940007_INSPECTIONS_20171231

NORTH CAROLI NA
Department of Environmental Qual

IN in lk M
sISM looftIN" UT I u IN' 5
Ames yon A.. .2 S

E Division of Water Quality
❑ Division of Soil and Water Conservation
❑ Other Agency I--1
Facility Number: 940007 Facility Status: Active Permit: AWS940007 !J Denied Access
Inspection Type: Compliance Inspection Inactive or Closed Date:
Reason for Visit: Routine County: Washington Region: Washington
Date of Visit: 11/07/2006 Entry Time:10:45 AM Exit Time:
Farm Name: Jack Resoess Farms
Owner: Jack Respess
Incident M
Owner Email:
Mailing Address: ,25556 Hwy 264 E Panlego NC 27860
Physical Address:
Facility Status: 0 Compliant ❑ Not Compliant
Location of Farm:
Integrator:
Latitude: 35°43'60"
Phone: [phone]
Longitude: 76°35'60"
Located on the eastside of NCSR 1127, approx. 2.0 miles north of intersection with Hwy 45 and 99.
Question Areas:
Discharges & Stream Impacts Waste Collection & Treatment Waste Application
Records and Documents
Certified Operator: James E. Wagaman
Secondary OIC(s):
Operator Certification Number: 18864
On -Site Representative(s): Name Title Phone
On -site representative James Wagaman Phone:
24 hour contact name James Wagaman Phone:
Primary Inspector: Marlene Salyer
Inspector Signature:
Secondary Inspector(s):
Inspection Summary:
Waste analyses:
7-6-06 = 1.3
3-21-06 = 1.2
9-11-06 = 1.2
Soil sample 2006
Irr records are balanced out!
Phone:
Date:
Page: 1

0
Permit: AWS940007 Owner - Facility: Jack Respess Facility Number : 940007
Inspection Date: 11/07/2006 Inspection Type: Compliance Inspection Reason for Visit: Routine
Regulated Operations Design Capacity Current Population
Swine
Q Swine - Feeder to Finish 2,000 983
Total Design Capacity: 2,000
Total SSLW: 270,000
Waste Structures
Type Identifier Closed Date Start Date Designed Freeboard Observed Freeboard
agoon #1 19.00 46.00
Page: 2

Permit: AWS940007 Owner - Facility: Jack Respess Facility Number: 940007
Inspection Date: 11/07/2006 Inspection Type: Compliance Inspection Reason for Visit: Routine
Discharges & Stream Impacts
Yes
No
NA
NE
1. Is any discharge observed from any part of the operation?
❑
■
❑
❑
Discharge originated at:
Structure
❑
Application Field
❑
Other
❑
a. Was conveyance man-made?
❑
■
❑
❑
b. Did discharge reach Waters of the State? (if yes, notify DWQ)
❑
■
❑
❑
c_ Estimated volume reaching surface waters?
d. Does discharge bypass the waste management system? (if yes, notify DWQ)
❑
■
❑
❑
2. Is there evidence of a past discharge from any part of the operation?
❑
■
❑
❑
3. Were there any adverse impacts or potential adverse impacts to Waters of the State other than from a
❑
■
❑
❑
discharge?
Waste Collection, Storage & Treatment
Yes
No
NA
NE
4. is storage capacity less than adequate?
❑
■
❑
❑
If yes, is waste level into structural freeboard?
❑
5. Are there any immediate threats to the integrity of any of the structures observed (I.e./ large trees, severe
❑
■
❑
❑
erosion, seepage, etc.)?
6. Are there structures on -site that are not properly addressed and/or managed through a waste management ❑
■
❑
❑
or closure plan?
7. Do any of the structures need maintenance or improvement?
❑
■
❑
❑
8. Do any of the structures lack adequate markers as required by the permit? (Not applicable to roofed pits,
Cl
■
❑
❑
dry stacks and/or wet stacks)
9. Does any part of the waste management system other than the waste structures require maintenance or
❑
■
❑
❑
improvement?
Waste Application
Yes
No
NA
NE
r
10. Are there any required buffers, setbacks, or compliance alternatives that need maintenance or
❑
■
❑
❑
improvement?
11. Is there evidence of incorrect application?
❑
■
❑
❑
1f yes, check the appropriate box below.
Excessive Ponding? ❑
Hydraulic Overload? ❑
Frozen Ground? ❑
Heavy metals (Cu, Zn, etc)? ❑
Page: 3

Permit: AWS940007 Owner -Facility: Jack Respess
Inspection Date: 11/07/2006 Inspection Type: Compliance Inspection
Facility Number: 940007
Reason for Visit: Routine
Waste Application
Yes No NA NE
PAN?
❑
Is PAN > 10%110 lbs.?
❑
Total P2O5?
❑
Failure to incorporate manurelsludge into bare soil?
❑
Outside of acceptable crop window?
❑
Evidence of wind drift?
❑
Application outside of application area?
❑
Crop Type 1
Coastal Bermuda Grass
(Hay)
Crop Type 2
Cotton
Crop Type 3
Crop Type 4
Crop Type 5
Crop Type 6
Soil Type 1
Soil Type 2
Soil Type 3
Soil Type 4
Soil Type 5
Soil Type 6
14. Do the receiving crops differ From those designated in the Certified Animal Waste Management
[) ■ ❑ ❑
Plan(CAWMP)?
15. Does the receiving crap and/or land application site need improvement?
❑ ■ ❑ ❑
16. Did the facility fail to secure and/or operate per the irrigation design or wettable acre determination? ❑ ■ ❑ ❑
17. Does the facility lack adequate acreage for land application?
❑ ■ ❑ ❑
18. Is there a lack of properly operating waste application equipment?
❑ ■ ❑ ❑
Records and Documents
Yes No NA NE
19. Did the facility fail to have Certificate of Coverage and Permit readily available?
❑ ■ ❑ ❑
20. Does the facility fail to have all components of the CAWMP readily available?
❑ ■ ❑ ❑
If yes, check the appropriate box below.
WUP?
❑
Page: 4

Permit: AWS940007 Owner - Facility: Jack Respess
Facility Number: 940007
Inspection Date: 11/07/2006 Inspection Type: Compliance Inspection
Reason for Visit: Routine
Records and Documents
Yes No NA NE
Checklists?
❑
Design?
❑
Maps?
❑
Other?
❑
21. Does record keeping need improvement?
❑ ■ ❑ ❑
If yes, check the appropriate box below.
Waste Application?
❑
120 Minute inspections?
❑
Weather code?
❑
Weekly Freeboard?
❑
Transfers?
❑
Rainfall?
❑
Inspections after > 1 inch rainfall & monthly?
❑
Waste Analysis?
❑
Annual soil analysis?
❑
Crop yields?
❑
Stocking?
❑
Annual Certification Form (NPDES only)?
❑
22. Did the facility fail to install and maintain a rain gauge?
❑ ■ ❑ ❑
23. If selected, did the facility fail to install and maintain a rainbreaker on irrigation equipment (NPDES only)? ❑ ❑ ■ ❑
24. Did the facility fail to calibrate waste application equipment as required by the permit?
❑ ■ ❑ ❑
25. Did the facility fail to conduct a sludge survey as required by the permit?
❑ ■ ❑ ❑
26. Did the facility fail to have an actively certified operator in charge?
❑ ■ 0 ❑
27. Did the facility fail to secure a phosphorous loss assessment (PLAT) certification?
❑ ❑ ■ ❑
Page: 5

t
Division of Water Quality
❑ Division of Soil and Water Conservation
❑ Other Agency
Facility Number: 940007 Facility Status: Active Permit: AWS940007 ❑ Denied Access
Inspection Type: Compliance Inspection Inactive or Closed Date:
Reason for Visit: Routine County: Washington Region: Washington
Date of Visit: 03/3012005 Entry Time: 01:00 AM Exit Time: Incident #:
Farm Name: Jack Resoess Farms Owner Email:
Owner: Jgck Bespess Phone: [phone]
Mailing Address: 25556 Hwy 264 E Pantego NC 27860
Physical Address:
Facility Status: ❑ Compliant ❑ Not Compliant Integrator:
Location of Farm: Latitude: 35"43'60" Longitude: 76°3660'_' - _
Located on the eastside of NCSR 1127, approx. 2.0 miles north of intersection with Hwy 45 and 99.
Question Areas:
0 Discharges & Stream Impacts Waste Collection & Treatment Waste Application
Q Records and Documents Q Other Issues
Certified Operator: James E. Wagaman Operator Certification Number: 18864
Secondary OIC(s):
On -Site Representative(s): Name Title Phone
On -site representative James Wagaman Phone:
24 hour contact name James Wagaman Phone:
Primary Inspector: Marlene Salyer Phone:
Inspector Signature: Date:
Secondary Inspector(s):
Phone:
Inspection Summary:
Soil sample Dec. 2004 alright.
Waste analysis: 3-15-05 = .74; 7-7-04 = .06; 2-17-04 = _62
I -The irrigation records are complete and balanced out.
Remember to cut the "woody" vegetation oft the lagoon banks.
Also get the new COC dated Oct. 2004.
Phone:
Page: 1

Permit: AWS940007 Owner -Facility: Jack Respess
Inspection Date: 03/30/2005 Inspection Type: Compliance Inspection
Waste Structures
Tvoe Identifier
Facility Number: 940007
Reason for Visit: Routine
Closed Date Start Date Desinned Freeboard Observed Freeboard
Lagoon #1 19,00 33.00
Page: 2
0

Permit: AWS940007 Owner -Facility: Jack Respess Facility Number: 940007
Inspection date: 03/30/2005 Inspection Type: Compliance Inspection Reason for Visit: Routine
ischaroes & Stream Impacts Yes No NA NE
1. Is any discharge observed from any part of the operation? ❑ ■ ❑ ❑
Discharge originated at:
Structure ❑
Application Field ❑
Other ❑
a. Was conveyance man-made? ❑ ■ ❑ ❑
b. Did discharge reach Waters of the State? (if yes, notify DWQ) ❑ ■ ❑ ❑
c. Estimated volume reaching surface waters?
d. Does discharge bypass the waste management system? (if yes, notify DWQ)
❑
■
❑ ❑
2. Is there evidence of a past discharge from any part of the operation?
0000
3. Were there any adverse impacts or potential adverse impacts to Waters of the State other than from a discharge?
❑
Yes
0
No
❑ ❑
NA NI
ste Collection,,2torage & Treatment
4. Is storage capacity less than adequate?
❑
0
❑ ❑
If yes, is waste level into structural freeboard? ❑
5. Are there any immediate threats to the integrity of any of the structures observed (1.eJ large trees, severe erosion, ❑ M ❑ ❑
seepage, etc.)?
6. Are there structures on -site that are not properly addressed andlor managed through a waste management or
❑
M
❑ ❑
closure plan?
7. Do any of the structures need maintenance or improvement?
❑
0
❑ ❑
8. Do any of the structures lack adequate markers as required by the permit? (Not applicable to roofed pits, dry stacks
❑
0
❑ ❑
and/or wet stacks)
9. Does any part of the waste management system other than the waste structures require maintenance or
1101113
improvement?
Waste Application
10. Are there any required buffers, setbacks, or compliance alternatives that need maintenance or improvement?
Yes No NA NE
❑ M, ❑ ❑
11. Is there evidence of incorrect application?
❑ 0 ❑ ❑
If yes, check the appropriate box below.
Excessive Ponding?
❑
Hydraulic Overload?
❑
Frozen Ground?
❑
Heavy metals (Cu, Zn, etc)?
❑
PAN?
❑
Is PAN > 10%110 lbs.?
❑
Total P2O5?
❑
Failure to incorporate manureisludge into bare soil? _
❑
Outside of acceptable crop window?
❑
Evidence of wind drift?
❑
Application outside of application area?
❑
Crop Type 1 Cotton
Crop Type 2 Coastal Bermuda Grass
(Hay)
Crop Type 3
Crop Type 4
Crop Type 5
Page: 3

