960067_Report_20200219

Semi -Annual Comprehensive
Report
Innovative Animal Waste
System
Report No. 1
April 2019-December 2019
B&B Partnership
White Oak Farms
Permit No.
AWI960067
Fremont
Wayne County
Report Date
February 18, 2020

Executive Summary
B&B Partnership, White Oak Farms was issued Permit No. AWI960067 to
construct and operate an animal waste management system that consists of
controlled anaerobic digestion, production and utilization of methane gas to
generate electricity, which is then sent to the Duke Energy Grid. The permit
provided for animal herd size expansion, and as required by NC Statute and Rule
is required to meet certain performance standards. This Report is intended to
address the Permit Condition Section III 8, which specifies reporting requirements.
Several operational changes where undertaken to improve the overall system
management and performance. Most importantly, the addition of food grade waste
enhanced the system by providing the needed volatile solids in the digester while
the manure volume alone was is low to generate enough food for the digester. A
Hose Drag waste application unit was added to increase wastewater application
efficiency. The first reporting cycle was not without challenges. Feeding the
digester, slurry pumpability, animal bedding changes for example required the
Facility to adapt and solve many issues as they learned the operate the system.
Some of the performance standard compliance metrics did not have enough data
generated to measure and make determinations regarding Facility's status. Old
Facility animal housing impacted the wastewater characteristics, but that is time
limited. Depopulation of the old housing units is planned for April 2020. One
performance standard, waste application ammonia loss, seems to have been easily
2 1 P a g e

met during this reporting period. By the end of the next report period, the Facility
should have enough data to complete all areas of the performance standard
evaluations.
3 1 P a g e

Table of Contents:
Sections:
A. Title Page......................................................................................................................... (pg. 1)
B. Executive Summary.....................................................................................................
(pg. 2-3)
C. Table of Contents.......................................................................................................... (pg. 4)
D. Purpose...........................................................................................................................
(pg. 5)
E. Separated Solids Status.................................................................................................
(pg. 5)
F. System Run -Off Inspection Log.....................................................................................
(pg. 5)
G. Operational Changes Log..........................................................................................
(pg. 6-7)
H. Soil Fertility Analysis....................................................................................................(pg.7-8)
I. Wastewater & Solids Analyses.................................................................................(pg.
8-10)
J. Ammonia Emissions Compliance & Structure Sampling
....................................(pg. 10-13)
K. Odor Monitoring............................................................................................................(pg.
13)
L. On -Site Record Location Status..................................................................................(pg.
13)
�ftw
Table 1: Wastewater Lab Data Table..............................................................................(pg• 8)
Table 2: Wastewater Lab Data Table..............................................................................(pg• 9)
Appendices:
Appendix A — FRBD Form
Appendix B — NCDA State Veterinary Division Letter
Appendix C — NCDEQ-DWR Pilot Study Approval Letter
Appendix D — Lab Reports
Appendix E — NCSU, Gabrow Study
4 1 P a g e

Purpose
Permit No. AWI960067 issued to B&B Partnership contains comprehensive
reporting requirements in Section III 8. This document is intended to meet the
reporting requirement. The Report addresses eight items related to the overall
system compliance and performance. Each section of this report discusses one of
the eight areas in the order outlined in the Permit.
1-Separated Solids Status
As of the completion of this Reporting Period, no solids have been separated from
the system. The digester has been operating at 90-95% solids reduction and the
removal of solids has not been necessary to date. Any solids accumulating in the
clarifier have been flushed back to the main covered digester. The clarified water
is discharged to the nitrification structure and does contain dissolved solids in the
form of nutrients. However, that nutrient mass is tracked with the irrigated
wastewater.
2-System Run-off inspections & Log
The Permittee lives on the property and sees the system every day during normal
operational tasks. Documentation of the weekly inspections are recorded on lagoon
level Form FRBD. These forms are provided in (Appendix A).
5 1 P a g e

3-Operational Changes Log
-Purchase of Hose Drag Aerway Unit
Early in 2019, the Facility purchased a Hose Drag System to increase wastewater
application efficiency. The operator can apply roughly 300 gallons/minute with
injection benefits of lower ammonia volatilization. This was an operational
improvement change from the former use of Hose Reel Traveling Gun
methodology.
-Mixing Pit Problems
Early in the operation it was discovered that when feeding the Inoculation Tank
from the loading pit, the different density between the manure and bedding in the
waste caused the manure to settle and the bedding material float, causing inadequate
pit flushing. Mixers were added to suspend and mix the solids for a more pumpable
slurry.
-Macerator Unit
A macerator was added adjacent to the loading pit to facilitate mortality
management through particle size reduction. The swine carcass is an excellent
source of volatile solids for methane production.
-Permission to Add Mortality
On August 19, 2019 the NC Department of Agriculture State Veterinary Division
provided the facility with permission to incorporate Facility mortality into the
digester system as an approved management method. (Appendix B)
6 1 P a g e

-Added Food Waste
On March 7, 2019 permission was granted to pilot test the addition of several waste
food products from local processors (Sandwich Meats/Hot Dogs etc.) The Facility
benefited from the material because the high volatile solid content resulted in
excellent methane production. (Appendix C)
-Stopped Addition Bedding Material
The Facility began the manure management of the swine houses using a bedding of
peanut hulls and plant debris. The plant material breaks down at a different rate
than the manure and meat products. As such, it was causing pumping problems,
so the decision was made to omit the bedding in the swine housing and begin a
program of frequent removal of manure utilizing skid steer equipment.
-Cleanout Inoculator Tank -
The inoculator required cleanout to remove the undigested peanut plant material.
The fresh waste was pumped directly to the primary covered Digester with out
inoculation. This did affect the system by slowing down the methane production
due to reduction in waste temperature and microbial contact with the fresh waste.
-New Electric irrigation pump
An electric irrigation pump was installed to replace the old diesel driven pump for
better reliability and ease of operation.
4-Soil Fertility Analysis
Currently, more acreage is available for waste application than is needed based on
the Phase 1 volume of wastewater being generated. The past soil fertility analysis
7 1 P a g e

for most fields surrounding the facility is valid through 2/7/2020, and new samples
have already been collected.
5-Wastewater & Solids Analyses
Wastewater was sampled quarterly as required by permit condition Section III 5.
Lab Reports are included as Appendix D. Table 1 and Table 2 are included below
for a quick reference comparison of changing concentrations over time by analyte.
TABLE 1.
SAMPLE LOCATION
SAMPLED DATE
TEST DESCRIPTION
RESULT
UNITS
Influent to Digester 6/24/2019
Total Kjeldahl Nitrogen as N
4508
mg/I
Influent to Digester
9/25/2019
Total Kjeldahl Nitrogen as N
4140
mg/I
Influent to Digester
12/30/2019
Total Kjeldahl Nitrogen as N
6696
mg/I
Influent to Digester
6/24/2019
Ammonia Nitrogen as N
3312
mg/I
Influent to Digester
9/25/2019
Ammonia Nitrogen as N
3520
mg/I
Influent to Digester
12/30/2019
Ammonia Nitrogen as N
5432
mg/I
Influent to Digester
6/24/2019
Nitrate -Nitrite as N
2.6
mg/I
Influent to Digester
9/25/2019
Nitrate -Nitrite as N
2.56
mg/I
Influent to Digester
12/30/2019
Nitrate -Nitrite as N
2.93
mg/I
------------------------
Influent to Digester
-------------
6/24/2019
------------- ---
Total Phosphorus as P
492.8
---------
mg/I
Influent to Digester
9/25/2019
Total Phosphorus as P
399.2
mg/I
Influent to Digester
�12/30/2019
Total Phosphorus as P
531.2
mg/I
Influent to Digester
6/24/2019
Copper
3406
ug/I
Influent to Digester
9/25/2019
Copper
1588
ug/I
Influent to Digester
12/30/2019
Copper
4638
ug/I
Influent to Digester
6/24/2019
Zinc
6816
ug/I
Influent toDigester
9/25/2019
Zinc
3998
ug_/I
Influent to Digester
12/30/2019
Zinc
8581
_
ug/I
Influent to Digester
6/24/2019
Total Solids, %
2.78
ug/I
Influent to Digester
9/25/2019
Total Solids, %
2.03
ug/I
Influent to Digester
12/30/2019
Total Solids, %
4.04
ug/I
There are several relevant factors to consider regarding the wastewater analysis
during this first report period. A review of the Influent to Final Storage samples
indicates high fecal coliform concentrations throughout the period.
8 1 P a g e

