, 1996. If the facility was built before June 21, 1996, when was it constructed or last
expanded
I (we) certify that I (we) have attempted to contact by certified mail all adjoining property owners and all property owners
wbo own property located across a public road, street, or highway from this new or expanding swine farm. The notice was
in compliance with tbe.teguirements of NCGS 106-805. A copy of the notice and a.list of the property owners notified is
attached. --- — -
Name of Land Owner:
Signature:
Date:
Name of Manager (if different from owner):
Signature: Date:
AWC -- August 1, 1997 3

III. Certif catioiz of Installation
A) Collection. Storage. Treatment_ Installation
N, ew.^ev)-anded or retrofitted facility (SI)
Animal waste storage and treatment structures, such as but not limited to lagoons surd ponds, have been installed
in accordance with the approved plan to meet or exceed the minimum standards and specifications.
For existing facilities without retrofits, no certifieation is necessary.
Name of Technical Specialist (Please. Print):
Affiliation Date Work Completed:
Address (Agency): Phone No.:
Signature: Date:
B) Land Application Site (vVUP)
Check the appropriate box
M The cropping system is in place on all land as
aste management plan.
u Conditional Approval: all required land as specif`iedk tbg �1ga Ed . rp�aaLing; the cropping system
as specified in the waste utilization plan has not been established evneL has committed to establish the
vegetation as specified in the plan by %(mon1fiffi4/vetb'c proposed cover crop is
ti
appropriate for compliance with the wasteutilizadon plan. ;; s• •f%yGi �1E��:•�'• :�
�,9�•
D Also check this box if appropriate 00,1N
if the cropping system as specified in the plan can not be es t �ewly cleared land within 30 days
of this certification, the owner has committed to establish ad o for erosion control,
Name of Technical Specialist (Please Print):L.M. SafleY_, Jr., PhD. , P.E.
Affiliation Agri —Waste Technology, Inc. Date Work Completed:
Address (Agency):
Signature:
This following signature block is only to
above has been checked.
Phone No,:
when the box for conditional approval in III. B
I (we) certify that I (we) have committed to establish the cropping system as specified in my (our) wasta utilization plan.
and if appropriate to establish the interim crop for erosion control, and wilt submit to DEM a verification of completion
from a Technical Specialist within 15 calendar days foilowing the date specified in the conditional certification. I (we)
realize that failure to submit this verification is a violation of the waste management plan and will subject me (us) to an
enforcement action from DEX
Name of Land Owner:
Signature:
'--ame of-Mana�er-fif-ditferent-from owner):
Date:
Signature: Date:
AWC — Au,u.t 1. 1997

C) Runoff Controls from Exterior Lots (RC)
Facility with exterior hits
ivlediuds to minimize the run off of gollutalms from
in the plan.
lcun^in_ and heap: use areas have be_n installed as s ecified
For facilities without exterior lots, no cerrijtcation is necessary.
Name of Technical Specialist (Please Print)-
Affiliation Daze Wort: Completed:
Address (Agency): Phone No.:
Signature: Date:
D) Application and Handling Eouioment Installation (NIVITP or I)
Check the appropriate bloc.-
J Animal waste application and handling equipment specified in the plan is on site and ready for use;
calibration and adiustment materials have been provided Co the owners and are contained as part of the plan.
LJ Animal waste application and handling equipment specified in the plan has not been installed but the owner has proposed leasing or third party application and has provided a signed contract; equipment specified in
the contract as ee tth the requirements of the plan: required buffers can be maintained: calibration and
adiusimVti�AAcghave been provided to the owners and are contained as part of the plan.
M 640 UA oval: Animal waste application and handling equipment specified in the plan has
be on site and installed by (month/dav/vear); there is adequate
&.was`tj until the equipment is installed and until the waste can be -land applied in
iccojt��vvjt t�e �ropns system contained in the plan; and calibration and adiustment guidance have
Ieei pro the Jwnerp and are contained as pan of the plan.
tiame of Te'h�ikaSpeci�li kPWase Print):L.M. Saflev, Jr., PhD., P.E.
Affiliation Ineb Date `York Completed:
Address (Ag7v/ M' �►+��+, e R ad Raleigh, NC 27606 Phone N .: (9 9) 829-0014
Signature: /I -� Date:/
The following signature block is only td be used when the box for conditional approval in III D
above has been checked.
I (we) certify that I (we) have committed to purchase the animal waste application and handling equipment as
specified in my (our) waste management plan and will submit to DEVI a verification of delivery and installation
from a Technical Specialist within 15 calendar days following the date specified in the conditional -certification. I
(we) realize that failure to subrrAt this verification is a violation of the waste management plan and will subject me
(us) to an enforcement xc4M from DENT.
Name of
��..
Signature:'APIO
Name of Nl n�g �r}
" • St AL
Signature:'20
owner): John College
Date: / Z • /� , JF �-X-
Date:,-/
E) Odor C Pf.�ti,tt5,��", y*4 1 and Mortality Management (SD. SI. WUP. RC or I)
Methods to C&V,8 geltis
ects as specified in the Plan have been installed and are operational. The
mortality managespecified in the Plan has also been installed and is operational.
Name of Technicalt (Please Print): L.M. Safley, Jr., PhD , P.E.
Affiliation A ri—Waste Technology, Inc. Date Work Completed:
Address (Agency): 70 —108 Bliia-Rildge toad, Raleigh, NC 27606 Phone No.. 919) 829-0014
Signature: V Date: L r
WC ,august t. I997 _

This Waste Management Plan (WMP) has been prepared by Agri -Waste Technology, Inc. for
the 2,500 sow breeding, gestation, and farrowing site, the 8,000 head nursery site, the 9,000
head grow finish site, and the 215 boar stud operation at The Hanor Company, Inc. Daughter
Nucleus Fann in Edgecombe County, North Carolina. All material in this Waste
Management Plan is accurate as of December 15, 1997 according to the information provided
to Agri -Waste Technology, Inc.
Prepared by: Susan Caule
(Name)
Environmental Engineer
(Title)
1= "
(Signature)
Reviewed by: L. M. Safley, Jr., Ph. D., P.E.
(Name)
Reviewed by:
(Date)
Agri -Waste Technolo '� SS/Q
(Company/Agency) ::a�0 iql ;•
SEAL
r. 10264
y'••FhGr �VE��••'�
�i f '•.....•••• �`
V S %
fit
(Date)
President Agri -Waste Technology, Inc.
(Titl'e) (Company/Agency)
(Signature) V IV
(Name)
(Title)
(Signature)
(Date)
(Company/Agency)
Agri -Waste Technology, Inc. is not responsible for any additions or deletions to or from this
Waste Management Plan by personnel not employed by Agri -Waste Technology, Inc.
xs

Waste Utilization Plan Agreement
The Honor Company, Inc.
Name of Farm: Daughter Nucleus Farm -- Edgecombe County
Owner/Manager Agreement
I (we) understand and will follow and implement the specifications and the operation and
maintenance procedures established in the approved animal waste utilization plan for the farm
named above. I (we) know that any expansion to the existing design capacity of the waste
treatment and storage system or construction of new facilities will require a new certification
to be submitted to the Department of Water Quality (DWQ) before the new animals are
stocked. I (we) also understand that there must be no discharge of animal waste from this
system to surface waters of the state from a storm less severe than the 25-year, 24-hour storm
(7 in., AWMFH). The approved plan will be filed on site at the farm office and at the office
of the local Soil and Water Conservation District and will be available for review by DWQ
upon request.
Naine of ?ankager
lity Owner: he Hanor Company, Inc.
SignatureDate: i Z - 3
Name of (If different from owner): _ John College
Signature: �(/. �T Date:
7
Name of Technical Specialist: (Please print): L.M. Safley,_ Jr., Ph. D., P.E. _
Affiliation: Aari-Waste Technology, Inc.
Address (Agency): Agri -Waste Technology, Inc.
700-108 Blue Ridge Road
Signature: Date: r'L r 0 97
xii

12. Land ApplicationlWaste Utilization Plan
Land application of the lagoon liquid is the final step in this operation's waste management
system. The goal of the -Land Application/Waste Utilization Plan (LAWUP) is to apply
nutrients at rates that do not exceed agronomic rates. By obtaining this goal, the quantity of
nutrients that is applied is effectively utilized by the crops that are grown on the fields.
12.1 Application Method
The land application area at the Daughter Nucleus site is divided into several application
fields. Two types of irrigation systems will be utilized to apply lagoon liquid: a center pivot
and a hose -reel with traveling guns.
12.2 Nitrogen Production
The amount of nitrogen produced by the facilities is estimated by using NRCS Standard 633.
This standard estimates that 5.4 pounds of Plant Available Nitrogen (PAN) per sow per year
is produced from a Farrow to Wean operation, 3.7 pounds of PAN per head per year is
produced from a boar operation, 0.48 pounds of PAN per head per year is. produced from a
Wean to Feeder operation and 2.3 pounds of PAN per head per year is produced from a
Feeder to Finish operation. Therefore, the 2,500 sows will produce 13,500 (2,500 sows x 5.4
Ibs/sow) pounds of PAN on an annual basis. The 7,680 nursery pigs will produce 3,686.4
(7,680 head x 0.48 lbs/head) pounds of PAN on an annual basis. The 8,640 finisher pigs will
produce 19,872 (8,640 head x 2.3 lbs/head) pounds of PAN on an annual basis. The 170
boars will produce 629 (170 head x 3,7 lbs/head) pounds of PAN on an annual basis. The
combined PAN production from the facilities will be approximately 37,687.4 lbs of PAN per
year.
A copy of the applicable pages from NRCS Standard 633 can be found in Attachment 3.
The amount of nitrogen in the sludge is also estimated from NRCS Standard 633, NRCS
Standard 633 states that 0,88 pounds of Plant Available Nitrogen per sow (Farrow to
12-1

Weanling) per year will be accumulated in the sludge, 0.076 pounds of PAN per nursery pig
per year will be accumulated in the sludge, 0.37 pounds of PAN per finisher pig will be
accumulated in the sludge, and 0.61 pounds of PAN per boar'will be accumulated in the
sludge. The minimum practical removal interval for sludge is 5 years. The quantity of PAN
that will be available from the lagoon sludge after 5 years can therefore be estimated to be
30,420.9 pounds. These numbers represent the calculated accumulated sludge PAN in the
lagoons at the Daughter Nucleus facilities. In order to properly determine the application rate
for the sludge, it will be analyzed when it is to be removed and applied at the agronomic
uptake rate of the crops that are grown on the sludge application fields.
12-2

12.3 Nitrogen Utilization
The cultivated areas on the Daughter Nucleus property consist of I separate fields containing
approximately 87.4 acres available for application of lagoon liquid. The planned cropping;
program for the application fields are shown in Table 12-1.
Table 12-1: Planned Cropping Program for Shellbank Site
Field Identification
Number
Field Acreage
Planned Crop
1
0.9
Sudangrass - Over Rye
2
8.0
Sudangrass - Over Rye
3
9.6
Sudangrass - Over Rye
4
5.79
Sudangrass - Over Rye
5
7.66
Sudangrass - Over Rye
6
25.76
Sudangrass - Over Rye
8
10.7
Sudangrass - Over Rye
11
4.2
Sudangrass - Over Rye
12
9.99
Sudangrass - Over Rye
13
2.4
Sudangrass - Over Rye
14
2.4
Sudangrass - Over Rye
The amount of Plant Available Nitrogen (PAN) which could be effectively utilized by the
crops, is dependant on the realistic expected crop yield for the dominant soil type present in
each of the fields, and the recommended PAN per unit of yield to that particular crop. The
realistic expected crop yields were determined for the dominant soil type found in the
12-3

application fields. The NRCS realistic expected yield of the crops on the dominant soil type
present in the application fields are summarized in Table 12-2. Some soil types did not have
a realistic expected yield listed for every crop with the MRCS. In these cases, the realistic
expected yields for surrounding soil types were used. The recommended application of PAN
is summarized in Table 12-3.
Table 12-2: Realistic Expected Yield of Appropriate Crops on
Application Field Soil Types
Field 0
Soil Type
(Map Symbol)
Soil Type
Field Acres
Realistic field
sudangrass
Over Rye (ton/ac)
I
GoA
oldsboro
0.9
6.5
2.5
2
NoB
Norfolk
8.0
6.1
2.5
3
NoB
Norfolk
9,6
6.1
2.5
4
NoB
Norfolk
5.79
6.1
2.5
5
GoA
Goldsboro
7.66
6.5
2.5
6
NoA
Norfolk
25.76
6.1
2.5
8
NoA
Norfolk
10.7
6.1
2.5
11
NoB
Norfolk
4.2
6.1
2.5
12
NoA
Norfolk
9.99
6.1
2.5
13
NoB
Norfolk
2.4
6.1
2.5
14
NoB
Norrolk
2A
6.1
2.5
t
12-4