Permit: AWS940007 Owner -Facility: .lack Respess
Facility Number: 940007
Inspection Date: 03/30/2005 Inspection Type: Compliance Inspection
Reason for Visit: Routine
Wasta Applination
Crop Type 6
Yes
Ljo Na
NE
Soil Type 1
Soil Type 2
Soil Type 3
Soil Type 4
Soil Type 5
Soil Type 6
14. Do the receiving crops differ from those designated in the Certified Animal Waste Management Plan(CAWMP)? ❑
■ ❑
❑
15. Does the receiving crop and/or land application site need improvement?
❑
E ❑
❑
16. Did the facility fail to secure and/or operate per the irrigation design or wettable acre determination?
❑
E Cl
❑
17. Does the facility lack adequate acreage for land application?
❑
■ ❑
❑
18. Is there a lack of properly operating waste application equipment?
❑
Yes
0 ❑
No NA
❑
NE
Records and Documents
19. Did the facility fall to have Certlricate of Coverage and Permit readily available?
❑
■ ❑
❑
20. Does the facility fail to have all components of the CAWMP readily available?
Cl
N ❑
❑
It yes, check the appropriate box below.
WUP?
❑
Checklists?
❑
Design?
❑
Maps?
❑
Other?
❑
21. Does record keeping need improvement?
❑
❑
❑
If yes, check the appropriate box below.
Waste Application?
❑
120 Minute inspections?
❑
Weather code?
❑
Weekly Freeboard?
❑
Transfers?
❑
Rainfall?
❑
Inspections after > 1 inch rainfall & monthly?
❑
Waste Analysis?
❑
Annual soil analysis?
❑
Crop yields?
❑
Stocking?
❑
Annual Certification Form (NPDES only)?
❑
22. Did the facility fail to install and maintain a rain gauge?
❑
E ❑
❑
23. If selected, did the facility fail to install and maintain a rainbreaker on irrigation equipment (NPDES only)?
❑
❑ 0
❑
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?
❑
0 ❑
❑
27. Did the facility fail to secure a phosphorous loss assessment (PLAT) certification?
❑
❑ 0
❑
Page: 4

Permit: AWS940007 Owner -Facility: Jack Respess Facility Number: 940007
Inspection Date: 03/30/2005 Inspection Type: Compliance Inspection Reason for Visit: Routine
28. Were any additional problems noted which cause non-compliance of the Permit or CAWMP? ❑ M ❑ ❑
29. Did the facility fail to properly dispose of dead animals within 24 hours and/or document and report those mortality ❑ M ❑ ❑
rates that exceed normal rates?
30. At the time of the inspection did the facility pose an air quality concern? If yes, contact a regional Air Quality ❑ M ❑ ❑
representative immediately.
31. Did the facility fail to notify regional DWQ of emergency situations as required by Permit? ❑ moo
32. Did Reviewer/Inspector fail to discuss review/inspection with on -site representative? ❑ M ❑ ❑
33. Does facility require a follow-up visit by same agency? ❑ 0010
Page: 5

Type of Visit OO Compliance Inspection O Operation Review O Structure Evaluation O Tech. Assistance O Confirmation for Ren
Reason for Visit *Routine O Complaint O Follow up O Emergency Notification O Other ❑ Denied Access
Facility Number 94 7 Date of Visit: 9/29/20Q4 Time: 3:3Q
Nat O erational 0 Below Threshold
® Permitted ® Certified U Conditionally Certified [3 Registered Date Last Operated or Above Threshold: .........................
Farm Name: JACk.RC&P JFa1................................................................................... County: WAslaingtotl..................................... WORD?.........
OwnerName:JACk......................................... Rt<spcss....................... :............................... Phone No: 91.9.441r. 0111...........................................................
Mailing Address: Z5516,Rwy..A&E................................................................................1'AAtkl*R.Nc........................................... ................ 17M ..............
FacilityContact: ..............................................................................Title:................................................................ Phone No:
Onsite Representative: a11MO. �.aliMAM...................................................................... Integrator: L,. L.tj1pj0..&..SRm..jUF�.....................................
Certified Operator:ja1mcs.,E................................. WAgaxllA[t....................................... . Operator Certification Number: lSR{.4.............................
Location of Farm:
Located on the eastside of NCSR 1127, approx. 2.0 miles north of intersection with Hwy 45 and 99. +
0 Swine [3 Poultry [I Cattle El Horse Latitude 35 ' ®° Longitude 76 36 i 046
Design Current
Design
Current
Design Current
Swine Capacity Population
Poultry Capacity
Population Cattle
Capacity Population
❑ Wean to Feeder
❑ Layer
❑ Dairy
® Feeder to Finish
2000
10 Non -Layer
I
JC1 Non -Dairy
❑ Farrow to Wean
❑ Farrow to Feeder
❑ Other
❑ Farrow to Finish
Total Design Capacity
2,000
❑ Gilts
Total SSLW
270,000
❑ soars
Number of Lagoons 3
Discharges & Stream Impacts
1. Is any discharge observed from any part of the operation? ❑ Yes ® No
Discharge originated at: ❑ Lagoon ❑ Spray Field ❑ Other
a. If discharge is observed; was the conveyance man-made? ❑ Yes ❑ No
b. If discharge is observed, did it reach Water of the State? (If yes, notify DWQ)
c. If discharge is observed, what is the estimated flow in gal/min?
d. Does discharge bypass a lagoon system? (If yes, notify DWQ)
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes ❑ No
2. Is there evidence of past discharge from any part of the operation? ❑ Yes ® No
3. Were there any adverse impacts or potential adverse impacts to the Waters of the State other than from a discharge? ❑ Yes ® No
Waste Collection & Treatment
4. Is storage capacity (freeboard plus storm storage) less than adequate? ❑ Spillway ❑ Yes ® No
Structure 1 Structure 2 Structure 3 Structure 4 Structure 5 Structure 6
Identifier: .........Primazy ................ S.acandary........ ............ .F.inAd............. ............
....................... ......................................................................
Freeboard (inches): 19 24 46
12112103 Continued

Facility Number: 94-7 Date of Inspection 9/29/2004
5. Are there any immediate threats to the integrity of any of the structures observed? (ie/ trees, severe erosion, ❑ Yes ® No
seepage, etc.)
6. Are there structures on -site which are not properly addressed and/or managed through a waste management or ❑ Yes ® No
closure plan?
(If any of questions 4-6 was answered yes, and the situation poses an
immediate public health or environmental threat, notify DWQ)
7. Do any of the structures need maintenance/improvement? _ ❑ Yes ® No
8. Does any part of the waste management system other than waste structures require maintenance/improvement? ❑ Yes ® No
9. Do any stuctures lack adequate, gauged markers with required maximum and minimum liquid level ❑ Yes ® No
elevation markings?
Waste Agnlication
10. Are there any buffers that need maintenance/improvement? ❑ Yes ® No
11. Is there evidence of over application? If yes, check the appropriate box below. ❑ Yes ® No
❑ Excessive Ponding ❑ PAN ❑ Hydraulic Overload ❑ Frozen Ground ❑ Copper and/or Zinc > 301
12. Crop type Corn, Soybeans, Wheat Cotton Irish Potatoes
13. Do the receiving crops differ with those designated in the Certified Animal Waste Management Plan (CAWMP)? ® Yes ❑ No
14. a) Does the facility lack adequate acreage for land application?
❑ Yes
❑ No
b) Does the facility need a wettable acre determination?
❑ Yes
❑ No
c) This facility is pended for a wettable acre determination?
❑ Yes
❑ No
15. Does the receiving crop need improvement?
❑ Yes
® No
16. Is there a lack of adequate waste application equipment?
❑ Yes
® No
Odor Issues
17. Does the discharge pipe from the confinement building to the storage pond or lagoon fail to discharge at/or below
❑ Yes
❑ No
liquid Ievel of lagoon or storage pond with no agitation?
18. Are there any dead animals not disposed of properly within 24 hours?
❑ Yes
®No
19. Is there any evidence of wind drift during land application? (i.e. residue on neighboring vegetation, asphalt,
❑ Yes
® No
roads, building structure, and/or public property)
20. At the time of the inspection did the facility pose an odor or air quality concern? If yes, contact a regional
❑ Yes
®No
Air Quality representative immediately.
Comments 64er 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):' ;❑ Field Copy ❑ Final Notes
13) Coastal Bermuda still not listed in WUP. James Wagaman stopped irrigation on bermuda in March 2004 when Mr. Martin
Mcl,awhorn told him of this problem that has existed since last year.
***Mr. Wagaman dropped off a copy of revised WUP, dated 10/4/04, at WaRO on ] 0/l4/04: Thank you for updating the waste plan.
Waste on 7/7/04 with 0.06 lbsN/1000ga1.
2/17/04 w/ 0.62 " .
* Remember to take soils test for 2004 crop year.
Reviewer/Inspector Name Scott
Reviewer/Inspector Signature:
Date:
12112103
Continued

Facility Number: _94-7 j Date of Inspection 9/29/2004
'Rcauired Records & Documents
21. Fail to have Certificate of Coverage & General Permit or other Permit readily available?
❑ Yes
® No
22. Does the facility fail to have all components of the Certified Animal Waste Management Plan readily available?
(ie/ W11P, checklists, design, maps, etc.)
❑ Yes
® No
23. Does record keeping need improvement? If yes, check the appropriate box below,
❑ Yes
® No
❑ 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
N No
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
® No
27, Did Reviewer/Inspector fail to discuss review/inspection with on -site representative?
❑ Yes
N No
28. Does facility require a follow-up visit by same agency?
❑ Yes
N No
29. Were any additional problems noted which cause noncompliance of the Certified AWMP?
❑ Yes
N No
NPDES Permitted Facilities
30. Is the facility covered under a NPDES Permit? (If no, skip questions 31-35)
❑ Yes
N No
31. If selected, did the facility fail to install and maintain rainbreakers on irrigation'equipment?
❑ Yes
❑ No
32, Did the facility fail to install and maintain a rain gauge?
❑ Yes
❑ No
33. Did the facility fail to conduct an annual sludge survey?
❑ Yes
❑ No
34. Did the facility fail to calibrate waste application equipment? ❑ Yes ❑ No
35. Does record keeping for NPDES required forms need improvement? If yes, check the appropriate box below. ❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ Stocking Form ❑ Crop Yield Form ❑ Rainfall ❑ Inspection After V Rain
❑ 120 Minute Inspections ❑ Annual Certification Form
10 No violations or deficiencies were noted during this visit. You will receive no further correspondence about this visit.
dditioiial C6inm6nts'kid/or Drawings:
12112103

Technical Assistance Site Visit Report
r Division of Soil and Water Conservation
Q Natural Resources Conservation Service
O Soil and Water Conservation District
O Other...
Facility Number 94 - 07 Date: 1301D4 Time: 1200 Time On Farm: 45 WaRO
Farm Name Jack Respess Farms County Washington, Phone:
919-943-2018
Mailing Address 25556 Hwy 264 E Pantego NC 27860
Onsite
Representative James Wagaman Integrator r
Type Of Visit
® Operation Review
❑ Compliance Inspection (pilot only)
0 Technical Assistance
I❑ Confirmation for Removal
I ❑ No Animals -Date Last Operated: I[I Operating
Operating below threshold
:INSwine []Poultry ❑ Cattle ❑ Horse
:. Design Current
Capacity Population
❑ Wean to Feeder
®' Feeder to Finish
❑Farrow to Wean
❑ Farrow to Feeder
❑ Farrow to Finish
❑ Gilts
❑ Boars
2000
1600
1LH Allen & Sons 7 1
Purpose Of Visit
OO Routine
O Response to DWQ/DENR referral
O Response to DSWC/SWCD referral
Q Response to complaint/local referral
O Requested by producer/integrator
O Fallow -up
Q Emergency
O Other...
Design Current
Capacity Population
❑ Layer
❑ Non -Layer
❑ Dairy
❑ Non -Dairy
❑ Other
GENERAL QUESTIONS:
❑ Dairy
❑ Non -Dairy
❑ Other
GENERAL QUESTIONS:
❑ Other
GENERAL QUESTIONS:
1. Is waste discharging from any part of the operation and reaching surface waters or wetlands?
❑ yes ® no
its there evidence of a past waste discharge from any part of the operation that waste reached
❑ yes ® no
surface waters or wetlands?
3. Does any problem pose an immediate threat to the integrity of the waste structure (large trees,
❑ yes ® no
;seepage, severe erosion, etc.)?
Is there evidence of nitrogen over application, hydraulic overloading or excessive ponding
❑ yes ® no
,requiring DWO notification?
Is there evidence of improper dead animal disposal that poses a threat to the environment
❑ yes ® no
;"and/or public health?
6. Is the waste level within the structural freeboard elevation range for any waste structure? ❑ yes ® no
Structurel Structure 2 Structure 3 Structure 4 Structure 5
Identifier primary secondary final
Level (inches) 19 29 48
:ROP TYPES Icorn soybeans Wheat I Icotton
GPRAYFIELD
SOIL TYPES Hy Rp
7. What type of technical assistance does the onsite representative feel is needed? (list in comment section)
03/10/03