The cause of this is due to the aged swine housing structures and watering hardware
leaks. This water hits the swine house floor and is routed to the nitrification/de-
nitrification lagoons. This condition is being eliminated with the depopulation of
all (9) houses surrounding the treatment lagoons by the end of April 2O2O.
TABLE 2.
SAMPLE LOCATION
SAMPLED DATE
TEST DESCRIPTION
RESULT
UNITS
Influent to Final Storage
6/24/2019
Total Kjeldahl Nitrogen as N
579.6
mg/I
Influent to Final Storage
9/25/2019
Total Kjeldahl Nitrogen as N
822
mg/I
Influent to Final Storage
12/30/2019
Total Kjeldahl Nitrogen as N
912
mg/I
Influent to Final Storage
6/24/2019
Ammonia Nitrogen as N
457
mg/I
Influent to Final Storage
9/25/2019
Ammonia Nitrogen as N
765
mg/I
Influent to Final Storage
12/30/2019
Ammonia Nitrogen as N
646
mg/I
Influent to Final Storage
6/24/2019
Nitrate -Nitrite as N
0.48
mg/I
Influent to Final Storage
9/25/2019
Nitrate -Nitrite as N
0.3
mg/I
Influent to Final Storage
12/30/2019
Nitrate -Nitrite as N
0.41
mg/I
----
-- -
Influent to Final Storage
------------ --------------
6/24/2019
Total Phosphorus as P
---
49.4
-------------
mg/I
Influent to Final Storage
9/25/2019
Total Phosphorus as P
76.8
mg/I
Influent to Final Storage
12/30/2019
Total Phosphorus as P
77
mg/I
Influent to Final Storage
6/24/2019
Copper
52
ug/I
Influent to Final Storage
9/25/2019
Copper
104
ug/I
Influent to Final Storage
12/30/2019
Copper
167
ug/I
Influent to Final Storage
6/24/2019
Zinc
197
ug/I
Influent to Final Storage
9/25/2019
Zinc
425
ug/I
Influent to Final Storage
12/30/2019
Zinc
787
ug/I
Influent to Final Storage
6/24/2019
Total Solids, %
0.38
ug/I
Influent to Final Storage
9/25/2019
Total Solids, %
0.51
ug/I
Influent to Final Storage
12/30/2019
Total Solids, %
0.53
ug/I
Influent to Final Storage
6/24/2019
Fecal Coliform(MPN),/gramSolids
107895
ug/I
- -
Influent to Final Storage
9/25/2019
------- ----
Fecal Coliform (MPN), /gram Solids
803922
-----
ug/I
Influent to Final Storage
12/30/2019
Fecal Coliform (MPN), /gram Solids
3500000
ug/I
The lagoon structures being transitioned into the nitrification/denitrification
components of the treatment system were formally used to receive swine waste
9 1 P a g e

prior to the conversion of the houses to scraped bedding type units. Since the
housing facilities used a conventional flush -type process until they were
converted, manure was flushed into the lagoon structures until the new system
was constructed. At the time the aerators were put into service, agitation of this
material likely affected the final effluent quality. Over time, the organic portion
of the old settled lagoon solids should oxidize, and its effect on the final effluent
quality should be negligible. The nitrification lagoon was recently measured
with a sludge judge and found to contain an average of 18 inches of settled,
measurable solids located on the lagoon bottom.
The TKN and Ammonia-N compounds are also likely higher due to the the same
water inputs from the aged housing and waste agitation cited above.
6-Ammonia Emissions Compliance & Structure Sampling
Three areas of compliance are addressed by this section of the report. First being
the atmospheric ammonia emission evaluation from the waste treatment system.
To conduct this evaluation, the first step is to measure the initial and final
concentrations of ammonia within the waste treatment system to obtain the total
reduction factor. Ammonia reduction can be estimated by the difference in
concentrations within the wastewater at key points within the system. For instance,
between the Digester Influent and the Final Storage (denitrification lagoon) the
average concentrations were 4088 mg/l and 623 mg/1 respectively. This amounts
to a total reduction of 85%. Samples collected on November 1", 2019 from the
clarifier effluent and the denitrification lagoon yielded ammonia concentrations of
2375 mg/1 and 895 mg/l respectively, indicating a 62% reduction between the
101Page

nitrification lagoon and the denitrification lagoon. The amount of ammonia
denitrified in the waste stream verses the amount lost through volatilization has not
been accurately determined with the limited data collected to date.
To obtain this information it will be necessary to sample each lagoon for gas phase
ammonia close to the wastewater surface /atmosphere interface utilizing ammonia
measuring equipment recently obtained by the Facility. Additional wastewater
samples to determine concentrations multiple times will also be necessary to
calculate meaningful results. At present, an inadequate set of data prevents this
evaluation. Data collection will continue and by the next scheduled report deadline,
enough data should be available.
The second compliance area is direct measurement of the barns for ammonia
emissions. At present, an inadequate set of data prevents this evaluation. Data
collection will continue and by the next scheduled report deadline, enough data
should be available. The barns ammonia loss compliance measurements will be
conducted the same method and frequency used for the wastewater lagoon
ammonia emission sample.
The third compliance area an ammonia emission evaluation from land application
of waste. The performance standard emission mass established by 15A NCAC 2T
is 0.2 kg/ NH3-N/wk/1,000 kg SSLW. To estimate this performance standard,
calculating the ammonia loss from the wastewater land application methods is
necessary. During the report period all wastewater from the system was injected
using a drag hose application system. This application methodology conserves
11 1 Page

more ammonia within the soil opposed to volatilization losses that occur during
spray irrigation.
To estimate the ammonia emission through land application, a key basic
assumption was obtained from NCSU research by Dr. Gabrow, (OVERviEw OF
DIFFERENT LAGOON EFFLUENT APPLICATION METHODS ON ODOR AND AMMONIA
EMISSIONS). This document concludes around 6% of the ammonia is lost to
volatilization when wastewater is land applied by Drag Hose method. (Appendix
E)
Based on application records, the facility land applied 3,184,000 gallons of
wastewater 2019. This final wastewater effluent was analyzed 4 times during this
period and contained an average ammonia concentration of 691 mg/l. That volume
and concentration accounts for 18,335 lbs of ammonia-N land applied. Based on
the 6% loss factor, 1,100 lbs (499.13 kg) of ammonia was lost through
volatilization.
The performance standard to be met is based on the following limit, 0.2 kg/ NH3-
N/wk/1,000 kg SSLW (15A NCAC 2T). The additional variables necessary to
evaluate this metric are the average SSLW and number of weeks.
Number of weeks= 39
Ave SSLW Sows= 416,997.5 kg
Ave SSLW Wean-Finish=497,387 kg
Total SSLW=896,365 kg
121Page