The NRCS nitrogen removal estimate for each crop is found in SCS 590-5 (North Carolina)
and are listed in Table 12-3. below. information concerning the realistic expected yields and
the nitrogen application rate are also included in Attachment 5.
Table 12-3: Realistic Plant Available Nitrogen Uptake Rates
Crop
Nitrogen Utilization Estimate
Given by NRCS
Nitrogen Utilization Estimate
Used in Calculations
Sudangrass
40-55 lb N/bu
55 lb N/bu
Rye Overseeded, (hay)
50-60 lb N/ton
55 lb N/ton
The pounds of plant available nitrogen (PAN) that each field can utilize was calculated using
a yearly crop rotation. For example, a field will grow sudangrass overseeded with rye. For
the portion of Field 1 that is Goldsboro soil, for example, the pounds of PAN that could be
utilized in one year by growing sudangrass hay would be 321.75 lbs PAN, as demonstrated by
the following calculations,
0.9 acres X 6.5 ton hay X 55 1b PAN = 321.75 lbs PAN
acre ton hay
The total pounds of PAN that all application fields with their respective crops could utilize is
41,528.5 lbs of PAN per year (see Spreadsheet 12-1). According to NRCS design
calculations, the Daughter Nucleus facilities will produce a total of 37,687.4 lbs of PAN in
lagoon liquid each year. Therefore, sufficient area is available in the application fields on the
property to utilize all of the PAN in the lagoon liquid that must be applied yearly.
12-5

Created:
Hanor NC
File:
DN3
Reviswd: 12/13/97
NC
DEM•
Disk:
Hanor N2
Hy: SIC
Daughter Nucleus
Site
Acreage owed by the
Hanor Company, Inc.
for application
of
Lagoon Effluent
Nitrogen
Soil
soil
Field
Slope
-
Realistic
Unit/
Removed
lbs N
Total N
Applic-
Field M
Acres Series
Type
Symbol
4
Crop
Yield
Acre
lbs/unit
per ac.
(lbsi
Period
1
.9 Goldsboro
Sandy Loam
1
0-2
Sudangrass
6.5
Ton
55
357.5
321,75
Apr-OCt
2
8.0 Norfolk
Loamy Sand
2
2-6
Sudangrass
6.1
Ton
55
335.5
2684
Apr -Oct
3
9.6 Norfolk
Loamy Sand
3
2-6
Sudangrass
6.1
Ton
55
335.5
3220-8
Apr -Oct
4
5.79 Norfolk
Loamy Sand
4
2-6
Sudangrass
6.1
Ton
55
335.5
1942.545
Apr -Oct
5
7.66 Goldsboro
Sandy Loam
5
D-2
Sudangrass
6.5
Tan
55
357.5
2738.45
Apr -Oct
6
25,76 Norfolk
Loamy Sand
6
0-2
Sudangrass
6.1
Ton
55
335.5
8642-48
Apr -Oct
8
10.7 Norfolk
Loamy Sand
8
0-2
Sudangrass
6.1
Ton
55
335.5
3589.85
Apr -Oct
11
4.2 Norfolk
Loamy Sand
11
2-6
Sudangrass
6.3
Ton
55
335.5
1409.1
Apr -Oct
12
9.99 Norfolk
Loamy Sand
12
0-2
Sudangrass
6.1
Ton
55
335.5
3351.645
Apr -Oct
13
2.4 Norfolk
Loamy Sand
13
2-6
Sudangrass
6.1
Ton
55
335.5
805.2
Apr -Oct
14
2.4 Norfolk
Loamy Sand
14
2-6
Sudangrass
6-1
Ton
55
335.5
805-2
Apr-Dct
1
.9 Goldsboro
Sandy Loam
1
0-2
over Rye
2.5'
Ton
55
137.5
123.75
Nov -Mar
2
a.0 Norfolk
Loamy Sand
2
2-6
Over Rye
2.5•
Ton
55
137.5
1100
Nov -Mar
3
9.6 Norfolk
Loamy Sand
3
2-6
Over Rye
2.51
Tan
55
137.5
1320
Rov-Mar
4
5.79 Norfolk
Loamy Sand
4
2-6
Over Rye
2.5'
Ton
55-
237.5
796.125
Nov -Mar
5
7.66 Goldsboro
Sandy Loam
5
0-2
Over Rye
2.5•
Ton
55
137.5
1053-25
Nov -Mar
6
25.76 Norfolk
Loamy Sand
6
0-2
Over Rye
2.5'
Ton
55
137.5
3542
Nov -Mar
8
10.7 Norfolk
Loamy Sand
8
0-2
Over Rye
2.5•
Ton
55
137.5
1471.25
Nov -Mar
11
4.2 Norfolk
Loamy Sand
11
2-6
Over Rye
2.5•
Ton
55
137,5
577.5
Nov -Mar
12
9.99 Norfolk
Loamy Sand
12
0-2
Over Rye
2.5'
Ton
55
237.5
1371.625
Nov -Mar
13
2.4 Norfolk
Loamy Sand
13
2-6
Over Rye
2.5•
Ton
55
137.5
330
Nov -Mar
14
2.4 Norfolk
Loamy Sand
14
2-6
Over Rye
2.5•
Ton
55
137.5
330
Nov -Mar
Overall Total
87.4
41528.52
' IndiCates On aSSumed
R.Y.E
Total lbs
N utilized:
41528.52
Weighted Average:
475.15469208
Effluent
Sludge
Sludge
0
lbs N
Year
Wt.
Avg.
lbs/unit
Animals
Produced
Acres
Nitrogen Produced
S/G/F Site
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
0 of animal units:
2500
1
475.1546911
.68
2500
2200
4.6300710933
lbs N/animal unit:
5.4
5
475.1546911
.88
2500
11D00
23.150355467
lbs N produced:
13500
10
475.1546911
.88
2500
22000
46.300710933
'
20
475.1546911
.88
2500
44000
92.601421866
Nitrogen Produced
Nursery Site
0 of animal units:
7680
1
475.1546911
.076
7680
583.6E
1.2283999526
lbs N/animal unit:
.48
5
475.1546911
.076
7680
2918.4
6.1419997631
lbs N produced:
3696.4
10
475.1546911
.076
7680
5836-8
12.283999526
20
475.1546511
.076
7680
11673.6
24.5n7999052
Nitrogen Produced
G/F Site
R of animal units:
0640
1
475.1546911
.37
8640
3196.8
6-7279142141
lbs N/animal unit:
2.3
5
475.1546911
.37
8649
15984
33 .639571071
lbs N produced,
29872
10
475.1546911
.37
8640
31968
67.279142141
_ 20
475.1546911
.37
B64o
63936
134.5582642e
Nitrogen Produced
boar Stud Site
t of animal units:
170
1
475.1546911
.61
170
103-7
.21824471472
1bS N/animal unit:
3.1
- 5
415.1546911
.61
170
518.5
1.0912235136
lbs N produced-
629
10
475.1546911
.61
170
1037
2.1824471472
20
475.1546911
.61
170
2074
4.3648942943
Total lbs N produced:
37687.4
Deficit( -)/Surplus(+) utilized (lbs)7
3841.12

12A Application of Lagoon Liquid
Prior to the application of lagoon liquid, the following items will be evaluated and recorded
on Form 8 "Pre -Application Checklist" (included in Attachment 7).
• Evaluation of field records to verify that the nitrogen goal for the given crop
has not been exceeded.
• Determination of amount of lagoon liquid to apply to the field.
• Evaluation of lagoon to determine if sufficient liquid volume exists (above
minimum pumpdown level) to achieve desired application.
In addition, the following general guidelines have been developed for land application of
wastewater.
• No runoff from the application site
• The soil is dry enough to apply with no deep seepage or runoff
• Wastewater will be applied to land with a growing crop or on land where -a
crop will be planted within 30 days.
• Wastewater be applied at a rate (inches/hour) that is less than the soil
infiltration rate.
According to information supplied by The Hanor Company, Inc. the irrigation system will
consist of a mobile irrigation pump which can be transferred from lagoon to lagoon,
Mainline attachment points, located on the berm of the lagoon, will transfer lagoon liquid to a
6", Class 200, PVC mainline which runs to the irrigated fields. The pump will be capable of
supplying 650 gallons per minute to a Zimmatic center pivot at a delivery pressure of
approximately 35 psi and 300 to 350 gallons per minute to the traveling gun at a delivery
pressure of approximately 70 to 80 psi. The traveling gun is a Ag-Rain T37A.
In order to avoid deep seepage or runoff from the application fields, the maximum application
at any one time should be 0.50 inches. Spreadsheet 12-2 displays the amount of lagoon liquid
to apply to eachIield in the application area for the given cropping scheme. These values are
based on the intended crop, realistic expected yield for the given crop and soil type of the
field.
12-7

If a uniform application rate of 0.50" per application is utilized, approximately I 1 cycles
- (passes) per irrigation field (except Field 1 which will require 12 cycles) will be required to
apply the desired amount of Plant Available Nitrogen to fields. No more than three 0.5"
applications should be made in a span of one week. The number of passes is determined by
the dominant soil type in the irrigation field and the cultivated crop. Table 12-3 summarizes
the number of cycles required per irrigation field to achieve the desired PAN application
(annually).
12-8

Table 12-3. Number of Irrigation Cycles Required to Achieve Desired Nutrient Application
Irrigation
Field
Dominant Soil Type
Number of Cycle
required at 0.5" on
Sudangrass
Number of Cycles
required at 0.5"
on Over Rye
1
Goldsboro Fine Sandy Loam
9
3
2
Norfolk Loamy Sand
8
3
3
Norfolk Loamy Sand
8
3
4
Norfolk Loamy Sand
8
3
5
Goldsboro Fine Sandy Loam
8
3
6
Norfolk Loamy Sand
8
3
8
Norfolk Loamy Sand
8
3
11
Norfolk Loamy Sand
8
3
12
Norfolk Loamy Sand
8
3
13
Norfolk Loamy Sand
8
3
14
Norfolk Loamy Sand
8
3
Note that the number of irrigation cycles indicated in Table 12-3 may not completely apply
the total desired application of Plant Available Nitrogen to the indicated irrigation lane. A
final pass at a reduced application rate may be desirable to "finish out" the desired application
of nutrients.
l 2-9

File: APP_LAND.cal
DatE: 12/13/97
Facility: Daughter Nucleus Farm
Lagoon Liquid Application Amounts
Lagoon Effluent Conc. =
85.6
lbs/ac-in
Total
Liquid
Effluent
Applic.
Dominant
Application
Realistic
PAN uptake
Total
Appliction
Application
Field
Soil
Area
Crop
yield
by crop
PAN applic.
Required
per acre
Type
(acres)
Cultivated
(units/ac.)
(lbs/unit)
(lbs/acre)
(acre -inches)
(inches)
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
1
Goldsboro
.90
Sudangrass
6.5
55.0
357.5
3.76
4.18
2
Norfolk
8.00
Sudangrass
6.1
55.0
335.5
31.36
3.92
3
Norfolk
9.60
Sudangrass
6.1
55.0
335.5
37.63
3.92
4
Norfolk
5.79
Sudangrass.
6.1
55.0
335.5
22.69
3.92
5
Goldsboro
7.66
Sudangrass
6.5
55.0
357.5
31.99
4.18
6
Norfolk
25.76
Sudangrass
6.1
55.0
335.5
100.96
3.92
a
Norfolk
10.70
Sudangrass
6.1
55.0
335.5
41.94
3.92
11
Norfolk
4.20
Sudangrass
6.1
55.0
335.5
16.46
3.92
12
Norfolk
9.99
Sudangrass
6.1
55.0
335.5
39.15
3.92
13
Norfolk
2.40
Sudangrass
6.1
55.0
335.5
9.41
3.92
14
Norfolk
2.40
Sudangrass
6.1
55.0
335.5
9.41
3.92
1
Goldsboro
.90
Over Rye
2.5
55.0
137.5
1.45
1.61
2
Norfolk
8.00
Over Rye
2.5
55.0
137.5
12.85
1.61
3
Norfolk
9.60
Over Rye
2.5
55.0
137.5
15.42
1.61
4
Norfolk
5.79
Over Rye
2.5
55.0
137.5
9.30
1.61
5
Goldsboro
7.66
Over Rye
2.5
55.0
137.5
12.30
1.61
6
Norfolk
25.76
Over Rye
2.5
55.0
137.5
41.38
1.61
8
Norfolk
10.70
Over Rye
2.5
55.0
137.5
17.19
1.61
11
Norfolk
4.20
Over Rye
2.5
55.0
137.5
6.75
1.61
12
Norfolk
9.99
Over Rye
2.5
55.0
137.5
16.OS
1.61
13
Norfolk
2.40
Over Rye.
2.5
55.0
137.5
3.86
1.61
14
Norfolk
2.40
Over Rye
2.5
55.0
137.5
3.86
1.61
-------------
Total
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
87.40
396.08