Facility Number 94 - 07 Date: 4/30/04 1
PARAMETER
"- [18. Waste spill leaving site
❑ 9. Waste spill contained on site
Ell 0. Level in structural freeboard
[111. Level in storm storage
[112. Waste structure integrity compromised
❑ 13. Waste structure needs maintenance
❑ 14. Over application >= 10% & 10 lbs.
❑ 15. Over application < 10% or < 10 lbs.
❑ 16. Hydraulic overloading
❑ 17. Deficient irrigation records
❑ 18. Late/missing waste analysis
❑ 19. Late/missing lagoon level records
❑ 20. Late/missing soils analysis
❑ 21. Crop needs improvement
® 22. Crop inconsistent with waste plan
❑ 23. Irrigation maintenance deficiency
[124. Deficient sprayfield conditions
Reaulatory Referrals
] Referred to DWO Date:
] Referred to NCDA Date:
] Other... Date:
LIST IMPROVEMENTS
MADE BY OPERATION
1
2
3.
A`
5.
C
QQ No assistance provided/requested
TECHNICAL ASSISTANCE Needed
25. Waste Plan Revision or Amendment
❑
26. Waste Plan Conditional Amendment
❑
27. Review or Evaluate Waste Plan wlproducer
❑
28. Forms Need (list in comment section)
❑
29. Missing Components (list in comments)
❑
30. 21-1.0200 re -certification
❑
31. Five & Thirty day Plans of Action (PoA)
❑
32. Irrigation record keeping assistance
❑
33. Organize/computerization of records
❑
34. Sludge Evaluation
❑
35. Sludge or Closure Plan
❑
36. Sludge removal/closure procedures
❑
37. Waste Structure Evaluation
❑
38. Structure Needs Improvement
❑
39. Operation & Maintenance Improvements
❑
40. Marker check/calibration
❑
41. Site evaluation
❑
42. Irrigation Calibration
❑
43. Irrigation system designfinstallation
❑
44. Secure irrigation information (maps, etc.)
❑
45. Operating improvements (pull signs, etc.)
❑
46. Wettable Acre Determination .
❑
47. ]Evaluate WAD certification/rechecks
❑
48. Crop evaluationfrecommendations
❑
49. Drainage work/evaluation
❑
50. Land shaping, subsoiling, aeration, etc.
❑
51. Runoff control, stormwater diversion, etc.
❑
52. Buffer improvements
❑
53. Field measurements(GPS, surveying, etc.)
❑
54. Mortality BMPs
❑
55. Waste operator education (NPDES)
❑
56. Operation & maintenance education
❑
57. Record keeping education
❑
58. Croptforage management education
❑
59. Soil and/or waste sampling education
❑
Provided
2 03/10/03

Facility Number 94 _ 07 Date: 1 4/30/04
COMMENTS:
'Need to designate OIC. +
Need to compete integrator change form.
New waste analysis taken 4/25/04 no results.
Waste analysis dated 2/17/04 nitrogen is 0.62 Ibs
Remember to take soil test for 2004 crop year.
2. Coastal bermuda not listed in waste plan. Need to contact tech spec. to have plan amended'to include this crop, pan
rates, window.
"Lagoon freeboard levels recorded weekly with drops in lagoon consistent with irrigation events.
TECHNICAL SPECIALIST Marlin McLawhorn
:. SIGNATURE
Date Entered: 5/17/04 Entered By: Imartin McLawhorn
3 03/10/03

Technical Assistance Site Visit Report
• Division of Soil and Water Conservation
O Natural Resources Conservation Service
O Soil and Water Conservation District
O Other...
Facility Number 94 - 07 Date: 1218103 Time: 1 1400 1 Time On Farm: 90 WaRO
Farm Name Jack Respess Farms County Washington Prone
919-943-2018
Mailing Address 25556 Hwy 264 E Pantego NC 27860
Onsite
Representative Jack Respess/ Michele Christensen Integrator Premium Standard Farms
Tvpe Of Visit
Compliance Inspection (pilot only)
Technical Assistance
Confirmation for Removal
❑ Operating below threshold
IN Swine ❑ Poultry ❑ Cattle ❑ Horse
Design Current
Capacity Population
❑ Wean to Feeder
® Feeder to Finish
❑ Farrow to Wean
❑ Farrow to Feeder
❑ Farrow to Finish
❑ Gilts
❑ Boars
2000
1660
Purpose Of Visit
OO Routine
O Response to DWQ/DENR referral
Q Response to DSWC/SWCD referral
O Response to complaint/local referral
O Requested by producer/integrator
O Follow-up
O Emergency
O Other...
Design Current
Capacity Population
❑ Layer
❑ Non -Layer
❑ Dairy
❑ Non -Dairy
❑ Other
GENERAL QUESTIONS:
1. Is waste discharging from any part of the operation and reaching surface waters or wetlands? ❑ yes ® no
2. Is there evidence of a past waste discharge from any part of the operation that waste reached ❑ yes ® no
surface waters or wetlands?
3. Does any problem pose an immediate threat to the integrity of the waste structure (large trees, ❑ yes ® no
seepage, severe erosion, etc.)?
4. Is there evidence of nitrogen over application, hydraulic overloading or excessive ponding ❑ yes ® no
requiring DWQ notification?
5. Is there evidence of improper dead animal disposal that poses a threat to the environment ❑ yes ® no
and/or public health?
6. Is the waste level within the structural freeboard elevation range for any waste structure? ❑ yes ® no
Structurel Structure 2 Structure 3 Structure 4 Structure 5
Identifier primary secondary final
Level {inches} 1 40 35 41
CROP TYPES ICom Soybeans Wheat
SPRAYFIELD
SOIL TYPES Hy Rp
7. What type of technical assistance does the onsite representative feel is needed? (list in comment section)
03/10/03
❑ Dairy
❑ Non -Dairy
❑ Other
GENERAL QUESTIONS:
1. Is waste discharging from any part of the operation and reaching surface waters or wetlands? ❑ yes ® no
2. Is there evidence of a past waste discharge from any part of the operation that waste reached ❑ yes ® no
surface waters or wetlands?
3. Does any problem pose an immediate threat to the integrity of the waste structure (large trees, ❑ yes ® no
seepage, severe erosion, etc.)?
4. Is there evidence of nitrogen over application, hydraulic overloading or excessive ponding ❑ yes ® no
requiring DWQ notification?
5. Is there evidence of improper dead animal disposal that poses a threat to the environment ❑ yes ® no
and/or public health?
6. Is the waste level within the structural freeboard elevation range for any waste structure? ❑ yes ® no
Structurel Structure 2 Structure 3 Structure 4 Structure 5
Identifier primary secondary final
Level {inches} 1 40 35 41
CROP TYPES ICom Soybeans Wheat
SPRAYFIELD
SOIL TYPES Hy Rp
7. What type of technical assistance does the onsite representative feel is needed? (list in comment section)
03/10/03

Facility Number 94 - 07 Date:
1218103
PARAMETER
pO No assistance provided/requested
❑ 8. Waste spill leaving site
TECHNICAL ASSISTANCE Needed
Provided
❑ 9. Waste spill contained on site
10. Level in structural freeboard
25. Waste Plan Revision or Amendment
❑
El
[111. Level in storm storage
26. Waste Plan Conditional Amendment
❑
❑
27. Review or Evaluate Waste Plan wlproducer
❑
❑
❑ 12. Waste structure integrity compromised
❑ 13. Waste structure needs maintenance
28. Forms Need (list in comment section)
El
El
29. Missing Components (list in comments) -
❑
❑
❑ 14. Over application 7= 10% & 10 lbs.
❑
❑
❑ 15. Over application < 10% or <10 lbs.
30.2H.0200 re -certification
❑ 16. Hydraulic overloading
31. Five & Thirty day Plans of Action (PoA)
❑
❑
32. Irrigation record keeping assistance
❑
❑
❑ 17. Deficient irrigation records
®18. Late/missing waste analysis
33. Organ izelcomputerization of records
El
❑ 19. Late/missing lagoon level records
34. Sludge Evaluation
❑
❑
❑ 20. Late/missing soils analysis
❑ 21. Crop needs improvement
35. Sludge or Closure Plan
❑
❑
® 22. Crop inconsistent with waste plan
36. Sludge removal/closure procedures
❑
❑
37. Waste Structure Evaluation
❑
❑
❑ 23. Irrigation maintenance deficiency
❑ 24. Deficient 5prayfeld conditions
38. Structure Needs Improvement
❑
❑
39. Operation & Maintenance Improvements
❑
❑
40. Marker checkicalibration
❑
❑
Reaulatory Referrals
41. Site evaluation
❑
❑
❑ Referred to DWQ Date:
42. Irrigation Calibration
❑
❑
❑ Referred to NCDA Date:
43. Irrigation designlinstalfation
❑
❑
❑ Other...
system
Date:
44. Secure irrigation information (maps, etc.)
❑
❑
LIST IMPROVEMENTS
45. Operating improvements (pull signs, etc.)
❑
❑
MADE BY OPERATION
46. Wettable Acre Determination
❑
❑
1
47. Evaluate WAD certification/rechecks
❑
❑
48. Crop oval uationlrecommendations
❑
❑
2.
49. Drainage worklevaluation
❑
❑
50. Land shaping, subsoiling, aeration, etc.
51. Runoff control, stormwater diversion, etc.
❑
❑
❑
❑
3
52. Buffer improvements
❑
❑
53. Field measurements(GPS, surveying, etc.)
❑
❑
4.
54. Mortality BMPs
❑
❑
55. Waste operator education (NPDES)
❑
❑
5.
56. Operation & maintenance education
❑
❑
57. Record keeping education
❑
❑
6.
58. Croplforage management education
❑
❑
59. Soil and/or waste sampling education
❑
❑
03/10/03

Facility Number ® - 07 Date: 1 1218103
MMENTS:
Waste plan amended 8/27/02 to include cotton tract 585 fields 1-8 and tract 586 fieldsl-2. Pan rate for cotton is 56 Ibslacre.
]eficit 1,086x1000 gallons
Waste analysis dated 9/17/03 nitrogen is 0.14 Ibs11000 gallons
Feb 03 nitrogen is 1.2 Ibs/1000 gallons
'Soil test dated 3/21103 Lime applied to sample 007 at rate of one ton per acre. Cu and Zn within guidelines.
?2. Waste plan needs to be amended to include coastal bermuda hay with pan rates and window. Contact tech spec.
18. Missing waste analysis to cover irrigation events on coastal bermuda for July 2003 and on rye for 2003 (out of crop
wndow ).
`Commercial fertilizer deducted from potatoes on IRR2.
18. Missing waste analysis to cover irrigation events on rye fo Nov. 2002
`Lagoon level is recorded weekly with drops in lagoon consistent with irrigation events
TECHNICAL SPECIALIST IMartin McLawhom
SIGNATURE
Date Entered:
12/16/03 1 Entered By: Imartin McLawhorn
3 03/10/03

Michael F. Easley, Governor
William G. Ross Jr., Secretary
North Carolina Department of Environment and Natural Resources
Alan W. Mimek, P.E. Director
Division of Water Quality
January 14, 2004
Mr. Jack Respess
Jack Respess Farm
25556 Hwy 264 E
Pantego, NC 27860
SUBJECT: NOTICE OF DEFICIENCY
Animal Feedlot Operation Compliance Inspection
Jack Respess Farm
Facility No. 94-07
Washington County
Dear Mr. Respess:
Enclosed please find a copy of the Compliance Site Inspection (as viewed in the DWQ database) conducted at the referenced facility
by the Division of Water Quality from the Washington Regional Office. Please read this inspection and keep it with all other
documents pertaining to your animal operation for future inspections.
In general, these inspections included verifying that: (1) the farm has a Certified Animal Waste Management Plan (CAWMP); (2) the
farm is complying with requirements of the State Rules 15 NCAC 2H.0217, Senate Bill 1217, and the Certified Animal Waste
Management Plan; (3) the farm operation's waste management system is being operated properly under the direction of a Certified
Operator, (4) the required records are being kept; and (5) there are no signs of seepage, erosion, and/or runoff. The following
deficiencies were noted during the inspection:
During the compliance inspection it was noted that there were waste applications made in October of 2002 on myegrass. fields 7 &
8, thai did not have a current waste analysis. In accordance with condition III, item 4 of your General Permit, an analysis of animal
waste shall be conducted as close to the time of application as practical and at least within 60 days (before or after) of date of
application. The analysis shall include the following parameters: Nitrogen, Phosphorus, Zinc and Copper., . -
Asa reminder, please note the following comments, which are conditions of the Certified Animal Waste Management Plan and the
General Permit; therefore, these items must be implemented:
cp The magnum waste level in lagoons/storage ponds shall not exceed that specified in the CAWMP. At a minimum, maximum waste
level for waste for lagoons/storage ponds must not exceed the level that provides adequate storage to contain 25 year, 24 hour storm
event plus an additional foot of structural freeboard
W An analysis of the liquid animal waste from the lagoon shall be conducted as close to the time of application as practical and at least
within 60 days (before or after) of the date of application. This analysis shall include the following parameters: Nitrogen,
Phosphorus, Zinc and Copper.
(p Soil analysis is required annually. Lime is to be applied to each receiving crop as recommended by the soil analysis.
q) The following records are required: off -site solids removal, maintenance, repair, wastetsoil analysis and land irrigation records.
These records should be maintained by the facility owner/manager in chronological and legible form for a minimum of three years.
cp Land application rates shall be in accordance with the CAWMP: In no case shall land application rates exceed the Plant Available
Nitrogen M&n rate for the receiving crop or result in runoff during any given Mlication.
cp All grassed waterways shall have a stable ou-tict with adequate capacity to prevent ponding or flooding damages. The outlet can be
another vegetated channel, an earth ditch, stabilization structure, or other suitable outlets.
cp It is suggested not a requirement, to keep crop yield information for future use to update your. waste management plan You will
need three years of crop yield data before your plan can be updated
cp The OIC has the duties to ensure that waste is applied in accordance with the CAWMP and General Permit by properly managing,
supervising and documenting daily operation and maintenance... The OIC also has the responsibility to certify monitoring and
reporting information. The failure of an 01C to perform his/her duties can result in a letter of reprimand, suspension, of certification,
or revocation of certificates.
�V"
943 Washinaton Snuare Mall Washington. NC 27889 1252m 946-6481 (Teleahonem 1252) 946-9215 (Fax) Customer Service