Emission Performance Standard Limit=.2 kg (NH3-N) *39 (wk) *896,365 kg
SSLW/1,000 kg SSLW
Emission Performance Standard Limit=6,992 kg NH3-N (Total) for 39 Week
Period
As can be seen above in the 6% loss estimate, 499.13 kg total is far below the 6,992
kg Performance Standard calculation.
7-Odor Monitoring
The Facility has had difficulty location a contractor with odor monitoring
experience. An aggressive contractor search is currently underway to obtain the
monitoring services.
8-On-Site Record Location Status
The Plant Office building contains the records related to operation, maintenance
and repair. A review of the record keeping indicated the information was present,
but the organization of the material needs improvement. The Permittee has already
begun that effort and will continue.
Next Report
In accordance with Section III 8.Of the Permit, the next report is due July 31, 2020.
131Page

APPENDICES

riAl lk: i a wi IWIT, WLIAA LAAll

L J °)
FORM FRBD-1
Waste ;structure Freeboard and Daily Precipitation Record
Farm Owner C Todd Balance Facility Number
Operator `d ; ��,�1-,:41 e P Month/Year
Day
Waste Structure Freeboard (inches)"2
Precipitation
(inches)3
Initials
Comments
1
2
3
4,�(
f,
5
6
7
8
9
10
12
13
14
15
16
17
_
18
Y
{a
_
19
20
_
21
22
23
24
25
`
26
27
28
29
30
31
1. Lagoon freeboard is the difference D Mween the Lowest point of a lagoon embankment and the level of liquid.
For lagoons with spillways, the diffenence between the level of liquid and the bottom of the spillway should be recorded.
Freeboard levels must be recorded at least weekly.
Rainfall must be recorded for every rain event.

FORM FRBD-1
Waste :Structure Freeboard and Daily Precipitation Record
Farm Owner Todd Balance Facility Number®- &
Operator , ; ;j <- Month/Year C? F)
Day
Waste Structure Feeeboarc (inches)"
Precipitation
(inches)'
Initials
Comments
#
#
#
#i`
#
#
2
3
4
5
6
7
8�
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
1. Lagoon freeboard is the difference between the lowest point of a lagoon embankment and the level of liquid.
For lagoons with spillways, the difference between the level of liquid and the bottom of the spillway should be recorded.
Freeboard levels must be recorded et least weekly.
Rainfall must be recorded for every rain event.

FORM FRBD-1
Waste 'Structure Freeboard and Daily Precipitation Record
Farm Owner Todd Balance Facility Number
Operator I-e-0 —64,11-4---c, i Month/Year l'03 2
Day
Waste Structuri. Freeboarc (inches)"2
Precipitation
(inches)3
Initials
Comments
#
#
#
h'
#
#
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
1. Lagoon freeboard is the difference between the lowest point of a lagoon embankment and the level of liquid.
For lagoons with spillways, the diffe-ence between the level of liquid and the bottom of the spillway should be recorded.
Freeboard levels must be recorded at least weekly.
Rainfall must be recorded for every min event.

FORM FRBD-1
Waste Structure Freeboard and Daily Precipitation Record
Farm Owner Todd Balance Facility Number -�(�,
Operator (� �� (� 1C Month/YearlC) el
Day
Waste Structcr= Freeboard (inches)"2
Precipitation
(inches)'
Initials
Comments
#
#
# _`-
#
#
1
2
3
rat
4
5
6
7
8
'
9
10
11
12
13
_
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
2.9
30
31
1. Lagoon freeboard is the difference between the IDwest point of a lagoon embankment and the level of liquid.
For lagoons with spillways, the differE nce between the level of liquid and the bottom of the spillway should be recorded.
2. Freeboard levels must be recorded a: least weekly.
3. Rainfall must be recorded for every rain event.

FORM FRBD-1
Waste Structure Freeboard and Daily Precipitation Record
Farm Owner Todd Balance Facility Number
Operator J . e C; Month/Year z o
Day
Waste StructUm Freeboard (inches)' L
Precipitation
(inches)';
Initials
Comments
#
#
# _
#1`
#
#
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
m
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24-
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
1. Lagoon freeboard is the difference between the lowest point of a lagoon embankment and the level of liquid.
For lagoons with spillways, the differe nce between the level of liquid and the bottom of the spillway should be recorded.
Freeboard levels must be recorded a least weekly.
Rainfall must be recorded for every -ain event.

FORM FRBD-1
Waste Structure Freeboard and Daily Precipitation Record
Farm Owner Todd Balance Facility Number
Operator �,`� ( + Month/Year
Day
Waste StructLr� Freeboard (inches)''
Precipitation
(inches)`
Initials
Comments
#
#
# _
A,
#
#
1
2
3
4
5
6
-
7
� u
8
9
10
12
13
14
q'
15
16
17
�1
18
19
20
21
�j.
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
Lagoon freeboard is the difference hetween the lowest point of a lagoon embankment and the level of liquid.
For lagoons with spillways, the differe nce between the level of liquid and the bottom of the spillway should be recorded.
Freeboard levels must be recorded a: least weekly.
Rainfall must be recorded for every -,Jn event.

FORM FRBD-1
Waste Structure Freeboard and Daily Precipitation Record
Farm Owner Todd Balance Facility Number
Operator ��.'l.e� ?,� Month/Year
Day
Waste Structure Freeboard (inches)"2
Precipitation
(inches)'
Initials
Comments
#
#
# _
#
#
#
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
-D
16
17
18
19
_
20
21
22
23
_
3
r
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
1. Lagoon freeboard is the difference between the lowest point of a lagoon embankment and the level of liquid.
For lagoons with spillways, the differe nee between the level of liquid and the bottom of the spillway should be recorded.
Freeboard levels must be recorded ai: least weekly.
Rainfall must be recorded for every �iin event.

FORM FRIBD-1
Waste :structure Freeboard and Daily Precipitation Record
Farm Owner Todd Balance Facility Number[7) 71 - =
Operator U W�d-z) LA Month/Yearl R,
Day
Waste StructureFreeboarc (inches)''
Precipitation
(inches)3
Initials
Comments
#
#
#
#
2
V
3
4
5
L Z"
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
1. Lagoon freeboard is the difference b3tween the owest point of a lagoon embankment and the level of liquid.
For lagoons with spillways, the differ =nce between the level of liquid and the bottom of the spillway should be recorded.
2. Freeboard levels must be recorded � t least weekly.
3. Rainfall must be recorded for every rain event.

FORM FRBD-1
Waste ;structure Freeboard and Daily Precipitation Record
Farm Owner Todd Balance Facility Number
Operator Month/Year
Day
Waste Structure Freeboard! inches'-z
Precipitation
(inches)3
Initials
Comments
#
#
# _
#
#
#
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
3 (�
D
14
15
16
17
18
19
_
20
63
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
1. Lagoon freeboard is the difference between the lowest point of a lagoon embankment and the level of liquid.
For lagoons with spillways, the difference between the level of liquid and the bottom of the spillway should be recorded.
2. Freeboard levels must be recorded at least weekly.
3. Rainfall must be recorded for every rain event.

Waste Structure Freeboard and Daily Precipitation Record
Farm Owner Facility Number
Operator �/���L�' Monm0/ ar
Day
Waste StruCtLIfe FrEeboard (inches)' 2
Precipitation
Initials
Comments
10
12
13
14
15
17
18
19
20
,21
22
25
26
27
28
30
1. Lagoon freeboard is the difference biAween the lowest point of a lagoon embankment and the level of liquid.
For lagoons with spillways, the difference between the level of liquid and the bottom of the spillway should be recorded.
2.Freeboard levels must 0orecorded atleast weekly.
l Rainfall must be recorded for every oinevent.