1Ttie � ��nor Col:�� 1 ( ,.�7 . Ir].c.
DI'J Farr-, i
}IAI-1Liei!-� -1
7-
� J
o ,
Q.
�• 1
S! I 1 N IJ - �8�2 oc. tarot
oc j
r
1.2 ac.
Saint Morksk
�• 41
•
lr•I •'' ''} 'ill
1 0 ,
as.e ac. e.a QC.
Y 1 Or•no7•
o,r<n
j N
I o-
4.2 oc. total
i
\ r' Gammons Pond Dam
i
Fr
wind Rose �• ;,s
pun p•re•nt of rut.
`y 1 !
tndi •r.a aveuon.
Field Key
"� "c �• It Field F'eIG IrrLgatetl
Acreagt Ac reoge
1 6.9 0.9
2 14.9 8.0 GRAPHIC SOLE V
3
4 20.6 5.79 Legend
5 14.° 7.G6
6 36.21 25.76—.—.—.- Road/Highway r:%c+ 6uld�ng I Inct, WOO .rt.
•7
7 .6 0.0 '•„i:<s', Property Line © Logoan "" i. The H a n o r Company, 1 n e
8 19.9 10.7 / • Slructurc Drpinage Ditch au. 1:
9 0.4 0.0 - --
1 1 7.7 4.2 Pond .uar
Edgecombe County, NC
1 3 5."' 2.4 Mn-+tart• T.cnnolr.,y, Inc yr•• �y,,....
Irrigation Lone AVffToo-ton Btu. wai. Hw6
1 4 4.9 2.4 � A•le ih, AL 27500
. Pi a1 I•,Y}.r-I r
7! ? ac. oC ©Mu
D..rcy:SAr1-1, PS1nLa11:
Figure 12-1: Lagoon Liquid Application Fields
12-12

C
12.5 Application of Sludge
When the level of sludge in the lagoon has accumulated to the extent that it begins to infringe
on the required treatment volume, the sludge will be removed. The sludge will be removed
by means of an floating dredge, pumped into a leak -proof tanker trucks and transported to the
application areas, most of which are at another nearby site (the Whitakers Site) owned by The
Hanor Company, Inc. A county map showing the location of the Whitakers Site is shown in
Figure 12-2.
It may be desirable to construct a temporary, flexible membrane lined settling basin to store
the sludge material and to allow free liquid to drain back into the lagoon. In this case, the
floating dredge would pump the material to the temporary containment basin, liquid would be
allowed drain back into the lagoon, and the sludge would then be pumped from the
containment basin into leak -proof trucks for transport to the sludge application sites.
When the sludge is applied at the application site, the sludge will be broadcast applied from
the trucks. Surveyor's flags will be used to indicate the proper buffers from the sludge
application areas.
Sludge will be applied according to the following guidelines.
• Evaluation of field records to verify that the nitrogen goal for the given crop
has not been exceeded.
• Determination of amount of sludge to apply to the field.
• No runoff from the application site
• The soil is dry enough to apply with no deep seepage or runoff
• Sludge will be applied to land with a growing crop or on land where a crop
will be planted within 30 days.
• All applicable buffers will be observed.
12-12

The Daughter Nucleus facilities will produce 30,420.9 lbs of PAN from five years of
accumulated sludge in the lagoons. Approximately 3,841 lbs of PAN will be applied via
application on the Daughter Nucleus land. The remaining 26,580 lbs of PAN in the sludge
will be applied onto the 243.3 acres at the Whitakers site. Effluent and sludge from the
facilities at the Whitakers site is also being applied to this land; however, a cropping scheme
of bermudagrass and corn overseeded with rye provides a total uptake of 66,976 lb PAN.
Only 36,008 lb of PAN from effluent and yearly sludge removal is being produced from the
Whitakers facilities. This leaves 30,968 lb PAN that can still be applied to the land without
exceeding the total nitrogen uptake by the crop. Spreadsheet 12-3 shows the nitrogen balance
and cropping scheme for the Whitakers site. A site map of this facility is shown in Figure
12-3.
12-14

Created:
Revised: 12/14/97
- By: SFS
Acreage owned by the
Lagoon Effluent
Tract 4 Field 0
Manor Nc
Whitaker SitE
Manor Company, Inc. for application
soil Soil
Acres Series Type
of
Field
symbol
1
_50
Bonneau
Loamy
and
1
2
8.10
Bonneau
Loamy
Sand
2
3
7.41
Bonneau
Loamy
Sand
3
4
5.60
Norfolk
Loamy
Sand
4
5
B.50
Norfolk
Loamy
Sand
5
6
12.50
Norfolk
Loamy
Sand
6
7
17.50
Norfolk
Loamy
Sand
7
8
15.3D
Rains
Sandy
Loam
a
9
9.60
Norfolk
Loamy
Sand
9
10
5.00
Rains
Sandy
Loam
10
11
17.80
Goldsboro
Sandy
Loam
11
12
2.20
Rains
Loamy
Sand
12
13
6.35
Norfolk
Loamy
Sand
13
14
10-DO
Rains
Sandy
Loam
14
15
22.90
Bonneau
Loamy
Sand
15
16
13.60
Bonneau
Loamy
Sand
36
17
5.50
Bonneau
Loamy
Sand
17
18
14.70
Norfolk
Loamy
Sand
18
19
6.60
Rains
Sandy
Loam
19
20
10.60
Rains
Sandy
Loam
20
21
.00
Gritney
Sandy
Loam
21
22
6.93
Bonneau
Loamy
Sand
22
23
16.10
Bonneau
Loamy
Sand
23
24
1.40
Congaree
Sandy
Loam
24
25
4.60
Bonneau
Loamy
Sand
25
26
14.20
Bonneau
Loamy
Sand
26
Overall Total 243.29
NC DEM
Percent
Slope
Crop
Realistic
yield
NIRR
Unit/
Acre
Nitrogen
Removed
lbsiunit
0-4
BG
3.5
tons
50
0-1
BG
3.5
tons
50
0-4
Corn
85
BU
1.25
0-2
Corn
110
BU
1.25
0-2
Corn
110
BU
1.25
2-6
Corn
110
BU
1.25
0-2
Corn
110
BU
1.25
0-2
Corn
110
BU
1.25,
0-2
Corn
110
BU
1.25
0-2
Corn
110
BU
1.25
0-2
Corn
125
Flu
1.25
0-2
BG
4.5
tons
50
0-2
corn
110
BU
1.25
0-2
BG
4.5
tons
So
0-4
BG
3.5
tons
50
0-4
BG
3.5
tona
50
0-4
BG
3.5
tans
5o
2-6
BG
3.S
tons
50
0-2
BG
4.5
tons
50
0-2
BG
4.5
tons
50
6-10
BG
3.8
tons
50
0-4
BG
3.5
tons
So
0-4
BG
3.5
tons
50
D-2
BG
3,8
tons
50
0-4
BG
3.5
tons
50
0-4
Bg
3.5
tons
50
- Realistic yield for the pasture(Bonneau soil) assumed to be the same as Norfolk
Effluent
Nitrogen Produced 1,500 Sow iFarrow 'to Wean Site
Live Animal Weight: 649500
lbs / Sow 433
_ 4 of animal units: 1500
lbs N/animal unit: 5.4
lbs N produced: elo0
Nitrogen Produced 1,250 Sow Farrow to Feeder Site
Live Animal Weight: 652500
lbs/animal unit: 522
4 of animal units: 1250
lbs N/animal unit: 6.5
lbs N produced: 8125
Nitrogen Produced 6,400 Head Feeder to finish (Two 3,200 Head Sites)
Live Animal Weight:- 864000
lbs/animal unit: 135
4 or animal units: 6400
lbs N/animal unit: 2.3
lbs N produced: 14720
Total lbs N produced: 30945
Deficit (-)/Surplus(+) utilized (1b31: 36031.0815
il • LAW, from site population
File:
[Disk:
Overseeded Overseeded Ovsrseeded
Rye Rye Rye Regular
Realistic Nitrogen Nitrogen Crop
Yield Removed Removed lbs N
tors/ac Ibs/unit lb/ac per ac.
2 55 110 175
2 55 110 175
2 55 110 106.25
2 55 110 )37.5
2 55 110 137.5
2 S5 110 137.5
2 55 110 137.5
2 55 110 137.5
2 55 110 137.5
2 55 110 137.5
2 55 110 156.25
2 55 110 225
2 55 110 137.5
2 55 11D 225
2 55 110 175
2 55 110 17S
2 55 110 115
2 55 lie 375
2 55 I)o 225
2 55 110 225
2 55 110 190
2 55 110 175
2 55 110 175
2 55 110 190
2 55, 110 175
2 55 110 175
Total lbs N utilized:
Weighted Average:
Sludge
'Sludgee
4
1bs N
Year
Wt. Avg.
lb/unit
Animals
produced
Acres
-----------------------------------------------------------------.
1
275.2932200
.99
1500
1320
4,79488743
5
215.2932200
.88
1500
6600
23.9744371
10
275.2932200
.88
1500
13200
47,9486743
20
275,2932200
.68
1500
2640D
95.B977486
1
275.2932200
1.1
1250
1375
4,99467441
5
275.2932200
1.3
1250
6675
2-4.9733720
10
275.2932200
1.1
1250
11750
49.9467441
20
275.2932200
1.1
1250
27500
99.9934081
1
275.2932200
.37
6400
2360
e.6o173745
5
275.2932200
.37
6400
IIB40
43.0086072
10
275.2932200
.37
6400
23680
96.0173745
20
275.2932200
.37
6400
47360
)72.034749
❑EMWHiK
Mancr 45
Total it
(lbs)
142.11
230E.1
1602.4115
136I.2`_
2103.75
3093. 75
4331. 2`_
3766.75
2376
1237.5
4719.25
737
1571.625
3350
64 yE
1e7t
1567.5
4169.5
Z:11
3551
U
197_.U�
45d8.5
420
13I1
40:7
66976.0675'
66976.0675
275.25322003

• 12.6 Summary of Waste Production and Application
Based on the steady state live animal population of the site, approximately 37,687.4 lbs of
Plant Available Nitrogen (PAN) are produced in the lagoon liquid each year. The lagoon
liquid application system will cover 87.4 acres with a potential maximum yearly PAN uptake
of 41,5285 pounds.
Additionally, 30,420.9 lbs of PAN will be produced in the lagoon sludge every five years.
About 12,6% of the sludge (3,841 lbs PAN) will be applied on the Daughter Nucleus land.
The remaining sludge (26,579.9 lbs PAN) will be applied onto available land at the nearby
Whitakers site (approximately 243.3 acres).
12-17

FROM :
PHONE NO. : 919 834 1674 Rpr. 21 1998 08:OORM P2
AV"
crtz
AgrIPVYWeTechnology, Inc.
700r 108 Blue Ridge Road
Raloigh, North Carolina 27606
Phone: [phone]
Fax: (919) $29-1507
April 20, 1998
Mr_ J. 1L Joshi
North Carolina Department of Health, Environment and Natural Rosou,roes
Land Quality Section
3800 Barrett Drivo, Suite 101
Raleigh, NC 27609
SUBJECT: Nitrogen uptake at The Manor Company, Inc. Daughter Nucleus Farm
Farm No. 33-59 4.
Dear Mr. Joshv
In response to your letter dated March 20, 1998, the expected yields that were;
submitted in the waste management plan for The Manor Company Inc. Daughter Nucleus;,
Farm were based on numbers obtained from the Agricultural Waste Management Field 1�'
Handbook (AWMFH); a copy is enclosed. The AWMFH gives a typical yield for a forage
sorghum as 6 tons/acre. However, the realistic yield for this crop has been rcvioed to four
tons per we since additional land has been secured for effluent application. t
Copies of the easement agreement and the deed to the additional land are enclosed.
There are 250 acres of tillable land that will be available for effluent application. One third
of the easement property will be planted with cotton. one third with corn, and one third with �� ~
peanuts. The realistic yield information for these crops was obtained from the Natural
Resources Conservation Service (MRCS) Realistic Yield Expectations for North Carolina, the
Edgecombe County Soil Survey, and Estimating Nitrogen Budgets for Soil Crop Systems by
Meisiinger and Randall (copies of excerpts enclosed). There is existing irrigation equipment
on the easement property that cati be utilized for effluent application_ Once information on
the size of the center pivots that are located on the easement property is known, the waste
management plan will be modified to reflect any changes that are necessary.
Additionally, the crops that will be planted on Fields 2-6 of The Han,or Company, Inc.
property have bcen changed. The crop grown on these fields will be corn overseeded with
rye rathor than sudangrass overseeded with rye. Overall, this gives an average PAN
((C. mcepts in Agricultural Byproduct UtIzation"

FROM ' PHONE NO. : 919 634 1874 Rpr. 21 1998 08.01RM P3
utilization per acre one the Daughtcr Nucicus Farm of 262.33 pounds per acre per year. This
information is summarized on the enclosed revised .nitrogen uptake Spreadsheet.
If you havc any questions concerning thus information please contact me at [phone].
xc: The HAnor Company, Inc.
hanor519
2
Sincerely, 7
,Ciar` C
Susan Cawley, BIT