Page 2
Jack Respess Farm
Facility No. 94-07
For your information, any swine facility that has a discharge to surface waters of the State will have to apply for a National Pollutant
Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) permit with the Division of Water Quality, effective January 1, 2001.
Thank you for your assistance and cooperation during the inspection. If you have any questions, please contact me at 252-946-6481,
ext. 208 or your Technical Specialist.
Sincerely,
Scott Vinson
Environmental Engineer
cc: Washington County SWCD Office
DSWC-WaRO
DWQ Central Files
WaRO
.iSAV Files

]Type of Visit OO Compliance Inspection O Operation Review O Lagoon Evaluation
Reason for Visit O Routine O Complaint O Follow up O Emergency Notification O Other ❑ Denied Access
Facility Number 9q 7 Date of Visit: 091D4/20D3 Time: 9:05
0 Not Q erational 0 Below Threshold
N Permitted N Certified GConditionally Certified © Registered Date Last Operated or Above Threshold:........... ..............
Farm Name. da Ck.RC5.j1eUXUJU......................................................................_........... County: W-85hintall .................................... WaRlr?........
OwnerName: dACli......................................... Rcspem ....................................................... Phone No: 919-244015..-------•.................................................
Mailing Address: 25.55.Ylty.2C.4..>a................ .............................. .8jRjCeQ.NC ........................................................... VAN .............
Facility Contact: .............................................................................. Title. Phone No:
Onsite Representative: J.a&Rgspc,;s.......................................................................•--..... Integrator: LJL.Afta..&SQU, =l.....................................
Certified Operator:jagk C.................................... ftapvS's............................................ Operator Certification Number: a.7.3.6.6.............................
Location of Farm:
.ocated on the eastside of NCSR 1127, approx. 2.0 miles north of intersection with Hwy 45 and 99.
® Swine ❑ Poultry ❑ Cattle ❑ Horse Latitude 35 • 44 Du Longitude F 7G • 3ti I V Iu
Design Current
Swine Capacity Population
❑ Wean to Feeder
-
N Feeder to Finish
-_ 2000 -
0
❑ 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 I I :d
❑ Other _.
Total'Design Capacity 2,000
Total SSLW
Number of Lagoons 3 ❑ Subsurface Drains Present 110 Lagoon Area 10 Spray Field Area
Holding Ponds / Solid Traps ❑ 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 yes, notify D WQ) ❑ Yes ❑ No
- • c. If discharge is'observed, what is the estimated- flow in gaypiin?
d. Does discharge --bypass a lagoon system? (If yes, notify DWQ) ❑ Yes ,❑ No
2. Is there evidence of past discharge from any part of the operation?. - - - = ❑ Yes N No
3. Were there any adverse impacts or potential adverse impacts to the Waters of the State other than from a discharge'
Waste Collection & Treatment --
4. Is storage capacity (freeboard plus storm storage) less than adequate? ❑ Spillway
Structure 1 Structure 2 Structure 3 Structure 4 Structure 5
Identifier: ......... P.rimarv..... Primary Final
El Yes N No
El Yes N No
Structure 6
.... .......... ............................................................................................. I.,........ ...................................
Freeboard (inches): 19+ 19+
05103101 Continued

Facility Number: 94-7
Date of inspection 09/04/2003
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?
$. 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? ❑ Excessive Ponding ❑ PAN ❑ Hydraulic Overload
12. Crop type Corn, Soybeans, Wheat Cotton Irish Potatoes
❑ Yes
® No p
❑ Yes
® No
❑ Yes
® No
❑ Yes
® No
❑ Yes
® No
❑ Yes
® No
❑ Yes
® No
13. Do the receiving crops differ with those designated in the Certified Animal Waste Management Plan (CAWMP)? ® Yes ❑ No
14. a) Does the facility lack adequate acreage for land application? ❑ Yes ❑ No
b) Does the facility need a wettable acre determination? Cl Yes ❑ No
c) This facility is pended for a wettable acre determination? ❑ Yes ❑ No
15. Does the receiving crop need improvement?
16. Is there a lack of adequate waste application equipment?
Re aired Records & Documents
17. Fail to have Certificate of Coverage & General Permit or other Permit readily available?
IS. Does the facility fail to have all components of the Certified Animal Waste Management Plan readily available?
(ie/ WUP, checklists, design, maps, etc.)
19. Does record keeping need -improvement? (ie/ irrigation, freeboard, waste analysis & soil sample reports) . .
20. -'Is facility not in compliance with any applicable setback criteria in effect at the time of design?
21. Did the facility fail to have a actively certified operator in charge?
22. Fail to notify regional DWQ of emergency situations as required by General Permit?
(ie/ discharge, freeboard problems, over application)
23. Did Reviewer/Inspector fail to discuss review/inspection with on -site representative?
24. Does facility require a follow-up visit by same agency?
25. Were any additional problems noted which cause noncompliance of the Certified AWMP?
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes
® No
®-Yes
❑ No.
❑ Yes
® No —-_
❑ Yes
El
® No
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes ® No
© No violations or deficiencies were noted during this visit. You will receive no further correspondence about this visit.
Comments ("refer to guesi�on #} Explainany YES answers and/or any recomu�endatrons or any other comments�'`_u
Use drawings of faciUty to better explain situations pages as4necessary} }r
4(use�addtttonal ❑ Fteid Copy ❑ Fusal Notes
;, u'"J �.
.,--
13. Need to talk with Technical Specialist Rufus Crooms about adding Coastal Bermuda to WUP as well as adding corn, wheat
+
& soybean back to the plan. A new WUP dated 8/19/02 by Mn Croom only gives cotton and potaotes for crops.
Reviewer/Inspector Name Scott Vinson . Entered by: Portia Peaden
_
Reviewer/Inspector Signature: Date:
O5103101 Continued

Facility Number: 94-7 Date of Inspection U9/04/2003
t
Odor issues
26. Does the discharge pipe from the confinement building to the storage pond or lagoon fail to discharge at/or below [:]Yes []No
liquid level of lagoon or storage pond with no agitation?
27. Are there any dead animals not disposed of properly within 24 hours? ❑ Yes ® No
28. Is there any evidence of wind drift during land application? (i.e. residue on neighboring vegetation, asphalt, ❑ Yes ® No
roads, building structure, and/or public property)
29. Is the land application spray system intake not located near the liquid surface of the lagoon? ❑ Yes ®No
30. Were any major maintenance problems with the ventilation fan(s) noted? (i.e. broken fan belts, missing or
or broken fan blade(s), inoperable shutters, etc.) ❑ Yes ® No
31. Do the animals feed storage bins fail to have appropriate cover? ❑ Yes ® No
32. Do the flush tanks lack a submerged fill pipe or a permanent/temporary cover? ❑ Yes ❑ No
Waste report dated 2/28/03 with 1.2 lbs N11000 gal.
Soils analysis dated 3/21/03 with one sample of 1T/ac lime required with lime applied. Copper and Zinc within acceptable
range.
19. Applications were made in October of 2002 on ryegrass on fields 7 & 8 that did not have a current waste analysis.
Remember to try and take a waste sample within 60 days before or after all waste application events. Plenty of PAN
balance left on ryegrass. No overapplication noted.
' Need to take another waste sample as soon as possible to cover irrigation events on Bermuda that were made in July 2003.
15. Newly established Bermuda crop is'overgrow with bullgrass and'weeds but bec_a_use of neighboring cotton fields unable to
irk --this-" ear. Remember to spray next year before cotton
III
05103101

Type of Visit O Compliance Inspection O Operation Review O Lagoon Evaluation
Reason for Visit OO Routine O Complaint O Follow up O Emergency Notification O Other ❑ Denied Access
Facility Number 94 7 Date of Visit: 7-1-21102 Time: 1335
O Not Operational O Below Threshold
® Permitted N Certified 0 Conditionally Certified [3 Registered Date Last Operated or Above Threshold: ...............
Farm Name: Jack2cal s..Fatm....................................... ........... ......................... ...... County: Wwjtj thtm.................................... WaKO........
Owner Name: Jack .......... ................. .Resp:ess..................... ........ ........ _.............. Phone No: W:943-24.19L........................ ........ ......................
MailingAddress: 7.5556Hwy.jfAE................................................................................ PaidcAuM.......... ...... .................. I....................... 267860 .............
FaciUtyContact: .............................................................................. Title:................................................................ Phone No:...................................................
Onsite Representative: Steye.Jhffi ................... ........ ..... ....................... .............................. Integrator: 1nd ttWrRt...................................................I........
Certified Operator: ,5kI7the.1l A ............................. jw.......... .......... ............................. Operator Certification Number:,17,3S,S.......... ........ .......
....
Location of Farm:
Located on the eastside of NCSR 1127, approx. 2.0 miles north of intersection with Hwy 45 and 99. L
w
® Swine ❑ Poultry ❑ Cattle ❑ Horse Latitude Longitude
... ...............
De§� Csrrent Deal Current -a
.::.:::......................I�................... ........
....................................::................._.I ...._..............................................:..:...................1..._..._..._.....................
::: `-Po elation':=i Ca :::...:.:°: Pn ula on
write' ............ .... .....Ca :Po alateon ...:
❑ Wean to Feeder
® Feeder to Finish
2000
700
❑ Farrow to Wean
❑ Farrow to Feeder
❑ Farrow to Finish
❑ Gilts
❑ Boars
U
❑ Layer ❑Dairy
? ❑ Non -Layer ❑Nan -Dairy
❑ Other
-Totat Design Capacity:: 2,000
Subsurface Drains Present
No Liquid Waste
Lagoon Area I❑ Spray Field Area
Discharges & Stream Impacts
L Is any discharge observed from any part of the operation?
❑ Yes ®No
Discharge originated at: ❑ Lagoon ❑ Spray Field ❑ Other
a. If discharge is observed, was the conveyance man-made? ❑ Yes ❑ No
b. If discharge is observed, did it reach Water of the State? (If yes_ notity DWQ) ❑ Yes ❑ No
c. If discharge is observed, what is the estimated flow in gal/min?
d. Does discharge bypass a Lagoon systeur? (If yes, notify DWQ) ❑ Yes ❑ No
2. Is there evidence of past discharge from any part of the operation?. ❑ Yes ® No
3. Were there any adverse impacts or potential adverse impacts to the Waters of the State other than from a discharge? ❑ Yes N No
Waste Collection & Treatment
4. Is storage capacity (freeboard plus storm storage) less than adequate? ❑ Spillway ❑ Yes N No
Structure 1 Structure 2 Structure 3 Structure 4 Structure 5 Structure 6
Identifier: .......... jtrintW.......... ........swAwdaty.....................fiBA.............................._......................._.. ,
Freeboard(inches): ._.._......... 4.8............... ............... 36............... ................ M............... ............ ....................... ............. ......................