FORM FRBD-1
Waste Structure Freeboard and Daily Precipitation Record
Farm Owner I Todd Balance Facility Number K- 41 d
Operator �i-O'W l p, ' ;:LL, C. -FL Month/Year Z_c>
Day
Waste Structure Freeboard (inches)"2
Precipitation
(inches)'
Initials
Comments
2
3
4
5
6
7
8r�
11
9
10
11
12
13
14
_
15
z
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
—
23
% ---
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
1. Lagoon freeboard is the difference between the lowest point of a lagoon embankment and the level of liquid.
For lagoons with spillways, the difference between the level of liquid and the bottom of the spillway should be recorded.
Freeboard levels must be recorded et least weekly.
Rainfall must be recorded for every r )in event.

FORM FRBD-1
Waste :structure Freeboard and Daily Precipitation Record
Farm Owner L Todd Balance Facility Number q Z - - '
Operator ,I, Month/Year � /.,�
Day
Waste Structur= Freeboard (in ches)''2
Precipitation
(inches )3
Initials
Comments
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9>
10
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
n,
21
22
23
('p
24
25
26
_
27
a b
28
29
30
`' U b
31
1. Lagoon freeboard is the difference between the lowest point of a lagoon embankment and the level of liquid.
For lagoons with spillways, the difference between the level of liquid and the bottom of the spillway should be recorded.
2. Freeboard levels must be recorded at least weekly.
3. Rainfall must be recorded for every rein event.

FORM FRBD-1
Waste Structure Freeboard and Daily Precipitation Record
Farm Owner �� ^Todd Balance Facility Number -
Operator tAl LA Al •.1- I MonthNear _ I
Da y
Waste Structure Freeboard inches 1.2
Precipitation
(inches)3
Initials
Comments
___
# +
#
#�
#
#
#
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
_
11
_
12
13
'(b
14
15
_
, .
16
17
_
18
19
20
21
22
23
_
24
_
25
26
27
28
_
29
30
31
_
_
1. Lagoon freeboard is the difference o �tween the lowest point of a lagoon embankment and the level of liquid.
For lagoons with spillways, the difference between the level of liquid and the bottom of the spillway should be recorded.
2. Freeboard levels must be recorded at least weekly.
3. Rainfall must be recorded for every rain event.

FORM FRBD-1
Waste Structure Freeboard and Daily Precipitation Record
Farm Owner r:)dd Balance Facility Number 1� I
% -
Operator C um; .l' MonthNear��/ 2G05-a
Day
Waste Structure Freeboard inches '.z
Precipitation
(inches)3
Initials
Comments
_
#
#
#
#
#
#
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
_
s
9
10
11
_
12
_
13
_
14�
_
' ib
15
16
_
1b
17
18
_
19
_
20
_
21
_
22
_
23
_.
24
_
25
26
27
28
29
_
30
31
1. Lagoon freeboard is the difference between the lowest point of a lagoon embankment and the level of liquid.
For lagoons with spillways, the differ:nce between the level of liquid and the bottom of the spillway should be recorded.
2. Freeboard levels must be recorded pit least weekly.
3. Rainfall must be recorded for every rain event.

APPENDIX B

North Carolina Department of Agriculture Joseph W. Reardon
r
Steven W. Troxler p g Assistant Commissioner
Commissioner and Consumer Services for Consumer Protection
Veterinary Division Douglas Meckes, DVM
State Veterinarian
August 19, 2019
Mr. Todd Ballance Swine Farm 911 Address:
Legacy Farms White Oak/Legacy Farm
570 Benton Pond Road 604 Benton Pond Road
Fremont, NC 27830 Fremont, NC 27830
Wayne County
Dear Mr. Ballance:
The mortality management system associated with the NCDEQ permitted swine production facilities,
Permit Nos. A WI000967 & A WG0009602, has previously entailed bin composting at the Fremont
Facility 96-67. The facility has recently designed, constructed and is operating an innovative swine waste
management technique that utilizes anaerobic biological processes to recover methane from swine manure
that is converted to electricity. The ability to manage routine mortality within this same process can be
used with the following steps:
Carcass maceration and liquid addition to create a pumpable slurry
2. Incorporation into the inoculation tank
3. Pumping inoculated mixture to the covered digester basin
4. Complete digestion of volatile solids within the basin
This method of processing allows for the recovery of methane gas as the volatile solids (from soft tissue
and manure) are consumed during anaerobic digestion. The methane is collected and used as fuel to
power generators that export electricity back to the electrical grid operated by Duke Energy. The facility
is then paid for power, recouping some of the dead animal's value.
The anaerobic digester facility for Legacy Farms at 604 Benton Pond Road, Fremont, NC is granted
approval NCDA&CS Permit Number SD19-8001 to handle animal mortality subject to the facility and its
operation meeting the following stipulations:
1. All requirements for the facility set in place by the NC Department of Environmental Quality -
Division of Water Quality (DWQ) must be satisfied and the anaerobic digester permitted under
their authority as an animal waste management system.
2. In addition to animal waste associated with the farming operation, only routine, normal mortality
from normal production of livestock belonging to the owner/permittee and supplemental protein
obtained from outside food waste sources are allowed. The permittee will maintain and on an
1030 Mail Service Center, Raleigh, North Carolina 27699-1030 • [phone] 0 Fax [phone]
An Equal Opportunity Employer

annual basis from the approval date a list of the alternate protein sources that supplement the
methane production.
3. Any abnormally high levels of animal mortality must be reported within 48 hours to the
Veterinary Division as well as the Division of Water Quality Regional Office.
4. End product(s) from the anaerobic digester must be land applied on the owner's premises or any
land that is included in the owner's Certified Animal Waste Management Plan (CAWMP) on file
with DWQ.
5. Processing to reduce dead animals prior to introduction into the anaerobic digester to a particle
size of 2" or less is recommended. If the anaerobic digester fails in any operational area, the
Veterinary Division as well as the Division of Water Quality Regional Office will be notified
within 24 hours and any/all use of the facility for disposing of animal mortality must immediately
cease. It is recommended that the farm have a secondary mortality management option in place.
6. Animal mortality must be added to the anaerobic digester within 24 hours after death.
7. The facility and operational records shall be available for annual inspection by Veterinary
Division personnel and shall be sent to the Veterinary Division upon request.
8. An application for a permit modification shall be required for changes in facility ownership or any
other changes from the stipulations of this permit
9. The Veterinary Division must be immediately notified of any complicating issues involving
animal disease or environmental concerns.
10. The State Veterinarian reserves the right to cancel this permit if a specific concern for controlling
animal disease arises, or if any of the aforementioned conditions are not met.
Sincerely,
r
J. Nea lt, Mof A im Health Programs/Livestock
cc: Dr. R. Douglas Meckes, State Veterinarian
Dr. Michael Martin, Director of AHP-Poultry
Dr. James Kittrell, Veterinary Medical Officer