FROM PHONE NO. : 919 834 1874 Apr. 21 1998 08:01AM P4
The HANOR Co., Inc./Hendricks Agreement
Tb s agreement is made and entered into this day of AA" , 1998, by
and between The HANOR Co,, Inc., hereinafter re%zred to as "HANGR", and George
Robert Hendricks and Barbara Cr. Hendricks, herebua$er mfmtd to as the
"Hendricks".
For as in consideration, of mutW promises contained hexeia, the parties do hereby agree
as follows:
1. The Hendricks shalt convoy to MANOR a one year easement to enter the real
estate descried in Exit 1 for the purpose of applybi , swine effluent
nutrients to run from March 31, 1999 through Ntuvh 31, 1999.
2. HANOR wM consak with current ownersloperators prior to malrmg e$luent
.. • applications to said real estate.
3. The He&dricks grant that said went nutrients may be pumped through
eAsting irngiddi equWm-ant located on real a Late' described in cubit 1.
"The parties hereby aolmowrledge that they have read this docur=t and understand the
same and are sipicag this document freely and vohmta ffy.
Marge Robert Reudrida
Barham. G Hendricks

FROM PHONE NO. ; 919 834 1874 Apr. 21 1998 06.01AM P5
EASEMkNT
Gorge Robert kiendricks and Barbara G. Hendri" Battleboro, North Carolina,
individually, hereinafter referred to $s Grantor(s� for and in consideration of the suua of
ONE DOLLAR and other good and valuable consideration, do(es) hereby grant The
HANOR Co., %c., whh ks prh cipal place of businoss loonted as E4614 Hwy. 14 & 60,
Spring Green., 'Wmonsin 53538, hereina$er referred to as Grautee, an easement on and
avcr the real estate dom bad on ExbA4 11 attached Im-eto and made a part hereof for
pur'Foses of applying swine effluent nutrients to said real. estate.
This Easement shall be for one year after the date hereof and shall be binding on
Graator(s), successors, ageuts, heirs and assigns.
Dated this 31 S (L day of 1998.
Barbara G. Hendricks

FROM : PHONE NO. : 919 934 le74 Apr. 21 199e 08:02AM P6
F.Q. 13OX /Gb6, Rocky Mount', N.C. 27801
NORTH CAROLINA
EOGECOMB9 COUNTY
Tills DEED, nlado this . 3.1f;t . day of: _ Mewl; , ]'103, by
MARTHA 11. 1101.LO14AN and limsband, WILLTAM la, IIULLOMAN, JR. , 3AIWI
H. HARRhLL and husband, PRANCIS 11ARRELL and LOUISE MCI;. IIALL,
Unmarried, GranLors, to GWRGR RO0UM' and wife, BARaARA
G. 1113NDR1CKs, Route 2, Box t6, ilatt.leborn, N.C. 27009, Grantees;
w l 'i' N 4 S 0 E T III
That the Grantors in consideration of Ten Ijoiiars and other
valuable consideration tc) thnm paid by the Gra:Itees, the receipt Of
which is hereby acknowledged, have bargained and sold, and by these
presents do grant, barcjain, sell and Convoy unto the UranLaes, their
heirs, or successors and assigns, the ic3.l.lowi.ng 4escr.ibed real
estate in No, 6 'Township, Edgecombe County, North Carolina;
Beginning at a point in the aentarline of 5,R. 1410
where it intersects with the western right-of-way line
of S. R. 14091 thence along 'the said western right. -of -
way line of S. R. 1409, S.•5° 15' W. 80 feet Rvare or
less; thence continuing along said line, S. 19 151
W. 100 feet, S. o' 301 E. 100'feet, S. 1' 40' E. 100
feet, S. 20 301 E. 100 feat ,'S'. 21 45' E. 100 feet, S.
3° 30' E. 100 feet, S. 4° 05'S''Fs, 100 feet, S. 4° 451 E.
100 feet, S. 6" 15' E. 100 Peet, S. 76 15' 1s. 100 feet,
S. 8° 20' E. 100 feet, S. 80 40.1 F, 100 feat. S. 90 101
E. 100 feet, S. 90 301 E. 100', feet to a concrete monument;
thence S. 460 001 W. 399 feet_', t}ience S. 54° 45' W. 546
feet; thence S. 770 W. 124'feet to an .iron stake; thence
S. 419 55' W. 130.5 feet to an iron stake; thence S. 39"
401 W. 661 feet ho ar iron eL'ake; thence S. 721 SO' W.
557 feet to an iron stake; thence S. 640 10' W. 243.5 feet
to an iron stake in the line of -the J. 8. Cutchin flair$
'and at a Branchl thence in a' westerly direction along the
various meanrlerings of said was the following courses
ielu and distances: N. 570 Al W.f.35.67 feat, N. 570 001 W.
1. 87 feet, N. 740 301 W. 72.5 feat, S. 890 30' W. 116.5 feat,
I�iyp c:i S. 830 00' W. 165.5 feet, S. 610451 W. 57 feet, N. 830
e -r 15'W. 101.25 feet, N. 610 1511W: 80 feet, N. n09 50' N.
1 l'') M1.67.25 feet, N. 640 45, w. 114 feet, N. 18° 151 W. 40
,' .• feet to a point; thence S. 501 001 W. 2.10.5 Ecet; thence
3*.;!3 S. 639 451 W. 121 feet; thence S. 590 20' W. 15.02 feet
rd more or lees to an .iron stake- in a ditch, 19 foot front
the centerline of the srancrl;i Cnen ce N. 11" 1B' W. 660.13
' L! feet to a point or stake; thence N. 20 431 W. 575.06 feet
-1L_- K to a point or stake; thence 8.:,701 33' W. 679 feet to a
stake or point; L-hasive N. 27"W W. 2#362.27 feet to a
}., , stake or point; thence-N. 624, 23' F.. 457.54 feet to a
a x stake or points thence S. 46° 451 R- 1.11-75 feet to a
4+ plaint or stake: thence N. 61°"2S' 9. 759,42 Ewat to a
I £ 0 point or stake; thence N. 186 041 E. 502.16 feet to a
point or stake; thence N. 596 45' E. 470.98 feet to a
r�r>arafi .
.f

FROM : PHONE NO. : 919 (334 1874 Apr. 21 199e 08:02AM P7
6]
and
point or stake; thence N. 73' 55' E. 524.42 feet
to an iron stake in the line of Henry Braswell Estate
Land; thence S. 249 57- E. 684.71 toot to a concrete
monument; thanaa N. 690 00' E.'1,385 feet to an iron
pipe; thence N. 730 100E. 807.5 feet more or less to
the point cold line intersecta•the centerline aF S.A,
1410 is concrete monument being'on the east side of
5.0. 1410); thence along theYcenterline of S.R. 1410,
S. 400 301 E. 1,424 foot mora�or less to the point and
place of Beginning and containing 377.9 Acres, more or
logo.
The above description is taken from "Map Of Property Of
8adie)All Mc d. Hall Heirs, No.•;6 Township, Xdgecombe
County, N.C.". scale: 1"W4001''dated March 28, 1983
and revised March 31, 1.9133, Gay-:larvia nssoclatee, ;nu.,
Rocky Mount, N.C.
There is also conveyed herewitW from Orantora to Grantaoa
sufficient and perpetual easamd�ts for maintenance of any
and all drainage ditchea which';extand from the subject
property onto property skill'hold by Crantore, sue that
the Grantees, whether it be by.tuse of land moving equipment,
or otherwise, shall suffictiently.' be able to keep said
dltbhaa dloarad, ciltaA oe othatwiaa suitable for drainage
purposes off of the land conv'eyed onto the land retained
kiy Grantors. That it is intended that Grantees, their
auacessors and assigns will have Perpetual right of ingress,
egress and regress. t;.•;
EXCEPTING AND RESERVING unto the said Grantors, their
heirs and assigns, the right of'ingress, egress and regress
in, through, across, over and;:updn the land conveyed
herein over existing farm roads,: paths, or access areas
from the adjoining land rataibW by the Grantees to an
existing public road. This easement is excepted and
reserved for the express purpose of cutting, removing and
transporting timber pulpwood;'bxJthe Grantors from adjoin-
ing lands retained by them'�fo';" hemselvee, their servants,
agents and workmen and the`Mintee assents thereto and
covenants to take whatever%action is necessary to provide
good and sufficient access.
rurther, the Orantore hereby grant Lo Ordntee an saBGmont
of access from the land eonveyed.herein to swift Creek
across that portion of the adjoining land retained by the
Orantorn me de" ribed In tho''plat recorded in Plat Book
13, Page 48, Edgocombe County,`.Aegistry. This easement is
granted for the express purpofeelof irrigating from Swift
'Creek t6 the land cefnvoyad , ®SG n and tha Grantors covenant'...:
to take whatever action is,'necessary to provide good and .
sufficient a4cosa, ..?'V -V
HAVE AND TO HOLD the aforesaid'real estate and all privileges
appurtenances thoreunto belbn9ing, to thQ said Granteoo, their
' 4 '
heirs, or successors and assigns forever.
And the said Grantora, for -themselves, their heirs, executors
and administrators, covenant with'the:•Grantee, their heirs, or
successors and assigns that they a,re7;0012ed of said premises in
fee and have the right to convey tbe;same in Lee simple; that the

FROM : PHONE NO. : 919 834 1874 Apr. 21 1998 08:03AM P8
r
same are free from encumbrances except as herein get forth; and
that they will warrant and defend the said title to the same
against the claims of all peroong whomooever.
IN TESTIMONY WHEREOF, the said Grantors have hereunto set
their hands and seals the day and year first above written.
(SEAL) , Lk (SEAL)
MRTHA H. t OLLO W: I D. -HOUDMAN,
SARA H RSi, (SEAL)
ff y FRANCIS HARRELL
r —&-v �� D `-ll dal (SEAL)
LOUISEMaG. HALL, Unmarried
.a
NORTH CAROLINA - COUNTY OF
.1, �1 1r)U� , Notary Public, do hereby
t
certify that KAWHA H. HOLLO'NAN and husband, WILLIAM 0. ROLLOKAN, JR.,
Grantors, each personally appeared befo* me this day and acknowledged
the due execution of the €oregoing•instrument. '
Witness my hand and offioial seal, this lh day of
i983.
Notary Public ••;.Jj' +�:
; r i,
My Commission expires:
NORTH CAROLINA - COUNTY o&'
r
Notary Public, do hereby
certify that SARAH H. HARRELL and husband, FRANCIS URRELL, Grantors,
each personally appeared before me -this day and acknowledged the
i, .
due execution of the foregoing instirument. y
r.
Witness my bandand o€fioial seal, this day of
1983.
+, Notary Public
My commissionn
¢x p• crap.— �.�. ,,.,..�...,,.....

FROM :
PHONE NO. : 919 834 1874 Apr. 21 1990 08:03AM P9
NORTH CAROLINA - COUNTY OF —CC&, .-_
Notary Public, do hereby
certify that LOUISS McG, HALL, Umarxied, Grantor, personally appeared
before me thin day and acknowledged the due execution of the foregoing
V
instrument.
Witness my hand and official Seal, thiQ� day of,,r,
raixav
Notary Public
Ky commission expixea=- .. wI - e Ytysa''w� i t
NORTH CAROL,INA COUNTY OF ��cr�The forego;Lnq
Ce rti f i cats (a) of 7V1
Notaryties) Public Is tarp:) certified to be correct. This
instrument was presented forp�regiBtrat- on and recorded in this
office in Book , _D4 Page _ 79__
This day of , 19 at
el
BY;
Iie�aater of DeQds )tegist Deeds
y
PI