05103101
Facility Number- 94-7
Date of Inspection 7-1-2002
5. Are there anv 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 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? ❑ Excessive Ponding ❑ PAN ❑ Hydraulic Overload
12. Crop type Cara, Soybeans, Wheat Cotton
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?
Renuired Records & Documents
17. Fail to have Certificate of Coverage & General Permit or other Permit readily available?
18. Does the facility fail to have all componeuts of the Certified Animal Waste Management Plan readily available?
(ie/ WUP, checklists, design, maps, etc.)
19. Does record keeping need improvement? (ie/ irrigation, Gceboard, 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?
Continued
❑ Yes
® No
❑ Yes
® No
❑ Yes
N No
❑ Yes
N No
❑ Yes
N No
❑ Yes
N No
❑ Yes
N No
® Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes N No
❑ Yes N No
❑ Yes N No
❑ Yes N No
❑ Yes N No
❑ Yes N No
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes N No
❑ Yes N No
❑ Yes N No
25. Were any additional problems noted which cause noncompliance of the Certified AWMP? ❑ Yes ® No
0 No violations or deficiencies were noted during this visit. You will receive no further correspondence about this visit.
❑ Field Copy ❑ Final Notes
Primary gravity feeds to lift station; pumped up to secondary structure that gravity feeds to final stage structure. Mr. Halls pumps
inuirity from primary to secondary and bypasses lift station. Waste levels are down due to operation being partially populated and drought
Lagoon level records are complete for lagoon #t3 only (all else is gravity -fed and not required to be documented).
Last waste analysis dated 2-26-02 at 2.4 lbs PAN11000 gal.
Soils report dated in 2002, with pH, copper and zinc levels within acceptable range
)MMENTS CONTINUED ON PAGE 3
Reviewerllnspector Name p;
Reviewer/Inspector Signature:
Date:

OSIO3101 Continued
Facility Number: 94--7 Bate of Inspection 7-1-2002
Odor Issues
26. Does the discharge pipe from the confinement building to the storage pond or lagoon fail to discharge at/or below
liquid level of lagoon or storage pond with no agitation?
27. Are there any dead animals not disposed of properly within 24 hours?
28. Is there any evidence of wind drift during land application? (i.e. residue on neighboring vegetation, asphalt,
roads, building structure, and/or public property)
29. Is the land application spray system intake not located near the liquid surface of the lagoon?
30. Were any major maintenance problems with the ventilation fan(s) noted? (i.e. broken fan belts, missing or
or broken fan blade(s), inoperable shutters, etc.)
31. Do the animals feed storage bins fail to have appropriate cover?
32. Do the flush tanks lack a submerged fill pipe or a permanenthemporary cover?
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes ❑ No
13. Waste plan is dated 1-27-97 with an overall PAN deficit of 3050 lbs. Cotton has not been added to plan to -date. Plan is set up on a
o year rotation of corm, soybeans and wheat. NOTE: Rufus Groom with NRCS did relay that he was currently working on the waste
IRR2 are set up for cotton at 66 lb/acre per recommendation by Rufus Croom, Washington Co. NRCS Technical Specialist. Mr. Hall
s made only one application on the cotton in April.
Waste was applied to ryegrass with the ryegrass cut and baled according to Mr. Hall
Mr. Hall did relay that after the current group of hogs, he would no longer be leasing the farm

�• F WA Michael F_ Easley, Governor
r `OHO RQG William G. Ross Jr., Secretary
North Carolina Departrnerit of Environment and Natural Resources
co Gregory Thorpe, Acting Director
> Division of Water Quality
March 25, 2002
Mr. Jack Respess
25556 Hwy 264 E
Pantego, NC 27860
Subject_ Notice of Deficiency
Animal Compliance Evaluation Site Inspection
Jack Respess Farms
Facility No. 94-7
it � �:,IS ME
Enclosed please find a copy of the Compliance Site Inspection (as viewed in the DWQ database) conducted at the
referenced facility by the Division of Water Quality from the Washington Regional Office. Please read this
inspection and keep it with all other documents pertaining to your animal operation for future inspections.
In general, these inspections included verifying that (1) the farm has a Certified Animal Waste Management Plan
(CAWMP); (2) the farm is complying with requirements of the State Rules 15 NCAC 2H.0217, Serrate Bill 1217, and
the Certified Animal Waste Management Plan; (3) the farm operation's waste management system is being operated
properly under the direction of a Certified Operator; (4) the required records are being kept; and (5) there are no signs
of seepage, erosion, and/or rtmo$ The following deficiencies were noted during the inspection:
The c orlon crop that has been used for waste application has not been implemented into the Waste Utilization Plan.
Since December 6, 2000 it has been intended for a cotton crop to be added to the WUP, however as of the date of
the last inspection, February 27, 2002, cotton has not been officially added to the plan. On Mares 14, 2002 I met
with Mr. Rufus Croom, technical specialist with Washington Co. NRCS, to discuss the need for the cotton crop to
be added to the WUP. Both he and yourself were to meet to finalize this act. Please respond to this letter as to
when this has occurred or to when it will occur. In accordance with condition lI, item 2 of your General Permit, a
vegetative cover shall be mainffiined on all land application fields and buffers in accordance with the CAWMP.
No waste may be applied upon fields not included in the CAWMP.
As a reminder, please note the following comments, which are conditions of the Certified Animal Waste Management
Plan and the General Permit; therefore, these items must be implemented:
(p The maximum waste level in lagoons/storage ponds shall not exceed that specified in the CAWMP. At a
minimum, maximum waste level for waste for lagoons/storage pounds must not exceed the level that provides
adequate storage to contain 25 year, 24 hour storm event plus an additional foot of structural freeboard
q) An analysis of the liquid animal waste from the lagoon shall be conducted as close to the time of application as
practical and at least within 60 days (before or after) of the date of application. This analysis shall include the
following parameters: Nitrogen, Phosphorus, Zinc and Copper.
9 Soil analysis is required annually. Lime is to be applied to each receiving crop as recommended by the soil
analysis.
(p The following records are required: off -site solids removal, maintenance, repair, waste/soil analysis and land
irrigation records. These records should be maintained by the facility owner/manager in chronological and legible
form for a minimum of three years.
(p Land application rates shall be in accordance with the CAWMP. In no case shall land Mplication rates exceed the
Plant Available Nitrogen (PAN) rate for the receiving coon or result in runoff daring anv given anplication.
q) All grassed waterways shall have a stable outlet with adequate capacity to prevent ponding or flooding damages.
The outlet can be another vegetated channel, an earth ditch, stabilization structure, or other suitable outlets.
(p It is sugg steel, not a recruirement, to keep crop yield information for future use to update your waste management
plan. You will need three years of crop yield data before your plan can be updated
NCDEKr'
R4:1 Wamhinnstnn SntlarP Mall Waehinntnn Nr'. 97RFM f7r,7) Q46-WI (TPlwihnnal 052) QM979-r, eFaxl rugtnmPr gPx%Arp

Page 2
Bishop Farm f"1
Facility a 7=41 �
(p The OIC has the duties to ensure that waste is applied in accordance with the CAWW and General Permit by
properly managing, supervising, and documenting daily operation and maintenance. The OIC also has the
responsilsility to certify monitoring and reporting information. The failure of an OIC to perform hislher duties can
result in a letter of reprimand, suspension, of certification, or revocation of certificates.
For your information, any swine facility that has a discharge to surface waters of the State will have to apply for a
National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) permit with the Division of Water Quality, effective
January I, 200 L -
Thank you for your assistance and cooperation during the inspection. If you have any questions, please contact me
at 252-946-6481, ext 208 or your Technical Specialist
Sincerely,
Scott Vinson
Environmental Engineer
Cc: NCDSWC-WaRO (w/o attachments)
jWaRO Files
JSAV Files

Al
fie]
for Visit p Routine p Complaint p Follow up p Emergency Notification p Other
p Denied Access
Facility Number Date of Visit: F 2/27/2002 Ti�rtc: 11:05
p of Opera-hpo—nal p Below Thresh old
■ Permitted ■ Certified p Conditionally Certified p Registered Date Last Operated or Above Threshold: .................. ......
Farm Name: Jack Respess Farms County: WasWnglon.................. .....-....... WaRO........
Owner Name: Jack Respess Phone No: 919-943-2018
MailingAddress: 2555fi.Ham.264.L................................................................................ Famtego.A.c ............................................................ 178,6.Q ..............
FacilityContact: ...............................................................................Title:................................................ ..... Phone No:
Onsite Representative: Steve.Hall.............................................. ....... _............................. Integrator:
Certified Operator: Ste{then.A............................ Hall.................................................... Operator Certification Number: 1.7.355.............................
Location of Farm:
® Swine p Poultry p Cattle p Horse Latitude 0 4 64 Longitude • 4 C�44
ti DeSIgII; Cnrrent Design Currents 3 c Desngn a Curxent
POuI g x �attle $ s r�
FVInE _@a ac Pn u�tEon �Y.Ca act Po _ulatlon _ Capacity �,Populatton
Layer Dairy
' p Non -Layer p Non -Dairy
® F:
P❑ Omer ,
�
Total design Capacity 2,000
r
g f
• _ Total SSLW 270,000_
Nu bet of La oohs �' 'J ❑Subsurface rains resent 13 Lagoon Area � pray ie rea
Holdjng`Ponds1Soltd,.T �� p a LiquidWaste anagement system
❑ can to 'ceder
® ee er to mns
r.1arrow to can
p Farrow to Feeder
p Farrow to Finish
p Gilts
p Boars
Discharp,es & Stream Impacts
l . is any discharge observed from any part of the operation? p Yes ® No
Discharge originated at: 0 Lagoon p Spray Field ❑ Other
a. If discharge is observed, was the conveyance man-made? p Yes p No
b. If discharge is observed, did it reach Water of the State? (If yes, notify DWQ) ❑ Yes p No
c. If discharge is observed, what is the estimated flow in gal/min?
d. Does discharge bypass a lagoon system? (If yes, notify DWQ) p Yes p No
2. Is there evidence of past discharge from any part of the operation? p Yes Ig No
3. Were there any adverse impacts or potential adverse impacts to the Waters of the State other than from a discharge? © Yes M No
"Paste Collection S Treatment
4. Is storage capacity (freeboard plus storm storage) less than adequate? ❑ Spillway p Yes ® No
Structure 1 Structure 2 Structure ; Structure 4 Structure 5 Structure 6
Identifier: Pzima:r.......... ..........P=ijzy.......... S0FcQjjdazy........
Freeboard(inches): ................19................................12..............................6a............................................................................................................................

Facility um er: 94_7 Date of Inspection 1 2727/2002 _.,.
5. Are there any immediate threats to the integrity of any of the structures observed? (ie/ trees, severe erosion,
❑ Yes
N No
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 .
p Yes
H No
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?
p Yes
® No
9. Do any stuctures lack adequate, gauged markers with required maximum and minimum liquid level
elevation markings?
❑ Yes
® No
Waste Application
10. Are there any buffers that need maintenance/improvement?
❑ Yes
® No
11. Is there evidence of over application? p Excessive Ponding p PAN p Hydraulic Overload
❑ Yes
®No
12. Crop type Corn, Soybeans, Wheat Cotton
13. Do the receiving crops differ with those designated in the Certified Animal Waste Management Plan (CAWMP)?
® Yes
p No
14. a) Does the facility lack adequate acreage for land application?
El Yes
p No
b) Does the facility need a wettable acre determination?
❑ Yes
p No
c) This facility is pended for a wettable acre determination?
❑ Yes
p No
15. Does the receiving crop need improvement?
❑ Yes
®No
16. Is there a lack of adequate waste application equipment?
p Yes
®No
Required Records & Documents
IT Nail to have Certificate of Coverage & General Permit or other Permit readily available?
❑ Yes
®No
18. Does the facility fail to have all components of the Certified Animal Waste Management Plan readily available?
(ie/ WUP, checklists, design, maps, etc.)
❑ Yes
®No
19. Does record keeping need improvement? (ie/ irrigation, freeboard, waste analysis & soil sample reports)
❑ Yes
®No
20. is facility not in compliance with any applicable setback criteria in effect at the time of design?
p Yes
®No
21. Did the facility fail to have a actively certified operator in charge?
Cl Yes
®No
22. Fail to notify regional DWQ of emergency situations as required by General Permit?
(ie/ discharge, freeboard problems, over application)
p Yes
®No
23. Did Reviewer/Inspector fail to discuss review/inspection with on -site representative?
❑ Yes
® No
24. Does facility require a follow-up visit by same agency?
© Yes
®No
25. Were any additional problems noted which cause noncompliance of the Certified A WMP?
❑ Yes
®No
In o violations or ileficiencies were noted during this visit You will receive no further correspon73ence about this visit.
p Field Copy ❑ Final Notes
Cotton crop has still not been included in WUP. Meeting Ruins Croom on 3/14/02 to discuss plan and all needed admen
Soil anlysis dated 1/9/01 with minimal to no lime required. Soil analysis for 2002 have been sent off and awaiting reply _
No irrigation events since last inspection on 10/19/01.
Awaiting most current waste analysis for spring application.
Reviewer/Inspector Name `S
Reviewer/Inspector Signature:
Date: % i f ., -I