APPENDIX C

ROY COOPER
Governor
MICHAEL S. REGAN
Secretary
UNDA CULPEPPER
Director
B&B Partnership
White Oaks Farm, Inc.
604 Benton Pond Rd
Fremont, NC 27830
Dear B&B Partnership:
NORTH CAROLINA
Environmental Quality
March 7, 2019
Subject: Permit No. AWI960067
White Oaks Farm, Inc.
90-Day Off -Site Waste Pilot Testing
Mesophilic Animal Waste Management System
Wayne County
Per your request on February 12, 2019, the Division of Water Resources (DWR) is granting White Oaks Farm,
Inc. approval for pilot testing the addition of off -site wastes from the following sources to the mesophilic
anaerobic digester system for a period not to exceed 90 days. Allowable requested sources are: Edible Meat
Waste (Kinston), DAF Sludge (Kinston), and Peptone (Tarheel). The request to include LP produce is denied.
The testing to be conducted will evaluate the effectiveness of the system to treat the specified food wastes,
impacts of the additional materials on the system operation, quantify the net Nitrogen in the digestate and final
effluent, and assess the hydrologic balance with the addition of these waste streams.
By way of this letter, DWR is approving the pilot testing with the following conditions:
1. The trial period shall be March 11, 2019 —June 9, 2019.
2. Maintain records of when all off -site wastes are received, and volume received. Wastes must be
introduced the day they are received, as no pre-treatment storage was presented in the study plan.
3. The total volume of food waste to be introduced to digester system is limited to the following:
a. Edible Meat Waste (Kinston) — 3,000 gallons/day
b. DAF Sludge (Kinston) —1,000 gallons/day
c. Peptone (Tarheel)—16,261 gallons/day
4. Food waste is to be of the type for which an analysis was submitted.
5. No animal mortality or human septage may be introduced to the digester system.
6. An operator must be on site at all times during pilot testing.
7. Maintain records of pilot testing for a minimum of five (5) years to conform with current permit record
keeping requirements.
If you have any questions about this letter, please feel free to contact me at [phone].
Sincerely,
r�
Christine Lawson, Program Manager
Animal Feeding Operations Program
cc: Washington Regional Office, WQROS
AFOGWS Central Files (Permit File AWI960067)
�� North Carolina Department of Environmental Quality I Division of Water Resources
512 North Salisbury Street 1 1636 Mail Service Center I Raleigh, North Carolina 27699-1636
=U o.a\ r 919.707.9000

APPENDIX D

EmwoQonnud alp hano mho
ID#: 183
LEGACY BIOGAS (BDX ENVIRONMENTAL)
ART BARNHARDT
BDX ENVIRONMENTAL, PLLC DATE COLLECTED: 12/30/19
11341 NC RM 53 WEST DATE REPORTED : 01/30/20
WRITE OAK ,NC 28399
REVIEWED BY:
Influent to Influent to Analysis Method
PARAMETERS Digester Final Star. Date Analyst Code
Ammonia Nitrogen as N, mg/1 5432 646 12/31/19 AKS 350.1 R2-93
Total Kjeldahl Nitrogen as N,mg/I 6696 912.0 01/02/20 BLD 351.2 R2-93
Nitrate -Nitrite as N, mg/I 2.93 0.41 12/31/19 DTL 353.2 112-93
Total Phosphorus as P, mg/1 531.2 77.00 01/02/20 AKS 365.4-74
Copper, ug/I 4638 167 01/10/20 LFJ EPA200.7
Zinc, ug/1 8581 787 01/10/20 LFJ EPA200.7
Total Solids, % 4.04 0.53 12/30/19 KDS 2540G-11
Fecal Coliform (MEN), /gram Solids 3500000 12/30/19 KDS 9221E-06

0
P.
Z
=O
U
O
¢
O
w
p
Q
Q
BOOO�
= ¢ S
p O w Z ti
Z Z W w
O i¢ 4 m..
J D
Qh.
Q
m
n1
U
Q Z 2 N 2
U ¢ y
iw/J w Z
m
Z
z
m
w
o
Y
=
w
¢
J z x
¢ m ci
� 171 Cl 0
m=
W
W
o
a
=
U
o.
z
OU
w
m
z
2
a 2
�E `a4
a
i
U
S1S31/SH3131NVHVd
a
Q
z
w
g
O
U
W
d
SP!IoS MOIL
gulaw
a
U
snaogdsogd y
al
z
SH3N NOOdN
x
_
}.__
L
_}...
}--
-NO41O3llOOIV-
_-.._
.._...
- --..
w x o
O '3H(11VH3dW31
m
m
m
z
o
0
'JOn HO
Q
w
w
JAWINIHM1V
I% 3NIHOlHO lV101
w
�
~
N
a
[[zz77
CAD o��0 dQ N V
p
u>
cn
cn
Co
IL
d �F
inn Ld 0?9
Id

Drinking Water ID: 37715
ID#: 183 A
LEGACY BIOGAS (BDX ENVIRONMENTAL)
ART BARNHARDT
BDX ENVIRONMENTAL, PLLC DATE COLLECTED: 10/17/19
11341 NC HWY 53 WEST DATE REPORTED : 11/01/19
WHITE OAK ,NC 28399
PARAMETERS
Ammonia Nitrogen as N, mg/1
Total Kjeldahl Nitrogen as N,mg/l
Nitrate -Nitrite as N, mgfl
Nitrate -Nitrite as N, mg/1
/ J
REVIEWED BY: ✓/
Initial Final Analysis Method
Date Analyst Code
2375 895.0 11/01/19 BLD 350.1 R2-93
2580 1055 11/01/19 BLD 351.2 R2-93
64.00 10/21/19 BLD 353.2 R2-93
0.45 10/23/19 BLD 353.2 R2-93

O
D
z
m
L•.
A ts7 z ts] b7 �`001
I
ti yy� prn
r
y v
{
W z°z ° �~
m
in
in
O
0 g y pip+
b CA
k
t
ITI
A
a
�_
n
3
^�
F° rn
m
o
m
m
_
=j
0 w
V
m
m
m
m
m
TOTAL CHLORINE, mg/
C7
m
OR ug/I AT COLLECTION
m
m
m
----p-iEMPERATURE,"C-
..
---0----<
-
N
AT COLLECTIONCB
p y
N
N
#OF CONTAINERS
Ammonia Nitro.
n
-0
TKN
�
ro
?'
Nitrate -Nitrite
n
ro
y
p
p
y p
m
m
m
m
n
a S9
PARAMETERS/TESTS
o
=
i
m
W
c o
j�
F
0 m n
D
m
]M_.1
=c-i
�-"
Vr'
a
z
0M
z
M
m
zn
to
p v c)
O n
= z o -ro
M
z
m
1S 0
o
g
r 2[1 Z (n j
ev0' m m
w
m
y
m ^
D
rn D 0
�
n
-
-p
nr7
E_
Z �D
m n
n z 0 p
O
D = Z
G�
0
0
C D
0
M
O
m z
0
M:tM
R 00
� O
k O
z�a
n�T
oJo A 7
d

LMACY BIOGAS (BDX. ENVSRONb1ENTAL)
:ART BARNHARDT.
BOX ENVIROIMNTAL, PLLC
11341 NC': HWY 53 'WEST
WHITE OAK ,NC 28399
Influent to
Influent to
PARAMF>'i'I RS
Digester
Foal .Star,
Ammonia Nitrogen as N, ingti
3520
765.0
Total Rjeldahl Nitrogen as N,mg/t
4140
Total Kiddahi Nitrogen as N,m9/1
82210
Nitrate -Nitrite as N, mgti
2s5
0,30
Total Phosphorus as P; nigh.
399.2
76AO
Copper, ugtl
ISM
104
Zinc, 0g/l
3998
425
Total Solids, %
2.03
0SI
{�
Feral Coliform (MPN), {gram Solids
SOM2
DATE COLLECT 09/25/I
DATE REPORTED t :.
/j
REVIEWED BY:
Analysis Method
Nate Analyst Code-
60/26/19
OTL-
350.1 R2-0
09f27/19
TLH
MIA R2.93
MOM
BLD
351,2 R2 93
09126/19
BLD
353.2 R243
09/27/19
BLD
.365.4-74.
09/26t19
LRd
EPA260 7
ontin9
LI+:J
EPA200.7
09125119
KDR
254OG-11
09/2511:9
KDS
9221E-06.