Client: NANOR-NC The Kanor Company, Inc.
Revised: 4rAM Daughter Nucleus Site
By. SLC Nitrogen Uptake Spreadsheet
File: ON4.xh
Ofsk: Strom's
1
0.9
GoMsbaro
Sandy Loam
1
0-2
Skdanprass .4
... Ton
55
220.00
798.00
Apr-Od
2
3.0
Norfolk
Loamy Sand
2
2.6
Corn 110
Bu
1-125
123.75
990.00
Apr-Od
3
9.6
Norfolk
Loamy Sand
3
2-6
Cam 110
Bu
1.125
123.75
1188.00
Apr -Oct
4
5.79
Norfolk
Loamy Sand
4
2-6
Cam 110
Bu
1.125
123.75
716.51
Apr -Oct
5
7.68
Goldsboro
Sandy Loam
5
0.2
Con 125
Bu
1.125
140.63
1077.19
Apr -Oct
6
25.76
Norfolk
Loamy Sand
6
0-2
Cam 110
Bu
1.125
123.75
3187.80
Apr -Oct
8
10.7
Norfolk
Loamy Sand
8
0-2
Sudangrass 4
Ton
55
220,00
235C00
Apr-Ocl
11
4.2
Norfolk
Loamy Sand
11
2-6
Sudangrass 4
Ton
55
220.00
924.00
Apr -Oct
12
9.99
Norfolk
Loamy Sand
12
0-2
Sudangrass 4
Ton
55
220.00
2197.80
Apr -Oct
13
2.4
Norfolk
Loamy Sand
13
2-6
Sudangrass 4
Ton
55
220.00
620.00
Apr -Oct
14
' - '„ 2A
Norfolk
Loamy Sand
14
2.6
Sudangrass 4
Ton
55
220.00
528.00
Apr-Od
Ease. Prop,
B3.33
Norfolk
Loamy Sand
Ease. Prop.
0-2
Corn t10
Bu
1.125
123.75
10312-09
Apr -Oct
Ease. Prop.
83.33
Norfolk
Loamy Swrd
Ease. Prop.
0-2
Cotton 700
Iblet
0.09
63.00
5249.79
Apr -Oct
Ease. Prop.
• . 83.33
Norfolk
Loamy Sand
Ease. Prop.
0-2
Peanuts 4000
lb
0.038
152.00
12666.16
Apr -Oct
1
0.9
Goldsboro
Sandy Loam
1
0-2
Over Rye 2.5 `
Ton
55
137.50
123.75
Now -Mar
2
0.0
Norfolk
Loamy Sand
2
2-6
Over Rye 2.5 `
Ton
55
137.50
1100.00
Nov -Mar
3
9.6
Norfolk
Loamy Sand
3
2-6
Over Rye 2.5 '
Ton
55
137.50
132r.00
Nov -Mar
4
5.79
Norfolk
Loamy Sand
4
2-6
Over Rye 2.5 '
Ton
55
137.50
796.13
NovaMw
5
7.66
Goldsboro
Sandy Loam
5
0-2
Over Rye 2.5 `
Ton
55
137.50
1053.25
Nav-Mar
8
25.76
Norfolk
Loamy Sand
6
0-2
Over Rye 2.51
Tan
55
137.50
3542.00
Nov -Mar
8
10.7
Norfolk
Loamy Sand
8
0-2
Over Rye 2.5 '
Ton
55
137.50
1471.25
Nov -Mar
11
4.2
Norfolk
Loamy Sand
11
2-6
Over Rye 2.5 '
Ton
55
137.50
577.50
Noy -Mar
12
9.99
Norfolk
Loamy Sand
12
0-2
Over Rye 2.5 `
Ton
55
137.50
1373.63
Nov -Mar
13
2.4
Norfolk
Loamy Sand
13
2.6
Over Rye 2.5 `
Tan
55
137.50
330.00
Nov -Mar
14
2.4
Norfolk
Loamy Sand
14
2.6
Over Rye 2.6 '
Ton
55
137.50
330.00
Now -Mar
Ease. Prop.
83.33
Norfolk
Loamy Sand
Ease. Prop.
0-2
Over Rye 2.51
Ton
55
137.50
11457.88
Nov -Mar
Ease. Prop.
63.33
Norfolk
Loamy Sand
Ease. Prop.
0-2
Over Rye 2.5 '
Ton
55
137.50
11457.88
Noy -Mar
Ease. Prop.
83.33
Norfolk
Loamy Sand
Ease. Prop.
0-2
Over Rye 2.5 '
Ton
55
137.50
11457.88
Nov -Mar
Total lba N utilized:
Weighted Average-
231
• In11, 1 son assumed R.Y.E-
Nitrogen Produced
haml=lBuent
Nllroaen Produced
from
Sludge
Yaatr� WLA�ig
�;i�t�...-�• �°
enr
k9��_.
1 262.3327974
0.08
2500
2200
8.386294i35
■ of animal units:
25M
5 262.3327974
0.89
25M
11000
41.93147068
lbs Wanenaf knit
5.4
10 262,3327974
0.88
25M
22000
83.86294135
lbs N produced:
13500
20 262.3327974
0.08
25M
44OW
167.7258627
1 262.3327914
0.076
7680
583.68
2.224960073
9 of animaf units
7680
5 262.3327974
0.076
7680
2918.4
11.1248DO37
lbs Nlankmal unit:
0.48
10 262,3327974
0.076
7680
5836.8
22.24960073
Its N produced:
3686A
20 262.3327974
0.076
7680
11673.6
44.49920146
1 262.3327974
0.37
8640
3198.8
12.18604777
0 of animal units:
W40
5 262.3327974
0.37
8640
15984
60.9W23885
lbs Nfanimal unit:
2.3
10 262.3327974
0.37
am
31968
12l.860,17TT
lbs N produced:
19872
20 282.3327974
0.37
am
03936
243.7209554
".R.9-FRO,
1 262.3327974
0.61
170
103.7
0.39529941
C of animal units:
170
5 262.3327974
0.81
170
516.5
1.97649705
lbs Nlanimalunit
3.7
10 2623327974
0.61
170
1037
3.952994099
-
' fbs N produced:
629
20 262,3327974
0.61
170
2174
7.905988t99
Total The
N Produced:
k _
Deficit (-KSorpl- (*) Utilized (Iba):
" :JS0821 A16

FROM :
PHONE NO. : 919 834 1874 Apr. 21 1998 08:04AM P11
Chapter B Role of Plaits to Waste Management pert wl
Agr9Cultutal Waste Mmugement-
Field Hwdtxmk
Table & 4 Ptant nutrient uptake by specified crap and removed in the harvested part of the crop --- Continued
■war
Crop Dry wt. Typical --------------------- Average concentration ofnutrients (`K+)------------- .--------
tb/bu yield/acre N P K Ca N9 a Cu Mn Tar
Pit part
Fruit crops - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - % of the fresh harvested material
Apples
12 tons
0.13
0.02
0.16
0.03,
0.02
0.04
0.0001
0,0001 0.0001
Bananas
9,900lb.
0.19
0.02
0.54
0.23
0.30
cantaloupe
17,5001b.
0.22
0.09
0.46
0.34
Coconuts
0.5 tons -dry
copra
5.00
0.60
3.33
a21
0.36
0.34
0.0010
0.0076
Gres
12 tons
0.28
0.10
0.50
0.04
Oranges
54,000lb.
0.20
0.02
0,21
0.0E
402
0.02
0.0004
0.0001 0.0040
Peaches
15 torts
0.12
0.03
0.19
0.01
0.0:3
0.01
0.0010
Pineapple
17 tons
0.43
0.36
1.68
0.02
0.18
0.04
Tomatoes
22 tons
0.30
0.04
0.33
0.02
0.03
0.04
0.0002
0.0003 0.0001
Silage crops - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - % of the dry harvested material - - - -
Alfiaifa haylage (60% dm)
10 wet/5 dry
179
0.33
2.32
0,97
0.33
0.36 0-0009
0.0062
Conn eilage (85% dell)
20 wet/7 dry
1.10
0.25
1.09
0.26
0-18
0.15 0.0005
0.0070
Forag so m 303hs1m7
2�--,&AQ A
1.44
0.19
1.02
0.37
0.81
0,11 0.0032
0.0045
apt hayl a (40% dm)
10 weV4 dry
1.60
0.28
0.94
0.31
0.24
0.18
Smghw"adan (W% dm)
10 weO dry
1.36
0.16
1A5
0.43
0.34
0,04
0.0091
Sugar crops - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - % of dte fresh harvested material - - - - - - - -
supreane
37 eons 0.16 0.04 0.37 0.05 0.04 0.04 '
sugar beets
20 t ons 0.20 0.03 0.14 0-11 0.08 0.03 0.0001 0..0025
tops
0-43 0.04 1.03 0.18 0.19 0.10 0.0002 0.0010
Tobacco
--•--------------%ofthedryharvestedmaterial----------------- !
All types 2,1001b. 3.75 0.33 4.98 3.75 0.90 0,70 0.0015 0.0275 0.0035
Tuapass-----------------%ofthedrybarvesWmaterial-----------------
Bluegrass 2 tons 2.91 0.40 1.05 0.93 0.23 0.66 0,0014 0.0075 0.0020
Bentgra,s 2.5 tons 3.10 0.41 2.21 0.65 0.27 0.21
Bermudagrass 4 tons 1.88 0.19 L40 0.37 0.15 0.22 0.0013
(210-A1yMM W2)
6-21

FROM :
PHONE NO. : 919 834 1874 Apr. 21 1998 08:05AM P12
_ -j
590A-3
Table 1. ,DFitroaen llyl Fertilization Rates by Cron Yield
A range is shown for N fertilization rates because N uptake is dependent on the available water holding
capacity (AWNC) of the soil. AWHC is primarily determined by the soil's texture, percent organic
matter and rooting depth. Make your selection from the chart based upon the soil's tenure, inherent
ability to produce, the occurrence of necessary conservation practices to protecz the resource base, and
the landuser's'historical crop production.
Cron
NitrGon Recommendation
Wb=
1-7 - 2.4 ft. N/bu,
Batley
1.4 -1.6 lbs. N/bu.
oats
1.0 -1.3 lbs. N/bzt.
Rye
1.7 - 2.4 lbs. N/bu.
Triticale
1.4 » 1.6 lbs. X/bu.
Com grain
1.0 -1.25 lbs. N/bu.
Corn -silage
10 -12. lbs. NAort
Sir 3humgtain
2.0 - 2.5 lbs. N/cwt.
Soybeaasl
3.5 - 4 ft. N/bti
Cotton
0.06 - 0.121b. NM. lint
Tobacco -Hurley - See current year Burley Tobacco kd m don Guide available from North Carolina
Cooperative Fxtensioa Service.
Tobacco - Flue -cured - see current year Tobacco Information Guide available from the North Carolina
Cooperative Encnsion Service_
Sorghum -Sudan grass
Sudan grass
Feats MUlet
Bermuda grass (all areas of starry
TaU fescue
Orchard grass
Tmwtby
Small grain
Pine Trees
Trees
45 - 55 lbs. Nlton Stay
45 - 35 lbs. Mon hay
45 - 55 lbs, NAon bay
40 - 50 lbs. Mon hay
40 - 50 lbs- Man hay
40 - 50 lbs.. N/ton hay
40.50 lbs. N/tou hay
50 - 60 lbs. Mon hay
40 - 60 lbs. ac/yr
70-100lbs. aclyr
NOTE: Reduce all hay crop Nitrogen rates by 25 percent when grazing. For each ton of Fray hasvrsteci from a
page system the nitmgft application maybe retained to the R.Y.E. (l) application into for hay-
tWh= waste is to lae applied to soybeans, it should be applied between the 64 leaf stage and when
pods are full to maximize the utiEiaation of nitrogen in " animal waste.
MRCS. NC
DECV%- IMER, 1006