• 05103101
ace ty Number: 94_7 Date of Inspection
Continued
Odor Issues
26. Does the discharge pipe from the confinement building to the storage pond or lagoon fail to discharge at/or below 13 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? 13 Yes ® No
28. Is there any evidence of wind drift during land application? (i.e. residue on neighboring vegetation, asphalt, p Yes ® No
roads, building structure, and/or public property) .01
29. Is the land application spray system intake not located near the liquid surface of the lagoon? p Yes ® No
30. Were any major maintenance -problems with the ventilation fan(s) noted? (i.e. broken fan belts, missing or
or broken fan blade(s), inoperable shutters, etc.) p Yes.,® No
3I. Do the animals feed storage bins fail to have appropriate cover? p Yes ® No
32. Do the flush tanks lack a submerged fill pipe or a permanent/temporary cover? p Yes p No
NA
^�
OR —
NO TA —
3-1
x y'y,.�['3',,�4 ]hi-•.- a j7�y, ,a,Y�,.� n tom.-,,),'
•.C:/'v'°'t~";P+"�AAif'.a�i•�1�9 r3 -r�L. '-n• -.
�} •� �"-_-,�- �� � l 2r � `r4r y t �'��c. - - -v �3. -T-c �., r �� t � �, � �yi�-� �sf iY t� f,a - s
J�
x` 3•- �8 �� ysa'a..� ���e'-a 5 ': s - wk _"s'_ ,.ice,. _ "s-E.'a•.a'z� ` - _
`�; �. L M ;n.�'
_ �' - r, _�, �--_ "�` �'r7- �i `` �-+.�� ��.-�; SC+�" is '�+_`•�.1��,�-.... � :--.ter � 3 .- '
��
ktt
'Ze! ri
41
n.,�.. �> ,�} ..«_ ,, � -� -sr -� s ''-ri.sr' Tart -•� :Ys _-.,. s

r
Type of Visit O Compliance Inspection O Operation Review O Lagoon Evaluation I
(Reason for Visit O Routine Q Complaint O Follow up O Emergency Notification O Other ❑ Denied Access
Facility Number
Date of Visit: 10/19121101 Time: 11:15 am Printed on: 10/31/2001
94 7
rO Not Operational Q Below Threshold
® Permitted ■ Certified Q Conditionally Certified E3 Registered Date Last Operated or Above Threshold:
Farm Name: Usli.ReSpmF.aL11 ........................................................................ County: 1'l' SItU0.gt1Ri1.................................. 1 RQ........
Owner Name: JAC ........... _... R�spt S_- _.� ..... ._,. __.. _ Phone No: 9V-Q4
Mailing Address: 2555 1xY.Zk4 F........_.....-..... _............................ _........_---....'rallImAc........................................................... 228.60-.-------
Facility Contact- Says -Hall.•. ................ ......................... Title: Ltm=........ ......... . ..... ................ ........ Phone No:
Onsite Representative: ,kcX.HAlI . . _._ ........... Integrator: .......................................... ........ ....
Certified Operator: Sjcpjjc&A...`................... Haig .................... ...__....................... ._ Operator Certification Number:17.355 _..__.. __.......
Location of Farm:
Located on the eastside of NCSR 1127, approx. 2.0 miles north of intersection with Hwy 45 and 99.
® Swine ❑ Poultry © Cattle ❑ Morse Latitude �• �� �" Longitude �• �� 0"
Discharges & Stream Impacts
1. Is any discharge observed from any part of the operation? ❑ Yes ® No
Discharge originated at: ❑ Lagoon ❑ Spray Field ❑ Other
a. If discharge is observed, was the conveyance man-made? ❑Yes [:]No
b. If discharge is observed, did it reach Water of the State? (If yes, notify DWQ) ❑ Yes ❑ No
c. If discharge is observed, what is the estimated flow in gal/min?
d. Does discharge bypass a lagoon system? (If yes, notify DWQ) ❑ Yes ❑ No
2. Is there evidence of past discharge from any part of the operation? ❑ Yes ® No
3. Were there any adverse impacts or potential adverse impacts to the Waters of the State other than from a discharge? ❑ Yes ® No
Waste Collection & Treatment
4. Is storage capacity (freeboard plus storm storage) less than adequate? ❑ SpiIlway ❑ Yes ® No
Structure I Structure 2 Structure 3 Structure 4 Structure 5 Structure 6
Identifier: ........ P.aimary ........ ......... Pommy......... .......Secondary---.--- ................................... .... ............................... .....................
Freeboard (inches): 19+ 19+ 63

05103101
Facility Number. 94-7 Date of Inspection 10/19/2001
Continued
! . i
Printed on: 10/31/2001
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 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
I0. Are there any buffers that need maintenance/improvement?
I I.- Is there evidence of over application? ❑ Excessive Ponding ❑ PAN ❑ HydrauIic Overload
12. Crop type Corn, Soybeans, Wheat Cotton (not in plan yet)
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes ® No
13. Do the receiving crops differ with those designated in the Certified Animal Waste Management Plan (CAWMP)? to Yes ❑ No
14. a) Does the facility lack adequate acreage for land application? ❑ Yes ❑ No
b) Does the facility need a wettable acre determination? ❑ Yes ❑ No
c) This facility is pended for a wettable acre determination? ❑ Yes ❑ No
15. Does the receiving crop need improvement?
16. Is there a lack of adequate waste application equipment?
Required Records & Documents
17. Fail to have Certificate of Coverage & General Permit or other Permit readily available?
18. Does the facility fail to have all components of the Certified Animal Waste Management PIan readily available?
(ie/ WiJP, 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?
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes ®No
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes ®No
❑ Yes ® No
25. Were any additional problems noted which cause noncompliance of the Certified AWMP? ❑ Yes ® No
0 No violations or deficiencies were noted during this visit. You will receive no further correspondence about this visit.
❑ Field Copy ❑ Final Notes
* Waste analysis dated 6/4/01 at 0.81 lbs N/l000 gals.; 3/6/01 at 1.6 lbs N/1000 gals.
* Soils analysis dated 1/9/01 with minimal to no lime required.
* 13. Rufus Croom has been planning to write cotton into waste plan since 12/6/00 when Rufus did last inspection.
Plan has not been revised yet.
Reviewer/Inspector Name "` `" ` `
p Scott'.Vinson,-.� �-.s � entered >jy Ann Tyndall;'.
Reviewer/Inspector Signature: _ ,,,�� Date:

?s103101
Facility Number. 94-7
Date of Inspection 10/19/2001
Continued
Printed on: 10/31/2001
Odor Issues
26. Does the discharge pipe from the confinement building to the storage pond or lagoon fail to discharge attor below ❑ Yes ❑ No
liquid level of lagoon or storage pond with no agitation?
27. Are there any dead animals not disposed of properly within 24 hours? ❑ Yes ® No
28. Is there any evidence of wind drift during land application? (i.e. residue on neighboring vegetation, asphalt, ❑ Yes ®No
. roads, building structure, and/or public property)
29. Is the land application spray system intake not located near the liquid surface of the lagoon? ❑ Yes ®No
30. Were any major maintenance problems with the ventilation fan(s) noted? (i.e. broken fan belts, missing or
or broken fan blade(s), inoperable shutters, etc.) ❑ Yes ® No
31. Do the animals feed storage bins fail to have appropriate cover? ❑ Yes ®No
32. Do the flush tanks lack a submerged fill pipe or a permanent/temporary cover? ❑ Yes ❑ No
J

?D� W A T§
Michael F. Easley
Governor
To: Producer
From: Scott Vinson,
entai Envrronm Engineer
Washington Regional Office
Subject: Animal Compliance Inspection
Year 2001
William G. Ross, Jr., Secretary
Department of Environment and Natural Resources
Kerr T. Stevens
Division of Water Quality
Enclosed please find a copy of the Compliance Site Inspection (as viewed in the DWQ database) conducted at the referenced
facility by the Division of Water Quality from the Washington Regional Office. Please read this inspection and keep it
with all other documents pertaining to your animal operation for future inspections.
In general, these inspections included verifying that: (1) the farm has a Certified Animal Waste Management Plan (CAWMP);
(2) the farm is complying with requirements of the State Rules 15 NCAC 2110217, Senate Bill 1217, and the Certified Animal
Waste Management Plan; (3) the farm operation's waste management system is being operated properly under the direction of a
Certified Operator; (4) the required records are being kept; and (5) there are no signs of seepage, erosion, and/or runoff.
As a reminder, please note the following comments, which are conditions of the Certified Animal Waste Management Plan and
the General Permit; therefore, these items must be implemented:
(p The maximum waste level in lagoons/storage ponds shall not exceed that specified in the CAWMP. At a minimum,
maximum waste level for waste for lagoorWstorage ponds must not exceed the level that provides adequate storage to
contain 25 year, 24 hour storm -event plus an additional foot of structural freeboard.
(p An analysis of the liquid animal waste from the lagoon shall be conducted as close to the time of application as practical and
at least within 60 days (before or after) of the date of application. This analysis shall include the following parameters:
Nitrogen, Phosphorus, Zinc and Copper_
(p Soil analysis is required annually. Lime is to be applied to each receiving crop as recommended by the soil analysis.
(p The following records are required: off -site solids removal, maintenance, repair, waste/soil analysis and land irrigation
records. These records should be maintained by the facility owner/manager in chronological and legible form for a
minimum of three years.
q) Land application rates shall be in accordance with the CAWMP. In no case shall land application rates exceed the Plant
Available Nitrogen (PAN) rate for the receiving crop or result in runoff during any given application.
(p All grassed waterways shall have a stable outlet with adequate capacity to prevent pending or flooding damages. The outlet
can be another vegetated channel, an earth ditch, stabilization structure, or other suitable outlets.
cp It is suwested, not a requirement, to keep crop yield information for future use to update your waste management plan.
You will need three years of crop yield data before your plan can be updated.
For your information, any swine facility that has a discharge to surface waters of the State will have to apply for a National
Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) permit with the Division of Water Quality, effective January 1, 2001.
Thank you for your assistance and cooperation during the inspection. If you have any questions, please contact me at 252-946-
6481, ext. 321 or your Technical Specialist.
Cc: WaRO
SAV Files
943 Washington Square Mail Washington, NC 27889 252-94M-6481 (Telephone) 252-946-9215 (Fax)

pe of Visit O Compliance Inspection O. Operation Review O Lagoon Evaluation
Reason for Visit O Routine O Complaint O Follow up O Emergency Notification O Other ❑ Denied Access
Facility Number 94 Date of Visit: 12/6/2000 Time: 13:30
O Not Operational O Below Threshold
® Permitted ® Certified 0 Conditionally Certified 0 Registered Date Last Operated or Above Threshold: .........................
Farm Name: Jade.Rasp.l;.arms.......................................................................... ......... County: lAshingtM.................................... WARQ........
OwnerName: ,Lack ......................................... Rmcss ....................................................... Phone No: 9.19:141-10.18 ..........................................................
Facility Contact: St.c.n.j all ........................................................Title: Uas.................................................. Phone No: 252.-.9.43=3597 .......................
MailingAddress: 255S6.jjWy..Z6.4.E................................................................................ PRALmAc ........................................................... VAN .............
Onsite Representative:Stcxe.11alll..................................................................................... Integrator:......................................................................................
Certified Operator:,,5Xcphg0.................................. RaJI .................................................... Operator Certification Number:1.73.5$
.............................
Location of Farm:
Located on the eastside of NCSR 1127, approx. 2.0 miles north of intersection with Hwy 45 and 99.
® Swine ❑ Poultry ❑ Cattle ❑ Norse Latitude • 6 « Longitude • &
Discharges & Stream Impacts
1. Is any discharge observed from any part of the operation? ❑ Yes ® No
Discharge originated at: ❑ Lagoon ❑ Spray Field ❑ Other
a. If discharge is observed, was the conveyance man-made? ❑ Yes ❑ No
b. If discharge is observed, did it reach Water of the State? (If yes, notify DWQ) ❑ Yes ❑ No
c. If discharge is observed, what is the estimated flow in gal/min?
d. Does discharge bypass a lagoon system? (If yes, notify DWQ) ❑ Yes ❑ No
2. Is there evidence of past discharge from any part of the operation? ❑ Yes ® No
3. Were there any adverse impacts or potential adverse impacts to the Waters of the State other than from a discharge? ❑ Yes ® No
Waste Collection & Treatment
'4. Is storage capacity (freeboard plus storm storage) less than adequate? ❑ Spillway ❑ Yes ® No
Structure I Structure 2 Structure 3 Structure 4 Structure 5 Structure 6
Identifier: •.......2nd.Stage........ .................................... ................. ............................... ....................... .................................... ....................................
Freeboard (inches): 52