0 ,��T°.o�
m rp O Q r
-_ 41
fTj
i
—10
Q
w o
OR L;O AT COLLECTION �m'eai /mrt
u TEMPERA.TURE,vC D c x
cp
ATCOLELTION
w a #OFCaNTAkNERS Q
Ammonia Nitro. 0 - It
TICK Cs ro-
° NitNafe rate -Nitrite t
T. Phosphorus ro It .q
Metats > •C 17,
% `Cotak Solids Y � ro -
FCtGwam > ro
d4 — — — — — — — — — — —
SU T�
m
�'Cf ry i
tp fN}
Q _
15pTI.. 49J
S.O..
-«.Fy
-^- Cot
w:
c, m
� to
a
PARAMETER TESTS o
�U Ly�pyyi
t
an �
�� L

EadOpOERM alp jimquafto
LEGACY BIOGAS (BDX ENVIRONMENTAL)
ART BARNHARDT
BDX ENVIRONMENTAL, PLLC
11341 NC RWY 53 WEST
WHITE OAR ,NC 28399
ID#: 183
DATE COLLECTED: 06/24/19
DATE REPORTED : 07/17/19
REVIEWED BY:
Influent to
Influent to
Analysis
Method
PARAMETERS
Digester
Final Stor.
Date Analyst
Code
Ammonia Nitrogen as N, mg/1
3312
457.0
06/25/19
KPG
350.1 R2-93
Total Ejeldahl Nitrogen as N,mg/l
4508
579.6
06/27/19
DTL
351.2 R2-93
Nitrate -Nitrite as N, mg/1
2.60
0.48
06/26/19
AKS
353.2 R2-93
Total Phosphorus as P, mg/1
492.8
49.40
06/27/19
BLD
365.4-74
Copper, ug/i
3406
52
07/03/19
LFJ
EPA200.7
Zinc, ug/I
6816
197
07/01/19
LFJ
EPA200.7
Total Solids,. %
2.78
0.38
06/25/19
KDS
2540G-11
Fecal Coliform (MPN), /gram Solids
107895
06/25/19
KDS
9221E-06

O
3
m
IN
,e s t to ' r"
m
XH0
m
to
A i3 'z �' �° is ~ n O 1
.O
O
D
O CrJ
r
to Y H 7. �.•�'
s
�Wa .,
Tn
in
z
o0 01°
w
w
�$,zzy'
'�
m
w
N
.L
ZN
n
F
m
C� O
m
m
e m
yy �
p♦1
b
3
m
#
n
M
m
TOTAL CHLORINE, mg/I
�I L LJ j� L it C7
m
m
OR ug/1 AT COLLECTION
�I y
<
z c
TEMPERATURE,°C
0
0
0
O C
AT COLLECTION
ci
—
c
N
A
#OF CONTAINERS
m z
Ammonia Nitro.
TKN
Nitrate -Nitrite
*rx
T. Phosphorus
�a1,
Metals
�
m
m
:„ s
dw,,":
% Total Solids
"y
m
FC/Gram
`b
z
o
PARAMETERS/TESTS
n
x
x
m
M
c� m D D
D
m
Zo
c�
x x z r
m
m
o�//��
0
c
m
C?
z
Jo` �'
M z cni�
rq
0
m
vo
m
z i T
'n D
O T m 0
O
Z
M
Z z m
Vni O
0
Z N S Z
D Z O
N
0
D
o D
m m O
= D = z
C
n p
0
0 n
n
O
U
Z
c
<a
>
F-
0
O
�
o
_

C��dor�o��c��� Flo D�c�oppoQa�c�d
ID#: 183
LEGACY BIOGAS (BDX ENVIRONMENTAL)
ART BARNHARDT
BDX ENVIRONMENTAL, PLLC
DATE COLLECTED: 03/27/19
11341 NC HWY 53 WEST
DATE REPORTED : 04./03/19
WHITE OAK ,NC 28399
.
REVIEWED BY:
Influent to
Influent to
Analysis
Method
PARAMETERS Digester
Final Stor.
Date
Analyst
Code
Total Kjeldahl Nitrogen as N,mg/l 1140
469.0
03/29/19
TLH
351.2 R2-93
Nitrate -Nitrite as N, mg/I 0.73
0.21
04/02/19
DTL
353.2 112-93
Total Phosphorus as P, mg/I 157.4
45.20
04/02/19
CLO
365.4-74
Copper, ug/l 2284
50
03/29/19
LFJ
EPA200.7
Zinc, ug/1 3573
207
03/29/19
LFJ
EPA200.7
Total Solids, % 0.65
0.31
03/28/19
KDS
2540G-11
Fecal Coliform (MPN), /gram Solids
254839
03/28/19
KDS
9221E-06

Eimw'u fin(W alp
LEGACY BIOGAS (BDX ENVIRONMENTAL)
ART BARNHARDT
BDX ENVIRONMENTAL, PLLC
11341 NC HWY 53 WEST
WHITE OAK ,NC 28399
PARAMETERS
Influent to Influent to
Digester Final Stor.
ID#: 183 A
DATE COLLECTED: 03/27/19
DATE REPORTED : 04/26/19
REVIEWED BY:
Analysis Method
Date Analyst Code
Ammonia Nitrogen as N, mg/I 1016 714.0 04/25/19 KPG 350.1 R2-93

m
D
N
0
Z
10
W
W
to
(.TI
w
m
m..
ZCJYt" (Z,�
n NB
z
G)
G�
L7
d
FR
H w N o
71
m
m
m
a
;�
z Y w
a `
O
m
t
m
x
m
TOTAL CHLORINE, mg/I
C7
v,
OR ug/I AT COLLECTION
<
0
0
G
TEMPERATURE,°C
<
ATCOLLECTION--
rzn- O ny
_N
0 o
#OFOONTAINERS
Z
N
a
T
ro
n
ro
It
v-
"d
Metals
a
>S..
%Total Solids---
y
__...
..
m
m
1. m
FC/Gram
'd
m
m
n
m
i
PARAMETERS/TESTS 0
c)
x
n
O
x
r0
x
Z
z
2
X
Z
m
—
2 2 z r
m
m
m
O
' p
m
Cn
O y Ory
O O Z m
m
m
O
'o
r Z V) Vl
w
0
Z T
L7 T m 0
m (7 S
m
N
n z O n O
r O
v
w
a
m r
C
-ni 2 O
m m z
n m
O z
= D
Ow m
O
O
_1
< a
m z
0
Z
y
T 1
Fn
v
< D
m m
C)
O
m
D
O
z
6
0
2