r
98
Tab1t 5-4, Cantinued.
NICISINCER & RANDALL
N [Dry matter bastes N harvested$
)snit Moisture
Common General of men content Comiuoa General
Crap description value rarea, sure of unit value range
96 % -- lb Nhmit -
Hairy. fresh
W boom
%Fheatgrass, crested
ifey, early bloom
Full bloom
matum
cotton, lint
seed
Flex, seed
Peanut
Seed with pods
Seed only
Hay
Potato. white tubers
Sugarbeet
Tops wkrown
Roots w1D crown
Tops wlo crown
Roota Vkrown
Sugarcane
Millable cane
C 12 rna crop
> 12 too crap
Cane tops + trash
Sunflower, seed
Oil type
Confection
70bacco
Flue•cured
Maryland type
Burley
Asparagus
Bean, snap, pads
Dry bran seed
Beet, ted table. roots
Tops
Broccoli
Cabbages head
Cantaloupe
Carrot. roots
Forlega
Cauliflower
Cuckrmber
Lettuce, head
3.70 3.10-4.20 Ton
1.60 1.30-1.90 Ton
1.40 1.10-1.70 Tan
0.60 0,50-0.70 Ton
Fiber and miscellaaeoua crops
0.20 0.15-0.25 1041b
3.70 3.40-4.0 1001b
3.80 3.30-4.30 100lb
75
19
16-21
20
26
21-3D
20
22
18-27
20
10
8-11
10
O2
&14.2
10
3.3
3.1-3.6
7
3.6
8.1-4.0
N BUDGE7S FOR SOI K.4XFWP SYSTEMS
Tcbla 5-4. ConE.inued.
99
Crop description
N )Dry aratter baaial
Common General
value range
Unit
of rnea-
we
Moisture
content
of.unit
harvested$
Comrnaay Ge-A
value range
46
96
- lb Niunit --
Onion, bulbs
220
1-90-2.60
Tan
8o
4-4
3.84.0
Pen. seed a*
4.20
3.60-4.70
Ton
80
17
14-49
Pwenopede
2.00
1.50-2.50
Ton
75
10
5-13
Pepper, sweet green
2.30
1.90-2.70
Ton
92
3.7
3.0-4.3
4hMch
4.70
3.90-5.50
Ton
91
E 5
7.0-8.9
Squash, su u ner
3.10
2.70-3,5Q
Ton
92
5.0
4.3-&6
Winter
2.10
1.70-2.50
Tan
88
5.0
4.1-.&0
Sweet coal, stover
1.30
1.10-1.50
Ton
70
7.8
6,640
Fare with husks
1-60
L40-1.80
Tan
73
&S
71".7
sweet potato, root
1.10
0.90-1.30
Tan
73
6.2
5.4-7.3
70mato
Z70
180•-3.10
Ton
94
3.2
2.8-3.7
Watermelon
126
1.00-1.50
Ton
91
2 3
1.8-2.7
4.20
3.40-5.00
10D lb
16
3.8
3.1-4.5
Tree sad fruit crops
4.60
3.80-6.40
too lb
10
4.1
3.4-4.9
Apple 0.35 0.25-0.45 Ton 82 1.3 0.9-1.6
1.85
1.50-2 ?0
Ton
15
8l
26-37 =
Almond, with slreli 3.30 3.00-3.60 Ten 15 56 51-61
LSD
1.20-1.90
100lb
75
0.4
0.3--0.5
ChMTY 1.15 im-1.30 Tan 82 4.1 3.8-4.7
Grapefruit 121) 1.00-1.40 Ton 88 2.9 2.4-&4
Grepe OAD 0.50-0.70 Ton 80 2.4 2A-2.B
2.10
i.80-2-So
Ton
82
7.B
fi.6-8.3
Leman 1-50 1.30-1.70 Ton 87 3.9 3.4-4.4
0-80
0.60-0-95
Tom
77
3.7
2.8-4.4
orange 120 LO0-1.40 Ton 82 4.3 3.8-3.0
2AO
2.20-2.3D
Tan
82
9.0
7.9-10A
read, 1.00 OM-1.20 Ton sa Z4 1.9-2.9
1.10
0-90-1.30
Ton
77
5.1
4.1-6.0
Fear 0.40 0.30-0.5if Tea 82 1.4 1.1-1.8
Pecan, with shell 2.80 2.50-3.10 Ton 15 48 43-53
strawberry 1.36 1.10-1.60 Ton 91 2.4 2.0-2.9
0.56
0-28-0.40
Ton
72
2.0
1.6-2.2 t
1 PtN and M harvested m71 g�enarally 6e above the common ensue fcrr crops grown
0.25
0.2Q-fl.30
Tan
70
l.fi
1.2-1.8
an N-rlch sails (luxury amounts of manure, fertatium, etc.) and for craps grown in water
0.25
0.0-1. LO
Ton
75
4.5
.5-.
stress conditions (low dry matte production), percent N and harvested N will general-
ly be blow the common value for crops grown in l\ parer sails flow N inputs) and for
2-70
2.20-3.2a1
Tam
10
49
40-69
crape +pith aboTe-average dry matter production (good rainfall years, irrigation. etc.)
3.20
2.80-3.60
Tan
10
bB
5045
l CHb as defined in chapter 12 by Pierce et al., 1s the N removed in the harvested
--
biomass.
to
1.7-2.3
1001b
3.1
2.6-3.6
100 lb
CD
3.5-4.6
100lb
Vegetable craps
6.50
4.80-8.20
Tan
3.00
2.50-3.M
Tne
4A0
3.50-4.50
100Ib
1.95
1.85-225
Tan
3.50
3.00-4-d0
Tan
SAO
5.10-6.80
Ton
2.80
2-30-8.30
Ton
L45
1.20-1.70
Tan
1.50
1.30-1.70
Ton
2.30
2.m-2.6o
'lion
4.40
3.80-5.00
Ton
2.40
2.D0-2.80
Ton
4.10
3.30-4.S0
Ton
4eontinued an next page)
20 1.6 1.4-t.8
18 2.5 2.1-3.0
25 3.0 2.644
92
8.8
7.7-7.9
87
7.9
6.5-9.0
10
3.6
32-4.1
87
5
4-6
as
I
943
90
12
10-14
91
5.0
4.1-5.9
9D
19
2.4-3.4
as
3.6
3.1-4.1
84
7.4
6.4-8.3
91
7.9
6.8-9.0
95
2.4
2.0-2.9
95
4.1
3.3-4.9
Tattle 5-5 are rough estimates and we to be used only as default values since
They are based on limited data. If more accurate local data are available they
should be used. To illustrate the use of Table 5-5 assume that the above alfalfa
Crop was grown on a sail containing2% organic matter without other N ap-
plications. One would then estimate that about 80174 of the N, or about 190
lb of Nlacre (about 210 kg of N/ha), was fixed (the 80% value comes from
1% organic matter times 30 lb of N/019 organic matter = 60 lb available
N that gives a preliminary estimate of 60 to 90% of N from fixation for al-
falfa; the secaudary adjustment directs us tc the upper end of this range since
our soil had <3% organic matter). If the same crop bad been grown on a
4% organic matter soil, one might estimate that 55% of the N was fixed.
The final component required to estimate total symbiotic N fixation is
N contained in the nonharvested portion of the crop, that is, abscissed leaves,
harvester losses, stems, crowns, and all the N contributed through the root
-4
m
a
UD
to
OD
07
A

FROM :
PHONE NO. : 919 834 1874
Apr. 21 1998 08:06AM P14
82
TABLE 5.--YIELDS PER ACRE OF CROPS AND PASTURE --Continued
SOIL SURVEY
soil mate and
map symbol I
Corn
ICotton
lints
Tobacco {
Peanuts
Soybeans
1 wheat
i
Pasturm
_..... ,�
'
u
j ksu
,
Ct---------------------• -{
-__
I
---
i -... j
-.-
i _••-
I •-_
i
....
GYC-----------^ ---------1
60
{
---
{ --- i
1.500
{ 20
;
5.5
Gritney ;
GYD---------------y -----1
---
i
'--
i --- t
---
I ---
! ---
i
5.0
Gritney
Jo-----------------------i
120
1
650
i 2,700 1
21800
i 45
I 50
1
9.0
Johns
1
3S------------ -----------;
�--
I
i
--_
1 i
{ --_ I
�..
I
1 •-_
1
i ---
1
1
---
Johnston
YeB^----•--------•_-------i
70
j
550
1 2.000 {
2,400
j 20
{ 35
!
9.0
Ketlansville 1
i
{ {
;
;
Lu------------------------ {
110
{
---
i --- i
---
{ 45
{ 05
;
9.0
Lumbee i
"
I,Y------------------------ 1
115
{
675
1 2,800 1
2,800
1 45
! 50
;
10.0
Lynchburg
MaA-----------------------
100
1
1'000
li 2.500 1
3.300
1 40
1 60
i
10.0
Marlboro (
I
{ I
I
I
{
Mae ----------------------- 1
100
i
1,600
i 2.400 1
31000
1 40
i 50
1
10.0
Marlboro
Me------------------�------I
90
�
---
i --- I
---
I 35
1 ---
I
8.0
Meggett
Na------------------------ 1
120
!
675
1 2.800 1
2,800
1 45
1 50
;
10.5
Nahuate
_ --------------------'1
NNorfolk
110
i
700
1 3.000 1
4.000
I 40
i 60
;
10,5
t
I
1 i
1
Y
i
Nos --------~--------------i
100
1
650
i !
21900
3,700
i
1 35
1
I 55
;
t0,o
Norfolk ;
{
I
NoC----------------------
.1 f —k
1
90
I
600
i,700 I
3,300
1 30
1 50
9.5
or olk ,
"us -----------------------I
Norfolk {
ol-------------------
PPapt`
,
P6�r,
Pits
i
PU------------ ------------{
Portamouth i
I
Rains !
90----
k--------------- --
Sgt--------------------------
otetB
i
Tarboro i
i
540 foatnotes at end of table
1
I i {
65 1 --- { 1,800 i 2,200 1 25 1
t i I i 1
;
! I ;
45
i I 1 i I
110 1 450 I 2,300 { --- { 45
100 .-- ` --- I i 1
No
1 ,
130 { i
; 750 i 3.000 i 3.300 { 45•
{ ; I
50 1 --- 1 j
l 2,000 i w�0 i
i ' 1
i I
1
,
;
{
50 1
i
45
I
45
60 j
1
--- i
{

State of North Carolina
Department of Environment,
Health and Natural Resources
Division of Water Quality
James B. Hunt, Jr., Governor
Jonathan B. Howes, Secretary
�. JUN 2 1P j J
NR PAL
June 26, 1997
TO: Raleigh Regional Water Quality Supervisor
FROM: Sue Homewood
SUBJECT: Notification of Facility Number Change
The following changes have been made to the Animal Operations Database. Please make
appropriate changes in your files.
Facility numbers 33-58, 33-57 and 33-59 were combined into one facility; facility number
33-58. Facility numbers 33-57 and 33-59 was deleted from the animal operations database.
If you have any comments or questions please feel free to call me at [phone] ext 502.
MY
P.O. Box 29535, Raleigh, North Carolina 27626-0535 Telephone [phone] Fax [phone]
An Equal Opportunity Affirmative Action Employer 50% recycled/10% post -consumer paper

LJL-PdrtrnCrlt ui r=nvlrunnierit,
Health and Natural Resources
Division of Water Quality
James B. Hunt, Jr., Governor
Jonathan B. Howes, Secretary
A. Preston Howard, Jr., P.E., Director
July 22, 1997
John College
Hanor Multiplier
876 Country Club Road
Rocky Mount, NC 27804
JLL 2 3'
Dear Mr. College:
'&4 0
.±. .
IDEHNR
Farm No. 33-58
Additional Information Request
Hanor Multiplier
Animal Waste Operation
Edgecumbe County
The Permits and Engineering Unit has completed a preliminary engineering review of the subject
application. Additional information is required before we can continue our review. From our earlier
conversation via telephone and fax, it was agreed to combine three certified farms (33-57, 33-58, and 33-
59) into one (33-58) under one Waste Utilization Plan (WUP) covering all these farms. The WUP,
however, does not cover the 170 boar studs present on the farm as specified on your permit application.
Please revise your WUP to include the boar studs and have certification for the 170 boar studs, and send
two copies of each document to this office by August 25, 1997.
Please reference the subject farm number when providing the requested information. All
information should be signed, and submitted to my attention at the address below. Please note that failure
to provide this additional information on or before the above requested date can result in your application
being returned as incomplete.
If you have any questions regarding this request, please call me at [phone], extension 363.
cc: Raleigh Regional Office, Water Quality
Permit File
Facilities Assessment -.Unit
P.O. Box 29535. Raleigh, North Carolina 27626-0535
An Equal Opportunity Affirmative Action Employer
Sincerely,
J.R. Joshi
Soil Scientist
State Engineering Review Group
Telephone [phone] FAX [phone]
50% recycled/ 10% post -consumer paper

State of North Carolina
Department of Environment,
Health and Natural Resources f
Division of Water Quality I MAY y
141997
James B. Hunt, Jr., Governor r, fah .
Jonathan B. Howes, Secretary n�f
A. Preston Howard, Jr., P.E., Director . ``�---
May 14, 1997
CERTIFIED MAIL
RETURN RECEIPT_ REOUESTED
The Hanor Company
Hanor Multiplier. . . .
876 Country Club Rd
Rocky Mount NC 27804
Farm Number: 33-58
Dear The Hanor Company:
You are hereby notified that Hanor Multiplier, in accordance with G.S. 143-215.10C, must apply
for coverage under an Animal Waste Operation General Permit. Upon receipt of this letter, your farm has
thirty (30) daya to submit the attached application and all supporting documentation. In accordance
with Chapter 626 of 1995 Session Laws (Regular Session 1996), Section 19(c)(2), any
owner or operator who falls to submit an application by the date specified by the
Department SHALL NOT OPERATE the animal waste system after the specified date.
Your application must be returned within thirty (30) days of receipt of this letter. Failure to submit the
application as required may also subject your facility to a civil penalty and.other enforcement actions for
each day the facility is operated following the due date of the application.
The attached application has been partially completed using information listed in your Animal
Waste Management Plan Certification Form. If any of the general or operation information listed is
incorrect please make corrections as noted on the application before returning the application package. The
signed original application, one copy of the signed application, two copies of a general location map, and
two copies of the Certified Animal.Waste Management Plan must be returned to complete the application
package. The completed package should be sent'to the following address:
North Carolina Division of Water Quality
Water Quality Section
Permits and Engineering Unit
Post Office Box 29535
Raleigh, NC 27626-0535
If you have any question concerning this letter, please call J R Joshi at [phone] extension
363 or Charles Alvarez with the Raleigh Regional Office at [phone].
Sincerely,
;(vr A. Preston Howard, Jr., P.E.
cc: Permit File (w/o encl.)
Raleigh Regional Office (w/o encl.)
P.O. Box 29535, Raleigh, North Carolina 27626-0535 Telephone [phone] FAX [phone]
An Equal Opportunity Affirmative Action Employer 50% recycle& 10% post -consumer paper