5/00-
Facility Number: 94-7 Date of Inspection F 12/6/2000
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 ❑ Hydraulic Overload
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?
Required Records & Documents
17. Fail to have Certificate of Coverage & General Permit readily available?
18. Does the facility fail to have all components of the Certified Animal Waste Management Plan readily available?
(ie/ WUP, checklists, design, maps, etc.)
19. Does record keeping need improvement? (ie/ irrigation, freeboard, waste analysis & soil sample reports)
20. Is facility not in compliance with any applicable setback criteria in effect at the time of design?
21. Did the facility fail to have a actively certified operator in charge?
22. Fail to notify regional DWQ of emergency situations as required by General Permit?
(ie/ discharge, freeboard problems, over application)
23. Did Reviewer/Inspector fail to discuss review/inspection with on -site representative?
24. Does facility require a follow-up visit by same agency?
25. Were any additional problems noted which cause noncompliance of the Certified AWMP?
�Vto e ' iencie'swere:::o: te:d:d:u:r:.h:g:towioais:or:dc•nts v:i: si:t::: : o: ,::will eveive no furthett
: :: ::: : :: :: :::6 respondenceabnt this:visit.:
13. Need to include cotton into the animal waste management plan.
Continued on back
❑ Yes
® No
❑ Yes
®No
❑ Yes
®No
❑ Yes
® No
❑ Yes
®No
❑ Yes
® No
❑ Yes
❑ No
® Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes ® No
Reviewer/lnspeetor Name Rufus Croom I

Reviewi*Anspector Signature: Date: 5100
Facility Number: 44-7 Date of Inspection 120/2000
Odor Issues
26. Does the discharge pipe from the confinement building to the storage pond or lagoon fail to discharge attor 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 fans) noted? (i.e. broken fan belts, missing or
or broken fan blade(s), inoperable shutters, etc.) ❑ Yes ® No
31. Do the animals feed storage bins fail to have appropriate cover? ❑ Yes I@ No
32. Do the flush tanks lack a submerged fill pipe or a permanent/temporary cover? ❑ Yes ® No

(Type of Visit O Compliance Inspection O Operation Review O Lagoon Evaluation
Reason for Visit O Routine O Complaint O Follow up O Emergency Notification O Other ❑ Denied Access
Date of Visit: 5/12/2000 Time:
Facility Number 94 7
0 Not Operational 0 Below Threshold
® Permitted 0 Certified 0 Conditionally Certified (3 Registered Date Last Operated or Above Threshold:...........
Farm Name:,Tack.RaAaUat'ms................................................................................... County: Washingham .................................... WAR ........
Owner Name: Jack ......................................... Rmcss .......................................... Phone No: 919:9.4�2i1��:.���:�.4,�:�41�......................
Facility Contact: S.k.Y.e.Rall........................................................ Title:.I.c U451M ................................................. Phone No: 251:143-J597........................
MailingAddress: J.7.539.JjWy.264,F.................................................................................091W.c.u..N.0 ........................................................ 2.7.810 .............
ORsite Representative: Sick.c.Hall.................... ......_.. Integrator
Certified Operator: ftphcn.A,,........................... Uayl.................................................... Operator Certification Number:l7.3,5S..............................
Location of Farm:
Located on the eastside of NCSR 1127, approx. 2.0 miles north of intersection with Hwy 45 and 99. +
I•
® Swine ❑ Poultry ❑ Cattle ❑ Horse Latitude �• �° �� Longitude
❑ Wean to Feeder
® Feeder to Finish
2000
1500
❑ Farrow to Wean
❑ Farrow to Feeder
❑ Farrow to Finish
❑ Gilts
❑ Boars
Discharges & Stream Impacts
1. Is any discharge observed from any part of the operation?
❑ Yes No
Discharge originated at: ❑ Lagoon ❑ Spray Field ❑ Other
a. If discharge is observed, was the conveyance man-made? ❑ Yes ® No
b. If discharge is observed, did it reach Water of the State? (If yes, notify DWQ) ❑ Yes 0 No
c. If discharge is observed, what is the estimated flow in gal/min?
d. Does discharge bypass a lagoon system? (If yes, notify DWQ) ❑ Yes 0 No
2. is there evidence of past discharge from any part of the operation? ❑ Yes 0 No
3. Were there any adverse impacts or potential adverse impacts to the Waters of the State other than from a discharge? ❑ Yes 0 No
Waste Collection & Treatment
4. Is storage capacity (freeboard plus storm storage) less than adequate? ❑ Spillway
Structure I Structure 2 Structure 3 Structure 4 Structure 5
Identifier: .......... Pxuna........... ......... Rximary.......... ....... Secundaq....... .................................... ....................................
❑ Yes ® No
Structure 6
Freeboard (inches): 30 30 30
e inn

S/00
Facility Number: 94-7 Date of Inspection 5/12/2000
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 ❑ Hydraulic Overload
12. Crop type Corn, Soybeans, Wheat Cotton
Continued on back
❑ Yes
® No
❑ Yes
® No
❑ Yes
®No
❑ Yes
®No
❑ Yes
® No
❑ Yes
IN No
❑ Yes
®No
13. Do the receiving crops differ with those designated in the Certified Animal Waste Management Plan (CAWMP)? ® Yes ❑ No
14. a) Does the facility lack adequate acreage for land application? ❑ Yes ❑ No
b) Does the facility need a wettable acre determination? ❑ Yes ❑ No
c) This facility is pended for a wettable acre determination? ❑ Yes ❑ No
15. Does the receiving crop need improvement?
❑ Yes
19 No
16. Is there a lack of adequate waste application equipment?
❑ Yes
® No
Required Records & Documents
17. Fail to have Certificate of Coverage & General Permit readily available?
❑ Yes
❑ No
18. Does the facility fail to have all components of the Certified Animal Waste Management Plan readily available?
(ie/ WUP, checklists, design, maps, etc.)
❑ Yes
® No
19. Does record keeping need improvement? (ie/ irrigation, freeboard, waste analysis & soil sample reports)
❑ Yes
®No
20. Is facility not in compliance with any applicable setback criteria in effect at the time of design?
❑ Yes
® No
21. Did the facility fail to have a actively certified operator in charge?
❑ Yes
®No
22. Fail to notify regional DWQ of emergency situations as required by General Permit?
(ie/ discharge, freeboard problems, over application)
❑ Yes
® No
23. Did Reviewer/Inspector fail to discuss review/inspection with on -site representative?
❑ Yes
® No
24. Does facility require a follow-up visit by same agency?
❑ Yes
® No
25. Were any additional problems noted which cause noncompliance of the Certified AWMP?
❑ Yes
19 No
NoViolatious:or deficien.des•were=noted dui kk—this Visit;'Ydu:wip:reeeive nor furthee
: -correspondence about this.visit.::... ....
... .::.:... .::.. ::. ..::
Records available.
In the process of having the waste plan revised to include cotton which has been planted and applied
onto. Was advised that a cotton crop has an allowance of 66 Ibs/ac by Technical Specialist.
Soil analysis available - lime was not required.
Waste analysis: 10/20/99 (0.951bs.); 3/20/00 (1.5 lbs.)
13. l will contact Rufus about your new waste utilization plan.
Continue to manage the farm as you have.
SEE PAGE 3
Reviewer/Inspector Name !Lyn Hardison Entered by Ann Tyndall
77-...-...n+lf..........4..» C:h.. na.. ten• r..an• -..-..

Reviewer/Inspector Signature: Date: 51001
Facility Number: 94-7 Date of Inspection 1 5/12/2000
Odor Issues
26. Does the discharge pipe from the confinement building to the storage pond or lagoon fail to discharge at/or below ❑ Yes ❑ No
liquid level of lagoon or storage pond with no agitation?
27. Are there any dead animals not disposed of properly within 24 hours? ❑ Yes ® No
28. Is there any evidence of wind drift during land application? (i.e. residue on neighboring vegetation, asphalt, ❑ Yes ® No
roads, building structure, and/or public property)
29. Is the land application spray system intake not located near the liquid surface of the lagoon? ❑ Yes ® No
30. Were any major maintenance problems with the ventilation fan(s) noted? (i.e. broken fan belts, missing or
or broken fan blade(s), inoperable shutters, etc.) ❑ Yes ® No
31. Do the animals feed storage bins fail to have appropriate cover? ❑ Yes ® No
32. Do the flush tanks lack a submerged fill pipe or a permanent/temporary cover? ❑ Yes ❑ No
�If you have any questions, contact me at 252-946-6481, extension 318.
ntinue to prepare yourself for the hurricane season.
Sinn

10 Routine 0 Complaint 0 Follow-up of DWQ inspection 0 Follow-up of DSWC review 0 Other
Facility Number 94 7 Date of Inspection 10-27-99
Time of inspection 13:00 24 hr. (hh:mm)
Permitted IN Certified ❑ Conditionally Certified ® Registered 10 Not O erational Date Last Operated:
Farm Name: Jack.fie&p=&Ear=................................................................................... County: Washingtm ..................................... W..aRD........
OwnerName: Jack ......................................... Respesa....... •••..••••••.•••................................ Phone No: 9j9x9.4,tr20j$ ..........................................................
Facility Contact:
Title:
Phone No:
Mailing Address: 25556.i aT.1fi4.E............•.............. ....................... P=1CgQ.NC ........................................................... 7.7860 .............
Onsite Representative: Stephen.Ha;l............................................................................... Integrator: --.
Certified Operator: 5teph=.A�,............................ I ll...................
Location of Farm:
Operator Certification Number:.17.ASS .............................
................................................................................................I--.............--...................................................................................................................................-.................. �
[uteri.oiLihe.caatsidt.of-NCSR..i1.2.7-..appro..2.9.milea.north.of.Wersectian.with.Hw,y..4S.And99......................-.--------....._........_.._.._........
-------------------------------------------------•--.--•..•--.•--•.-••••••••-•••......................••..-•.•••.••-•••••••••••••••...••................•••.••••••••••.•••..........I............................................................................. .
Latitude Longitude
r. Destgn 'Current _ Design Current' Desrgn ` =Current`
Svvune . = ` •- Poalt . _ Cattle
Caiiak" 'Povulation _-r-Y, _ ';-,Capacit-v Population- " . Capacity, - Popolation
❑ Wean to Feeder
® Feeder to Finish
2000
1400
❑ Farrow to Wean
❑ Farrow to Feeder
❑ Farrow to Finish
❑ Gilts
❑ Boars
❑ Other I I -
Total Design Capacity 2,000
- Total SSLW 270,000
Discharees & Stream Impacts
1. Is any discharge observed from any part of the operation?
Discharge originated at: ❑ Lagoon ❑ Spray Field ❑ Other
a. If discharge is observed, was the conveyance man-made`?
b. If discharge is observed, did it reach Water of the State? (If yes. notify DWQ)
c. If discharge is observed, what is the estitnawd flog+• in gal/min?
d. Does discharge bypass a lagoon system? (If yes, notify DWQ)
2. Is there evidence of past discharge from any part of the operation?
3. Were there any adverse impacts or potential adverse impacts to the Waters of the State other than from a discharge?
Waste Collection & Treatment
4. Is storage capacity (freeboard plus storm storage) less than adequate? ❑ Spillway
Structure I Structure 2 Structure 3 Structure 4 Structure 5
Identifier: ...............................
Freeboard (inches): ...............41................
5- Are there any immediate threats to the integrity of any of the structures observed? (ie/ trees, severe erosion,
seepage, etc.)
3/23/99
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes ® No
Structure G
❑ Yes ® No
Continued on back

Facility Number. 94-7 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/itnprovement?
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 maintenancelimprovement?
11. Is there evidence of over application? ❑ Excessive Ponding ❑ PAN
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?
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- rail 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?
kNo�vioiations;tir:deGeieticie W*v 're;noted:during tliii'*W '' Vdii will:re"te' e'no further,
-correspondence about this• visit.' . ' • . ' • ' • ' • ' • '
Printed on 5/10/2000
>Io-n-ss
❑ Yes
® No
❑ Yes
® No
❑ Yes
® No
❑ Yes
®No
❑ Yes
®No
❑ Yes
® No
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes ® No
Comments (refer to: question #)T- Explain any VIES answers and/or any recommendations"or.: anv other comments
.Use drawings of facility to better, explain situations (use additional pages as necessary) - -
eed to send letter. 03-11-99
V,
Crooin
Reviewer/Inspector Name Rufus -
- — —-
RnviPvvPr/lnenPrtnr CianatwrP- 11atP-