APPENDIX E

OVERVIEW OF DIFFERENT LAGOON EFFLUENT APPLICATION METHODS ON
ODOR AND AMMONIA EMISSIONS
Garry Grabow
Assistant Professor
Department of Biological and Agricultural Engineering
North Carolina State University
Campus Box 7625
Raleigh, North Carolina 27695-7625
e-mail Garry Grabow&ncsu.edu
Background
In recent years, there has been an increasing emphasis on controlling odor from animal
operations. Historically, animal operations have been exempted from odor regulations in North
Carolina, and no stipulations regarding odor emissions or their abatement are contained in animal
waste management system permits. However, as part of a waste utilization plan (WUP), a part
of the overall certified animal waste management plan (CAWMP), an odor "checklist" must be
completed and submitted. Only three of seventeen listed odor sources in the checklist are related
to land application, and two of those three relate to slurries or sludge. While not currently
regulated through the permitting process of animal operations, there is a mechanism in place to
allow registering of complaints due to objectionable odors from animal operations, for follow-up
inspections of the complaints, and evaluation and recommendation to be made by the Division of
Air Quality (DAQ). As such, air quality enforcement is complaint -driven. DAQ may require the
owner or operator of an animal facility to submit information pursuant to the complaint. In
addition, the Director may require a best management plan for controlling odors. If the plan fails
either by lack of submission of the plan or non -implementation of the plan, the Director may
require the owner or operator of the facility to submit an application for a "control technology"
permit. Only at this point does air quality have a permit directly associated with it. On a federal
level, the USEPA, under the recent "consent decree", has initiated monitoring of selected animal
operations in order to obtain baseline figures of ammonia emissions. However, emissions from
land application will be exempt from any regulations resulting from this monitoring. Concurrent
with State and Federal pressure to reduce ammonia emissions and odor are changing
demographics in North Carolina that have included the construction of homes and subdivisions
in closer proximity to agricultural operations. These factors have combined to spur efforts to
reduce odor and ammonia emissions from animal operations.
Liquid Waste Characteristics
Swine anaerobic lagoon effluent is low in solids (around 0.5%) and contains on average
about 128 pounds per acre -inch (4.7 pounds per 1,000 gallons or 565 mg/1) of total nitrogen
(Barker, 1994). These values range widely depending upon type of swine operation, season, and
other factors. Ammonia comprises approximately 80% of total nitrogen in swine lagoon effluent
and the rest is in organic form. Little to no nitrate is contained in swine lagoon effluent. While
anaerobic lagoon effluent contains a relatively large amount of ammonia, there are many other
compounds that contribute to odor. Over 300 compounds that contribute to odor have been
identified in hog waste, including ammonia, hydrogen sulfide, and volatile organic compounds

(VOCs) (Schiffman et al., 2001). While very few of these compounds can be detected on their
own, synergistic effects and transformations can increase odor.
Ammoniacal nitrogen is comprised of ammonia (NH3) - sometimes referred to as un-
ionized ammonia - and ammonium (NH4+), the proportion of which is controlled by pH.
Ammonia (NH3) can be lost through volatilization and is the odor -producing form of
ammoniacal nitrogen and its proportion increases with increasing pH. At a pH of 9.0 ammonia
and ammonium concentrations are equal. At a pH of 7.0, only 0.57% is in the form of ammonia.
The average pH of anaerobic swine lagoon effluent is about 7.8 and ranges from about 6.5 to 8.5
(Barker, 1994). At a pH of 7.8, ammonia is about 3% of ammoniacal nitrogen.
Mechanisms that control ammonia and odor emissions
A variety of factors affect odor and ammonia losses during land application. These
include application equipment type, crop, weather, soil properties and conditions, and animal
waste properties. Most lagoon effluent in North Carolina is applied either through irrigation -type
equipment or by hose -drag -type equipment. Land application is also done with tanker/spreaders
that may broadcast or inject liquid manure but that type of equipment is more commonly used
with slurries rather than with lagoon liquid. Weather affects not only the odor and ammonia
emissions from the land application equipment to the ground, but also affects emissions after
application. Dry, windy conditions promote ammonia loss — however, odor is generally more
noticeable under humid conditions. Crop condition can affect ammonia loss too. Dense, high
crop canopies can increase odor and ammonia loss if effluent is applied "over the top" but will
reduce odors if applied beneath the canopy (drop tubes or injected). Soils factors such as pH,
cation exchange capacity (CEC), infiltration rate and soil -moisture content can affect odor and
ammonia loss. Lower pH soils (more acidic) will have lower ammonia loss rates; soils with high
CEC will also lose less ammonia due to binding of ammonia on exchange sites, and low
infiltration rates and high soil moisture content will increase ammonia losses since infiltration
will be impeded. Nutrient content and pH of lagoon effluent will also impact ammonia losses.
Ammonia losses increase with increasing nutrient (particularly N) content and increasing pH.
Equipment Options
Irrigation -Type Equipment
Most swine anaerobic lagoon effluent in North Carolina is land -applied with irrigation
equipment. Irrigation systems included in this category are solid set sprinklers, hard hose and
cable -tow traveling systems, center pivots, and boom -type sprayers. Two basic mechanisms
affect odor and ammonia loss in these systems; evaporation and drift. Several factors may
contribute to evaporation and drift. These include nozzle size and type, operating (nozzle)
pressure, and height of nozzle.
Evaporation in spray irrigation is limited by the energy available to convert water from a
liquid to vapor phase. That amount is estimated to be in the 1 to 2 percent range (Christiansen,
1937; Thompson et al., 1997). Measurements of evaporation in the field have ranged from less
than one percent to ten percent for drop type nozzles (Schneider, 2000) to 20 percent for impact -
type sprinklers including big -guns. The latter figure reflects total losses and therefore includes
drift. Evaporation also occurs once the liquid contacts the crop canopy or ground. These losses
are harder to quantify.
Nozzle size and type, and operating pressure determine droplet size of the effluent being
land applied. Smaller droplets result in greater evaporation and drift compared to larger droplets.

Smaller nozzles and higher pressures result in small droplet size. Kohl (1974) found that mean
droplet size was 1.75 min at 43 psi and 1.5 min at 58 psi for a 7/64 inch nozzle while for a 5/32
inch nozzle the average droplet diameters were 2.1 and 1.7 min respectively for the same
pressures. Kincaid et al. (1996) developed relationships between operating pressure, nozzle size
and droplet sizes for impact and drop -type nozzles. Using their relationship, median droplet size
for a 0.5 inch nozzle (at the low end of the range of "big gun nozzles") is 4.8 min at a nozzle
pressure of 50 psi and 3.1 min for a nozzle pressure of 100 psi. Since the falling rate of a droplet
is proportional to its diameter squared, a droplet of 1 min diameter will travel roughly four times
as far as one of 4 min diameter. Nozzle type can also affect droplet size in "big -guns" found
on hard -hose traveler and cable -tow systems. Ring nozzles tend to break up the spray pattern
more than taper -ring or taper -bore type nozzles, and therefore tend to increase odor and ammonia
loss. Drop -type sprinklers have been developed for center pivots. These nozzles operate under
lower pressure (typically 10-30 psi) than impact sprinklers (35-70 psi), and big gun systems (50-
100 psi), and distribute effluent by dispersing a stream on a inverted splash plate. Some of these
nozzles are manufactured specifically for wastewater as they are specifically designed to pass
solids.
Nozzle height can substantially impact odor and ammonia emissions. Greater distances
form the ground to the nozzle result in greater evaporation and drift. Nozzle height is more
important for larger droplets as small droplets can actually rise with upward air motion. Center
pivots can either use impact sprinklers mounted on top of the boom, or use nozzles suspended on
drop hoses below the boom. The combination of a low nozzle height and low pressure translate
to low drift from center pivot or boom -type systems using drop nozzles. Shaffer and Aldrige
(2003) found drift to be greatest with a hard hose traveling system and lowest with a center pivot
system with drop nozzles in a study conducted in Raleigh, NC.
Hose -Drag -Type Equipment
Recently, hose -drag type equipment (also sometimes referred to as drag -hose) has
become popular in North Carolina. The unit is pulled by a tractor and either attached to a hard
hose reel or to flexible hose. Distribution of liquid manure to the units is normally accomplished
with pumps at the lagoon and buried main lines and hydrants; similar to a hard hose traveler
supply system. Odor and ammonia emissions during land application from this type of
equipment is reduced compared to irrigation -type equipment due to two factors; low pressure at
the discharge point (just a few pounds), and discharge close to the ground. Most of these units
also incorporate aeration tines that aerate the soil and promote infiltration that also aids in odor
and ammonia loss reduction. Liquid manure is dispensed as a "sheet" of water rather than
droplets from either hooded outlets or splash plates.
Variations of this type of equipment include boom type equipment that broadcast a wider
wetted width under slightly higher pressure, much like the distribution of a tanker by with two
outlet nozzles. A typical nozzle diameter on this type of unit ranges between two and three
inches.
Management Options
A number of management options are available to reduce emissions of odor and
ammonia. Land applying in summer and fall can result in less odor due to greater biological
activity both in the liquid manure and in the soil. Application during daytime may reduce odors
compared to early morning or evening. This is because the air is "stable" in the early morning