State of North Carolina
Department of Environment,
Health and Natural ourde?S�7
Division of Water Quali
f
James B. Hunt, Jr., Governor
Jonathan S. Howes, Secretary
A. Preston Howard, Jr., P.E., Director x o0r
May 1.4, 1997
CERTIFIED MAIL
RETURN RECEIPT REQUESTED
The Hanor Company
Hanor Multiplier
876 Country Club Rd
Rocky Mount NC 27804
Farm Number: 33-59
Dear The Hanor Company:
N1.9AA
A'4� 00
0_%WMW06ftftW0,ft
EDEHNR
You are hereby notified that Hanor Multiplier, in accordance with G.S. 143-215,10C, must apply
for coverage under an Animal Waste Operation General Permit. Upon receipt of this letter, your farm has
thirty (30) days to submit the attached application and all supporting documentation.. In accordance
with Chapter 626 of 1995 Session Laws (Regular Session 1996), Section 19(c)(2), any
owner or operator who fails to submit an application by the date specified by the
Department SHALL NOT OPERATE the animal waste system after the specified date.
Your application must be returned within thirty (30) days of receipt of this,letter. Failure to submit the
application as required may also subject your facility to a civil penalty and other enforcement actions for
each day the facility is operated following the due date of the application.
The attached application has been partially completed using information listed in your Animal
Waste Management Plan Certification Form. If any of the general or operation information listed is
incorrect please make corrections as noted on the application before returning the application package. The
signed original application, one copy of the signed application, two copies of a general location map, and
two copies of the Certified Animal Waste Management Plan must be returned to complete the application
package. The completed package should be sent to the following address:
North Carolina Division of Water Quality
Water Quality Section
Permits and Engineering Unit
Post Office Box 29535
Raleigh, NC 27626-0535
If you have any question concerning this letter, please call J R Joshi at [phone] extension
363 or Charles Alvarez with the Raleigh Regional Office at [phone].
Sincerely,
vl A. Preston Howard, Jr., P.E.
cc: Permit File (w/o encl.)
Raleigh Regional Office (w/o encl.)
P.O. Box 29535, Raleigh, North Carolina 27626-0535 Telephone [phone] FAX [phone]
An Equal Opportunity Affirmative Action Employer 50% recycled/ 10% post -consumer paper

State of North Carolina
Department of Environment,
Health and Natural resources
Raleigh Regional Office
James B. Hunt, Jr., Governor
Jonathan B. Howes, Secretary
IDEHNFZ
DIVISION OF WATER QUALITY
March 24, 1997 :_
Mr. John College
876 Country Club Road
Rocky Mount, North Carolina 27804
Subject: Compliance Evaluation Inspection
Facility # 33-57; 33-58; 33-59
Daughter Nucleus #1
Edgecombe County
Dear Mr. College:
On March 17 1997, Mr. Buster Towell from the Raleigh Regional
Office conducted a compliance inspection of the subject animal
facility. This inspection is part of the Division's efforts to
determine compliance with the State's animal waste nondischarge
rules.
The inspection determined that the swine operation was not
discharging wastewater into waters of the State and that operations
are proceeding according to your approved Animal Waste Management
Plan. As a result of the inspection, the facility was found to be
in compliance with the State's animal nondischarge regulations.
Effective wastewater treatment and facility maintenance are an
important responsibility of all animal waste producers. The
Division of Water Quality has the responsibility to enforce water
quality regulations in order to protect the natural resources of
the State. The Raleigh Regional Office appreciates your
cooperation and compliance. If you have any questions regarding
this inspection please call Mr. Buster Towell at [phone].
Sincerel ,
Y
arrett
Water Quality Section Supervisor
cc: Edgecomb County Health Department
Mr. A.B. Whitley, Edgecombe Soil & Water Conservation District
Mr. Steve Bennett, Regional Coordinator, DSWC-RRO
DWQ Compliance Group
RRO Files
3800 Barrett Drive, Suite 101, FAX [phone]
Raleigh, North Carolina 27h09Nit`
C An Equal Opportunity Affirmative Action Employer
Voice 919-571-4700 50% recycled/ 10% post -consumer paper

[j DSWC Animal Feedlot Operation Review
WQ Animal Feedlot Operation Site Inspection
IffRoutine 13Complaint p State employee call p Follow-up of DWQ inspection p Follow-up of DSWC review
Date of inspection F.3 --
Facility Number S Time of Inspectioni7.0,) ® Use 24 hr. time
_ Total Time (in hours) Spent onReview
Farm States: T--�
�� `� -- - or Inspection -(includes travel and processing) tL2�J
Farm Name: County: Owner Nrme: (:& tN'_.. -. ! n�. Phone No:
�7ivMailing Address: ,...., L4 _•� � G ._.___._. ........_yL.._.. �...._.. � ..........�....._ �._._......�
Oasite representative: _� __[ Q_.. _...._. __� Integrator:
Certified Operator Name:
Location of Farm: Z )—d
Latitude �•�•�"
Longitude • 4
113 Not O erational_j Date Last Operated: _.. _.... .._ .r_. _ _...._ .._.. _..... r......... ......_ ....._
Type of Operation and Design Capacity
Swine :`'Number' t Poultry Number .Cattle
❑ Wean to Feeder
G(9 6
❑ Feeder to Finish
FMmw to Wean
El Farrow to feeder
Farrow to Finish
Layer ❑ Dairy
❑ Non -La -Layer Beef
(:1 Other Type of Livestock
Number of.Lagoons Holding —.Pond: 0 Subsurface Drains Present
0 La non Ares 0 $ ray Field Area
x rg s a a r
General
I. Are there any buffers that need maintenancelimprovement?
2. Is any discharge observed from any part of the operation?
a. If discharge is observed, was the conveyance man-made?
b. If discharge is observed, did it reach Surface Water? of yes, notify DWQ)
c. If discharge is observed, what is the estimated flow in pVmin9
d. Does discharge bypass a Iagoon system? (If yes, notify DWQ)
3. Is there evidence of past discharge from any part of the operation?
4. Was there any adverse impacts to the waters of the State other than from a discharge?
S. Does any part of the waste management system (other than lagoons/holding ponds) require
maintenance/improvement?
❑ Yes No
❑ Yes No
❑ Yes
❑ Yes �No
❑ Yes �No
❑ Yes jJ No
❑ Yes
❑ Yes No
Continued on bark

A facility not in compliance with any applicable setback criteria?
7. Did the facility fail to have a certified operator in responsible charge (if inspection after 1/1/97)?
S. Are there lagoons or storage ponds on site which need to be properly closed?
Structures (Lagoons and/or Uoldini Ponds
9. Is structural freeboard less than adequate?
Lagoon-3
Freeboard M: Lagoon 1 Lagoon 2
I0. Is seepage observed from any of the structures?
11. Is erosion, or any other threats to the integrity of any of the structures observed?
12. Do any of the structures need maintenancelimprovement?
❑ Yes
❑ Yes
❑ Yes
15 No
\u
C!TN0
❑ Yes
No
Lagoon 4
❑ Yes
'o
❑ Yes
�`No
❑ Yes
ld"No
(If any of questions 9-12 was answered yes, and the situation poses an
immediate public health or environmental threat, notify DWQ)
13. Do any of the structures lack aaquate markers to identify start and stop pumping levels? MORk '_r 0, 9,7 z es
Waste ADtilication
14, Is there physical evidence of over application? ❑ Yes
(If in excess of WMP, or runoff entering waters of the State, notify DWQ)
IS. Crop type Gtl1^h I, � !/.. .. ... �_...._ ..
16. Do the active crops differ with those designated in the Animal Waste Management Plan? ❑ Yes ETNo
17. Does the facility have a lack of adequate acreage for land application? ❑ Yes No
1$. Does the cover crop need improvement? ❑Yes fo
19. Is there a lack of available irrigation equipment? ❑ Yes No
For CertiCed Facilities Oniv
20. Does the facility fail to have a copy of the Animal Waste Management Plan readily available?
21. Does the facility fail to comply with the Animal Waste Management Plan in any way?
22. Does record keeping need improvement?
23. Does facility require a follow-up visit by same agency?
24. Did Reviewer/Inspector fail to discuss review/inspection with owner or operator in charge?
Corarnents (refer to question #):. Explain any YES answers and/or any recommendations or any other comments.
wngs . ty ..
Usk din iof faeilr tp.better explain situations. (use additional pages as necessary) .
❑ No
❑ Yes
.�I N
❑ Yes
I�1 N
❑ Yes
12 �NXo,
❑ Yes
5No
❑ Yes
Reviewer/Inspector Name G[
Reviwer/Inspector Signature: _ �Flu..�/Y _ Date: J zt % - 9 %
nr U,. ..- A.... J: r.. ui,.+.... n.. ,. J: •„ C.rr:nw r. n:Jin, 4ccaresninl rrnil • . •• . r

4.
.A facility not in compliance with any applicable setback criteria?
7. Did the facility fail to have a certified operator in responsible charge (if inspection after I/l/97)?
8. Are there lagoons or storage ponds on site which need to be properly closed?
Structures a oohs and/or ffoldln_Ponds)
9. Is structural freeboard less than adequate?
Freeboard (ft): Lagoon 1 Lagoon 2 Lagoon 3
0
Pl , 3.w
10. Is seepage observed from any of the stmlures? 7
11. Is erosion, or any other threats to the integrity of any of the structures observed?
12. Do any of the structures need maintenancelimprovement?
(If any or questions 9-12 was answered yes, and the situation poses an
immediate public health or environmental threat, notify DWQ)
I3. Do any of the stru tares lack adquate markers to identify start and stop pumping Ievels? h.,ArOnj
Waste Aanlication
14. Is there physical evidence of over application?
(If in excess of WMP, or runoff entering waters of the State, notify DWQ)
15. Crop type
16. Do the active crops differ with those designated in the Animal Waste Management Plan?
I7. Does the facility have a lack of adequate acreage for land application?
18. Does the cover crop need improvement?
19. Is there a lack of available irrigation equipment?
For Certified Facilities Onlv
20. Does the facility fail to have a copy of the Animal Waste Management Plan readily available?
21. Does the facility fail to comply with the Animal Waste Management Plan in any way?
22. Does record keeping need improvement?
23. Does facility require a follow-up visit by same agency?
24. Did Reviewer/Inspector fail to discuss review/inspection with owner or operator in charge?
❑ Yes eN.o
❑ Yes 21 `a
❑ Yes O NNo
❑ Yes 01
Lagoon 4
❑ Yes 1\0
❑ Yes No
❑ Yes E o
tr s.f
Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes LQNo
❑ Yes
015CO
❑ Yes
0 No
❑ Yes
o
❑ Yes
7No
❑ Yes
❑ Yes
❑ Yes 1d
❑yes 14N
❑ Yes No
Comments (refer to question #): Explain any YES answers and/or any recommendations or any other comments.
Use drawings of facility to. better explain situations: (use additional pages as nece
ssary
H
Reviewer/Inspector Name Y� - _ `t
Reviwer/Iaspector Signature: r� Date: aj /
.•�. Tl:... �..... ..t fib.....- !'1.... l:n• W.. r..- /1.. ..1: w. C........� C....: /, n. dayseeranl /Inir

Date of Inspection s -/ 7- r 7 I
Facility Number Time of Inspection = Use 14 hr. time
Farm States: 1:-A ��� Total Time (In hours) Spent onRe-*Iew ,
•---- or Inspection (includes travel and processing)
Farm Name: 1 o, h h eH / /_ County: L �G[L.�. �...__..... _. .. _
Owner Name: %L1Z CO=e 07,_. ._..— _ Phone No: '? 19 ' tY fj 7e 3
Mailing Address: G...... CIO& 17 fe-7 G142%LL�_... _. � d✓19�i � � _ iIY �r �7 ���
Onsite representative: .. J'' ��Or..._ .. _..�... _.._. W� Integrator.`
Certified Operator Name: ...� yn C. fj. /_ Vim.
Location of Farm: /4�1__')_
Latitude �•����
Longitude • 6 �~
V of O erationa[ I Date Last Operated: _ ...._ ..__ .... . _.....r.. .._. _ ..»..._ .._........._.... _ . ._. � .....__....
of Vperanon anti
Swine. , a i. ~": Number :.Poultry Number :.Cattle Number
❑ Wean to Feeder
❑ Feeder to Finish
Farrow to Wean
D i]
F rrow to Feeder
Farrow to Finish
La ❑ Dair
Non -Layer j Beef
❑ Other Type of Livestock
;:�, ;;Numbet,of Lagoons /;Holding Pondi;: -!� � .;; �] Subsurface Drains Present
ne 1
1. Are there any buffers that need maintenance/improvement?
2. Is any discharge observed from any part of the operation?
a. If discharge is observed, was the conveyance man-made?
b. If discharge is observed, did it reach Surface Water? (If yes, notify DWQ)
C. If discharge is observed, what is the estimated flow in gaUmin?
d. Does discharge bypass a lagoon system? (If yes, notify DWQ)
3. Is there evidence of past discharge from any part of the operation?
4. Was there any adverse impacts to the waters of the State other than from a discharge?
S. Does any part of the waste management system (other than lagoons/holding ponds) require
f
My
❑ Yes No
❑ Yes MlNo
❑ Yes 01vo
❑ Yes 2<o
❑ Yes 0<0
❑ Yes 0 No
❑ Yes �No
0 Yes I��o