and little mixing occurs. A temperature inversion is an example of extremely stable conditions.
When the air heats up over the course of the day, it becomes unstable, the air mixes and odor
dissipation is greater. However, the mixing that promotes dissipation of odor over and near the
land application field may be accompanied by wind that picks up over the course of the day and
transports odors off -site to neighboring property. If irrigation equipment is used to land apply,
care should be taken not to land apply during windy conditions. The general recommendation is
not to apply in winds averaging more than five miles per hour.
Other "common sense" options are not to land apply when social events are held nearby
such as on weekends and holidays. It may also be prudent to inform neighbors when you plan to
land apply.
Research in North Carolina
Previous
Research on ammonia losses from land application has been conduction in North
Carolina over the past 30 years. These studies have looked at ammonia loss through two
mechanisms that may occur during land application; loss of effluent volume via evaporation and
drift, and decrease in ammonia concentration in the liquid from the lagoon to the ground.
Westerman et al (1983) found an average of 19% ammonia loss from a solid set system during
land application onto coastal bermudagrass. Estimated ammonia loss was based upon change in
concentration between the lagoon and catch cans. Irrigation was done at night in this study and
evaporation was found to be negligible. In a study conducted during the same time period
(1977-79) Safley et al (1993) found a 30% loss of ammonia also from a solid set irrigation
system land applying to coastal bermudagrass. In this study loss was calculated based upon mass
rather than concentration; considering volume recovered in catch cans and change in ammonia
concentration. A study done with big gun irrigation found a 3% loss of ammonia from land
application onto bare soil based upon the change in ammonia concentration between the lagoon
and catch cans (Safley et al., 1992). Results for center pivot irrigation using impact sprinklers
under the same conditions showed a 5% loss of ammonia based upon concentration and a 26%
loss of ammonia based upon mass (change in concentration times volume lost). A later study
found a 6% loss of ammonia from big gun irrigation on coastal bermudagrass based upon
concentration. In this study evaporation was found to range between 2 and 8 percent
(Westerman, 1995).
Recent
A study contrasting ammonia losses between big gun irrigation and a hose -drag type
system has been recently completed. Unlike the aforementioned studies that sought to quantify
ammonia loss only from the lagoon through the irrigation system to the ground, instrumentation
was setup to collect air samples over plots receiving liquid swine manure for several days after
land application occurred. While ammonia emission during irrigation was much lower than
some previously published studies, total ammonia loss was similar. Most loss occurred during
the first four hours after the irrigation event. Little to no ammonia loss was found between the
big gun and the catch cans. Average ammonia losses from four big gun trials were 22% while
average ammonia loss for three hose -drag trials was about 6%. These findings confirm the
ability of hose drag systems to reduce odor and ammonia emissions compared to a big -gun
system.

Table 1 Relative Effectiveness of Various Equipment Used to Land Apply Swine Effluent
from Anaerobic lagoons in limiting odor and ammonia loss. Relative Uniformity and
Application Timeliness are also shown'.
Ammonia
Limit
Uniformity of
Timeliness of
System Type
Conservation
Odor
Application
Application
Solid set
Poor
Poor
Good
Good
Big -gun
Very poor
Very poor
Good
Good
Center Pivot —
Very poor
Very poor
Excellent
Excellent
impact sprinklers
Center
Pivot/Boom with
Good
Good
Excellent
Excellent
drop nozzles
Hose Drag
Excellent
Excellent
Fair
Excellent
'Table adapted from Livestock and Poultry Environmental Curriculum, using various sources
2Better ammonia conservation means less ammonia loss
3Timeliness of application implies moving large quantities of effluent in a short time period for
management flexibility and considering field accessibility (trafficability).
References
Barker, J. C., J.P. Zublena, and F.R. Walls. 1994. Animal and Poultry Manure Production and
Characterization. North Carolina Cooperative Extension Service. Revised 2001.
Christiansen, J.E. 1937. Irrigation by sprinkling. Agricultural Engineering 18(12): 533-538.
Kincaid, D.C., K.H. Solomon, and J.C. Oliphant. 1996. Drop size distributions for irrigation
sprinklers. Transactions of the ASAE 39(3):839-845.
Kohl, R.A. 1974. Drop size distribution from medium-sized agricultural sprinklers.
Transactions of the ASAE
Thompson, A.L., D.L. Martin, J.M. Norman, J.A. Toplk, T.A. Howell, J.R. Gilley, and A.D.
Schneider. 1977. Testing of a water loss distribution model for moving sprinkler systems.
Transactions of the ASAE 40(1):81-88.
Safley, L.M Jr., J.C. Barker, and P.W. Westerman. 1988. Ammonia loss from irrigation of
anaerobic lagoon liquid. ASAE meeting paper no. 88-2574 presented at the 1988
international winter meeting of the American Society of Agricultural Engineers, Chicago,
IL, Dec. 13-16.
Safley, L.M Jr., J.C. Barker, and P.W. Westerman. 1993. Loss of nitrogen during sprinkler
irrigation of swine lagoon liquid. Bioresource Technology 40(1992) pp. 7-15.
Schneider, A.D. 2000. Efficiency and uniformity of the LEPA and spray sprinkler methods: A
review. Transactions of the ASAE 43(4):937-944.
Safley, L.M., Jr., S.L. Crawford, P.W. Westerman, and R.L. Mikkelson. 1993. Ammonia
volatilization from irrigated application of anaerobic lagoon liquid. N.C. Agricultural
Research Project.

Shaffer, K.A. and F. Aldridge. 2003. Wastewater irrigation system selection to meet uniformity,
odor, and drift concerns. ASAE meeting paper no. 032249 presented at the 2003 annual
international meeting of the ASAE, Las Vegas, NV, 27-30 July.
Schiffman, S.S., J.L. Bennett, and J.H. Raymer. 2001. Quantification of odor and odorants from
swine operations in North Carolina. Agric. Forest Meterol. 108:213-240.
Westerman, P.W., J.C. Burns, M.R. Overcash, and R.O. Evans. 1983. Swine lagoon effluent
applied to coastal bermudagrass. EPA-600/2-84-004. No. PB 83-152 264. NTIS,
Springfield, VA. 213 pp.
Westerman, P.W., R.L. Huffman, and J.C. Barker. 1995. Environmental and agronomic
evaluation of applying swine lagoon effluent to coastal bermudagrass for intensive grazing
and hay. In: Proceedings of Seventh International Symposium on Agricultural and Food
Processing Wastes. June 18-20, 1995, Chicago, IL. ASAE publication 7-95, ASAE, St.
Joseph, MI.