6. facility not in compliance with any applicable setback criteria?
7. Did the facility fail to have a certified operator in responsible charge (if inspection after 1/1/97)?
B. Are there lagoons or storage ponds on site which need to be properly closed?
ftructures (Lagoons and/or Holding Ponds)
9. Is structural freeboard less than adequate?
Freeboard (ft): Lagoon 1 Lagoon 2
'g 1) // Zr l r!
10. Is seepage observed from any of the structures?
11. Is erosion, or any other threats to the integrity of any of the structures observed?
12. Do any of the structures need maintenance/improvement?
Lagoon 3
❑ Yes MlNo
❑ Yes 2<o
❑ Yes No
❑ Yes ❑ No
Lagoon 4
❑ Yes No
❑ Yes Di o
❑ Yes L el'N0
(If any of questions 9-12 was answered yes, and the situation poses an
immediate public health or environmental threat, notify DWQ)
13. Do any of the structures lack adquate markers to identify start and stop pumping levels? *14d6y-S O S �� _ es ❑ No
+4w cl A(,vg . 4 I � a -4,.,1
Waste Application
14. Is there physical evidence of over application? ❑ Yes ld'No
(If in excess of WMP, or runoff entering waters of the State, notify DWQ)
15. Crop type {�iV+�"�,.L!f e„? I r L�f r•3 •� �� _...._.. r
16. Do the active crops differ with those designated in the Animal Waste Management Plan? ❑ Yes 0No
17. Does the facility have a lack of adequate acreage for land application?
❑ Yes
0<0
18. Does the cover crop need improvement?
❑ Yes
❑ N
19. Is there a lack of available irrigation equipment?
❑ Yes
CYNo
For Certified Facilities Onl
20. Does the facility fail to have a copy of the Animal Waste Management Plan readily available?
El Yes
�/
E�d NNo
21. Does the facility fail to comply with the Animal Waste Management Plan in any way?
❑ Yes
Ld No
22. Does record keeping need improvement?
❑ Yes
ETNo
23. Does facility require a follow-up visit by same agency?
❑ Yes
{J N
24. Did Reviewer/Inspector fail to discuss reviewCmspcction with owner or operator in charge?
❑ Yes
No
Comments (refer to question #): Explain any. YES answers andlor any recommendations or any other comments:
Use drawings of facility, to better explain situations:. (tLse additional;pages as' necessary} f 3
Reviewer/Inspector Name
Reviwer/Inspector Signature:
Date:_-! —7'?
cc: Division of Water Ouality. Water Ouality Section. Facilitv Assessment Unit 11/14l96

DDSWC Animal Feedlot Operation Review
WQ Animal Feedlot Operation Site Iiispec#ion
La Routine © Complaint J3 State employee call 0 Follow-up of DWQ inspection 0 Follow-up ofDSWC review
Dote of inspection 13 " /7
Facility Number
Time of inspecdQji//j6 ® Use 24 hr. time
Total Time (in hours) Spent onReOew
Farm Status: _ —. •» - ••---••,=-••--- ••••--• - or Inspection (includes travel and processing)
AFarm Name: 4 h I.. C ffj&5». C' _L. County: m G ._—
OwnerNPme: L.17 .e_Z:�».L,-;7 A�'' �,L Phone No: L:9yL!� `��3 i� •_»
Visiting Address: -? 16 »a &_-,4,-e` l 6 /2 D ,, . 140 G�Cu� A-1 e u "4-....
Onsite representative:��n Integrator: �`_.Q_ .._ . , . , _ ••
Certified Operator Name: ..s� 1. _ ��.Q _ .._.._ . _.. _._.._ r.... _ ......-_._ ... ..._ _.._ ....
Location of Farm:
Latitude Longitude113 �• �' ���
NotOperational j Date Last Operated: _. �.... »_ �._.. ___. ..�._..._..._....._............ ._....... � .....�»._..._
Type of Operation and Design Capacity
Swine 1liurr�hnr PoultYY Numhor =' Cattle ?4.h.r ;
Feeder
to Finisl
Number cf Lagoons / Holding Pooda
© Subsurface Drains Present
�.:
13 Lagoon Area
l] Spray Field Area
. - I pI�1111.�Y�Y�1
�����I
1���1
IIYi✓_�/iYr��l I�P��I�1�
General
1. Are there any buffers that need maintenance/improvement?
2. Is any discharge observed from any part of the operation?
& if discharge is observed, was the conveyance man-made?
b. If discharge is observed, did it reach Surface Water? Of yes, notify DWQ)
c. If discharge is observed, what is the estimated flow in gal/min? Z-1
d. Does discharge bypass a lagoon system? Of yes, notify DWQ)
3. Is there evidence of past discharge from any part of the operation?
4. Was there any adverse impacts to the waters of the State other than from a discharge?
5. Does any part of the waste management system (other than lagoons/holding ponds) require
maintenance/improvement?
❑ Yes 0 No
❑ Yes E No
❑ Yes 0 rNo
❑ Yes No
❑ Yes No
s
❑ Yes _No
❑ Yes la N
❑ Yes No
Continued on back

- ---------
,CQU
jEdgecombe
Owner
The Hanor Company
L
Manager
l--
John College
Address
1876 Country Club Rd
ockv Mount NC
7804
Certified
Farm Name
Hanor Multiplier
Phone Number
919-443-7038
Lessee
Region
ARO 0 MRO 0 WARO 0 WSRO
AFRO *RRO OWIRO
Location"I,..—,-: . ...... 7-71 ..... ......................... . .. . .................... : ........ ............................. ............. . ............. ........... , ....... . .
............ .... ......
...................... ......................................... .
.............
........................................ .....
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
F - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . I . . . I . . . . . . . . . .
Certified Operator in Charge John Ii._College certification # Ft7488
Backup Certified Operator Certification # E-
Comments
E
rorowa+oM1s+�rm*orororo
................. I. Date inactivated or closed ...............
...............................
................... ... .........
Type of Operation
NSwine OPoultry OCattle [ISheep ElHorses [3Goats [3None
Desi capacit
. . . . . .....
Total 2,5 0 0= Swine
SSLW 1,082,500 1 [—Farrow to Wean
k
36.0547
060
A.
Mimi= ON 7FIN =I=
. .. ........
..... ..... ..... . . . . . . ..... . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ............... ............ . . . . . . . . . . . . ..........
MENU
IMIIP.11� =
AvailAcres Certification Date 6/28/95

Request to be removed 0 Confirmation for removal
Removal Comments
Regional DWQ Personnel Assigned to Facility
Date Record Exported to.Permits Database

F ..
WT
.1
Agh-aNasteTeehnology, Inc.
700-108 Blue Ridge Road
Raleigh, North Carolina 27606
Phone: [phone]
Fax: [phone]
To iP. s:ew Qzz-,
Fax No.: 57/~4719
�t�
From : a' -AV ,5'iLzy
Date -3���7
No. of Pages : _3
(including Cover sheet)
Remarks: ❑ Urgent ❑ For Your Review ❑ Reply ASAP ❑ Please Comment
Message:
n/
Thank You
"Concerts in Apriculrural Rvnmc�urt t )rilizatinn"
bOiTO'd LOST GE6 6T6 9NI`AJO-IONH931 31SUM—IagO LT:9T L65T-20—NOW

{ AgrWftteTechnology, Inc.
700-108 Blue Ridge Road
't Raleigh, North Carolina 27606
Phone: [phone]
Fax: [phone]
MEMORANDUM
. March 3, 1997
TO-. Mr_ Buster Towell, Division Of Water Quality
.FROM: Bryan Staley, Err
SUBJECT: Boar Stud Lagoon Certification For The Hanor Company, Inc. -Daughter
Nucleus Site
Enclosed please find the lagoon capacity and lagoon liner certification for the Boar Stud
facility at the Hanor Company's Daughter Nucleus site. Both the lagoon capacity and liner
were certified on November 16, 1996. Don't hesitate to call if you have any questions
regarding this certification.
hQmwr45z
"Concepts in Agricultural Byproduct Utilization"
bafF-0'd LOST 6eS 6T6 ONI `A90-10NH031 31SHM-1a0d LT :9T L66T-20-�HW

Lagoon Capacity Certification
Agri -Waste Technology, Inc. has inspected the lagoon at The Manor Company, Inc. Boar Stud
operation in Edgecombe County, North Carolina and certifies that it was constructed so as to
meet the required lagoon volume. capacity. Table 5 summarizes the lagoon as it was
constructed.
Table 5: Lagoon Parameters (as constructed)
at
Length (R)
Width (A)
Depth (ft)
Side Slope
loimensions
p Berm
196
189
10.60
3 J
ax. Liquid Level
190
183
9.60
3:1
�axinum Liquid Capacity
277,183 ft3
�esign Capacity
248,693 W
L. M. Safle)., Jr. _U116/96
(Name) (Date)
Presidgilt of A d-Wg= chnology_ Inc.
(Title) n (Company)
l
SE AL
1 10264
., Jp
'�., N lYl. SAS ,�•`
V0i20'd LOST 6zS 6T6 JNI`J,9010NH931 31SHM-Ia90 4T:9T L66T-Z0-aUW

tro d _H101
10. Lagoon Certification
Agri -Waste Technology, Inc. has inspected the Iagoon liner at The Hanor Company, Inc.
Daughter Nucleus Boar Stud operation in Edgecombe County, North Carolina. The lagoon was
visually inspected to assure that it was constructed in accordance with the design parameters.
In addition the lagoon litter was tested by GSE Lining Technology, Inc. testing laboratories to
assure compliance with the liner specifications.
L-M._Saflcy. Jr.
(Name)
11116/96
(Date)
President of A,giWaste Technology. Inc.
(Title) (Company)
,i . I �,•��� j� � RQ �rrrrr
I*s
o
SE AL
10264
I V KS PF� :•`���flit
I
4
43
b8/b8'd LOST 6Z8 6 T 6
DN I `ASO_1ONHD31 31SVM- I a9d LT :9T L66T-EO_Ndw

I-�• •L• .fir - .`vF.V
1_1�dt�'•
••6'?. f: i! it iff h J�it(.:jj•+
-
"`� Agri WasteTechm*)gy Inc.
.
700-108 Blue Ridge Road
s r ; Raleigh, North Carolina 27606
r,..F Phone: [phone]
Krii j
Fax: [phone]
f1 4� r
March 3, 1997
MEMORANDUM
TO: Mr. Buster Towell, Division Of Water Quality
FROM: Bryan Staley, EIT
SUBJECT:. Boar Stud Lagoon Certification For The Hanor Company, Inc: -Daughter
Nucleus Site
Enclosed plcase find the lagoon capacity and lagoon liner certification for the Boaz Stud
facility at the Hanor Company's Daughter Nucleus site. Both the lagoon capacity and liner
were certified on November 16, 1996. Don't hesitate to call if you have any questions
regarding this certification.
b==452
"Concepts in Apcultur g Byproduct Udhativn"
PO/Z6'd LOST 6Z8 6T6 ONPA0070NH031. 31SUM-IdOH 92:9T 2,66T-20-6bW

Lagoon Capacity Certification
1 "
Agri -Waste Technology, Inc. has inspected the lagoon at The Hanoi Company, Inc. Boar Stud
operation in Edgecombe County, North Carolina and certifies that it was constructed so as to
meet the regidred lagoon volume capacity. Table 5 summarizes the lagoon as it was
constructed.
Table 5: Lagoon Parameters (as constructed)
Dimensions at
Length (fft)
Width (ft)
Depth (ft)
Side Slope
Top Bcrm
196
189
10.60
3:1
Max. Liquid Level
190
183
9.60
3:1_
aximum Liquid Capacity
277,183 ft�
Design Capacity
248,693 ft
L. M. SaEev, Jr _ - - _ 11/16/96
(Name) (Date)
President - of Agd Waste Technology. Inc, ,.
(Title) (Company)
M1
10264
fit all tt�
Irl����
VOi20'd LOST 6ES 6T6 DNI `hJO-1ONHD31 91SUM-I?J9U 92:9T L66T-£O--dUW

ve , d lti101
10. Lagoon Certification
Agri -Waste Technology, Inc, has inspected the lagoon liner at The Hanor Company, Inc.
Daughter Nucleus Bear Stud operation in Edgecombe County, North Carolina. The lagoon was
visually inspected to assure that it was constructed in accordance with the design parameters.
In addition the lagoon liner was tested by GSE Lining Technology, Inc. testing laboratories to
assure compliance with the liner specifications.
L. M. Saflcy, Jr. 11 /16196
(Name) (Date)
President of Agd-Waste TechT1ogy_ Inc,
(Title) (Company)
'Y
SEAL '
10264
N MSAL
43
t7o/t7a'd LOST 6E8 6T6 JNI `J,00_10NH9S1 31SHM-I�100 92:9T 666T-20-?IHW