., Printed on 6110/2000
Facility Number. 94-7 Date of inspection 10-27-99
Odor Issues
26_
Does the discharge pipe from the confinement building to the storage pond or lagoon fail to discharge at/or below
❑ Yes
❑ No
liquid level of lagoon or storage pond with no agitation?
27.
Are there any dead animals not disposed of properly within 24 hours?
❑ Yes
® No
28.
Is there any evidence of wind drift during land application? (i_e. residue on neighboring vegetation, asphalt,
❑ Yes
® No
roads, building structure, and/or public property)
29.
Is the land application spray system intake not located near the liquid surface of the lagoon?
❑ Yes
® No
30.
Were any major maintenance problems with the ventilation fan(s) noted? (i.e. broken fan belts, missing or
or broken fan blade(s), inoperable shutters, etc.)
❑ Yes
® No
31.
Do the animals feed storage bins fail to have appropriate cover?
❑ Yes
® No
32.
Do the flush tanks lack a submerged fill pipe or a permanent/temporary cover?
❑ Yes
❑ No
j Additional Comments and/orDrawings: . - _

State of North Carolina
Department of Environment and
Natural Resources
Division of Water Quality
James B. Hunt, Jr., Governor
Wayne McDevitt, Secretary
Kerr T. Stevens, Director
May 7, 1999
Mr. Jack Respess
Jack Respess Farms
25556 Hwy. 264 E.
Pantego, NC 27860
NCDENR
NORTH CAROLINA E)EPARTMENT OF
ENVIRONMENT ANr> NATURAL RESOURCES
SUBJECT: Animal Feedlot Operation Compliance Inspection
Jack Respess Farms
Facility No. 94 -7
Washington County
Dear Mr. Respess:
On May 5, 1999, 1 conducted an Animal Feedlot Operation Compliance Inspection at the referenced
facility. Overall, the operation was found to be in satisfactory condition. A copy of the inspection report is
attached for your review.
In general, this inspection includes verifying that. (1) the farm has a Certified Animal Waste Management
Plan (CAWMP); (2) the farm is complying with requirements of the State Rules 15 NCAC 2H.0217, Senate
Bill 1217, and the Certified Animal Waste Management Plan; (3) the farm operation's waste management
system is being operated properly under the direction of a Certified Operator; (4) the required records are
being kept; (5) there are no signs of seepage, erosion, and/or runoff.
The recommendations and/or comments regarding your inspection can be found in the comment section of the
attached inspection form. It is very important as the owner and Operator in Charge that you address any noted
concerns, as soon as possible. For assistance, please contact your Technical Specialist and/or the local Soil &
Water Conservation District Office.
Thank you for your cooperation and assistance during the inspection. Should you have further questions or
comments regarding this inspection, do not hesitate to call me at [phone], ext. 321.
Sincerely,
\r-�f
Daphne B. Cullom
Environmental Specialist 11
cc: Washington County SWCD Office
WaRO
943 Washington Square Mail, Washington, North Carolina 27889
Telephone 252194ti W1 FAX [phone]
An Equal Opportunity Affirmative Action Employer

Facility Number 94 7 Date of Inspection 5-5-99
Time of Inspection 13.10 24 hr. (hh:mm)
Permitted ® Certified 0 Conditionally Certified © RegisteredJE3 Not O erational Date Last Operated:
Farm Name: dA&.1ims.F.alt7tns..........................................,..................................... County: Washinom......----..........---------------- W..aR0........
OwnerName: Jack ......................................... Respesa ....................................................... Phone No: 251-2 3.-2018.-----•----............................................ .
Facility Contact: Ste..Y.e.Hai........................................................ Title: JAN59 ................................................. Phone No: 2519WA-.3597......................
MailingAddress: 25556Jjwy.2fi4.E................................................................................ PankgoAc ........................................................... 2,78.60 .............
Onsite Representative: 5l<exx. A. Jac1i.Re3P aa.....------........................................ Integrator:...............................................................--.....................
Certified Operator: 5tc t..A............................ Halt.................................................... Operator Certification Number:1713M .............................
Location of Farm:
r............................................................................................................................................................................................................................. .................................
Latitude �� ° r_�' 0 u Longitude 6
Design Current _: Design Current Design Current
twine:- Ca ac ' PO ulatton po ranscity - Porilitatinn Cattle Cana -itv, , Ponulatinn�
❑ Wean to Feeder
® Feeder to Finish
2000
—1000
❑ Farrow to Wean
❑ Farrow to Feeder
❑ Farrow to Finish
❑ Gilts
❑ Boars
Number of La Dons 3 ❑ Subsurface Drains Present ❑ Lagoon Area ❑ Spray Field A: ca
g
-. ..
Halding Ponds 1 Sol�d_Traps -' ❑ No Liquid Waste Management System
Discharges & Stream Impacts
1- is any discharge observed from any part of the operation?
Discharge originated at: ❑ Lagoon ❑ Spray Field ❑ Other
a. If discharge is observed, was the conveyance man-made?
b. If discharge is observed, did it reach Water of the State? (If yes, notify DWQ)
c. If discharge is obser ed, what is the estimated flow in gal/min?
d. Does discharge bypass a lagoon system? (If yes, notify DWQ)
2. Is there evidence of past discharge from any part of the operation?
3. Were there any adverse impacts or potential adverse impacts to the Waters of the State other than from a discharge?
Waste Collection & Treatment
4. Is storage capacity (freeboard plus storm storage) less than adequate? ❑ Spillway
Structure 1 Structure 2 Structure 3 Structure 4 Structure 5
Identifier:
...............
❑ Yes % No
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes ® No
Structure 6
............................
Freeboard (inches): ............._60............... ................ 19..............................54.................-
5. Are there any immediate threats to the integrity of any of the structures observed? (ie/ trees, severe erosion, ❑ Yes ® No
seepage, etc.)
3123/99 Continued on back

Printed on 5/1012000
Facility Number. 94-7 Date of Inspection 5-5-99
6. Are there structures on -site which are not properly addressed and/or managed through a waste management or
closure plan? ❑ Yes N No
(If any of questions 4-6 was answered yes, and the situation poses an
immediate public health or environmental threat, notify DWQ)
7. Do any of the structures need maintenance/improvement? ❑ Yes N No
8. Does any part of the waste management system other than waste structures require maintenance/improvement? ❑ Yes N No
9. Do any stuctures lack adequate, gauged markers with required maximum and minimum liquid level
elevation markings?
❑ Yes
N No
Waste Application
10. Are there any buffers that need maintenance/improvement?
❑ Yes
N No
11. Is there evidence of over application? ❑ Excessive Ponding ❑ PAN
❑ Yes
N No
12. Crop type Cotton
13. Do the receiving crops differ with those designated in the Certified Animal Waste Management Plan (CAWMP)?
❑ Yes
N No
14. a) Does the facility lack adequate acreage for land application?
❑ Yes
N No
b) Does the facility need a wettable acre determination?
❑ Yes
N No
c) This facility is pended for a wettable acre determination?
❑ Yes
® No
15. Does the receiving crop need improvement?
❑ Yes
N No
16. Is there a lack of adequate waste application equipment?
❑ Yes
N No
Required Records & Documents
17. Fail to have Certificate of Coverage & General Permit readily available?
❑ Yes
❑ No
18. Does the facility fail to have all components of the Certified Animal Waste Management Plan readily available?
(ie/ WUP, checklists, design, maps, etc.)
❑ Yes
N No
19. Does record keeping need improvement? (ie/ irrigation, freeboard, waste analysis & soil sample reports)
❑ Yes
® No
20. is facility not in compliance with any applicable setback criteria in effect at the time of design?
❑ Yes
N No
21. Did the facility fail to have a actively certified operator in charge?
❑ Yes
® No
22. Fail to notify regional DWQ of emergency situations as required by General Permit?
(ie/ discharge, freeboard problems, over application)
❑ Yes
❑ No
23. Did Reviewer/Inspector fail to discuss review/inspection with on -site representative?
❑ Yes
N No
24. Does facility require a follow-up visit by same agency?
❑ Yes
N No
25. Were any additional problems noted which cause noncompliance of the Certified AWMP?
❑ Yes
N No
�. No violations;or:d'efieiet4cies•were:rioted:duriitgI.thiswisit:: Y66 will'receivehi) ftirt6e'r:
-corres ondence about this - visit., - " • ' • ' :::: ...:
Comments.{refer to questionA) :.Explain any YES answers and/or anr_recommendations or amother coinments -
Use drawings o[facilityto better explain-sltuattons. (use additional pages as necessaiy)s
13. Need a copy of the new Waste Utilization Plan on site.
This facility has applied for its General Permit.
you have any questions about this inspection, please contact me at [phone], ext. 321.
..
Reviewer/Ins ector Name _ �� f" 4
p Daphne B .Cullom _— - -- �- �-.� _v .-_ -�_ � � ��.� .. ='.
RP%-iPwPr11nenPrtar Ciansfiirae ItrwtP!

Printed on 5110/2000
Facility Number: 94-7 Date of Inspection 5-5-99
Odor Issues
26. Does the discharge pipe from the confinement building to the storage pond or lagoon fail to discharge attor 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 anv evidence of wind drift during land application? (i_e. residue on neighboring vegetation, asphalt. ❑ Yes ❑ No
roads, building structure, and/or public property)
29. is the land application spray system intake not located near the liquid surface of the lagoon? ❑ Yes ❑ No
30. Were any major maintenance problems with the ventilation fan(s) noted? (i.e_ broken fan belts. missing or
or broken fan blade(s), inoperable shutters, etc.) ❑ Yes ❑ No
31. Do the animals feed storage bins fail to have appropriate cover? ❑ Yes ❑ No
32. Do the flush tanks lack a submerged fill pipe or a permanenthemporary cover? ❑ Yes ❑ No
Additional`Comments and/or Drawings: - -
IV

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
January 12, 1999
Mr. Jack C. Respess
Jack Respess Farms
25556 Hwy 264 East
Pantego, North Carolina 27860
SUBJECT: Animal Feedlot Operation Site Inspection
Jack Respess Farms
Facility No. # 94-7
Washington County
Dear Mr. Respess:
Enclosed please find a copy of the Animal Feedlot Operation Site Inspection (as it is
viewed in DWQ database) conducted at the referenced facility by the Division of Water
Quality from the Washington Regional Office. Please read this inspection and keep it
with all other documents pertaining to your animal operation for future inspections.
In general, this inspection included verifying that: (1) the farm has a Certified Animal
Waste Management Plan (CAWMP); (2) the farm is complying with requirements of the
State Rules 15 NCAC 211.0217, Senate Bill 1217, and the Certified Animal Waste
Management Plan; (3) the farm operation's waste management system is being operated
properly under the direction of a Certified Operator; (4) the required records are being
kept; (5) there are no signs of seepage, erosion, and/or runoff.
Thank you for your assistance and cooperation during the inspection. If you have any
questions, please contact me at 919/946-6481, ext. 318 or your Technical Specialist.
Sincerely,
Lyn B. Hardison
Environmental Specialist
Cc: LBH files
943 Washington Square Mall, Washington, North Carolina 27889 Telephone [phone] FAX [phone]
An Equal Opportunity Affirmative Action Employer

IV
•-mesign -. %:urrent
the Capacity gPopulation
,. z
Facility Number Date of Inspection
Time or 1 nspection a5 24 hr. (hh:mm)
p Registered ■ Certified p Applied for Permit p Permitted 113 Not Operational I Date Last Operated:
Farm Dame: ,lack.Respess.Falrms.................. ......................... County: Washington WaRO
OwnerName: Jack ......................................... ptrspm ...................................................... Phone No: Z52-9.43-21HR ..........................................................
Facility' Contact: ...............................................................................Title: .......... Phone No:
Mailing Address: 2555 i.Hm.264.E................................................................................ Pantcgo.NC............................................ ................ 27.160 ..............
OnsiteRepresentative: Jack.C..Resptess......................................................... ................ Integrator:.......................................................................................
Certified Operator: Jack.G................................... Resptess ............................................. Operator Certification Number: 1.7M6............................
Location of Farm:
Latitude
u
Swine Capacity ,TP.
Longitude • °
sa vesign - -current
i '.Poultry, Caliacity Populateow C
l� Layer _ rr
p on- ayer �
E3 Wean to I, ee er
11 Yeeder to F ints
❑ Farrow to can
[3 Farrow to Fee er
p Farrow to Finis
p Gilts
Boars
General
1. Are there any buffers that need maintenance/improvement? p Yes ® No
2. Is any discharge observed from any part of the operation?
Discharge originated at: p Lagoon p Spray Field p Other
a. If discharge is observed, was the conveyance man-made?
b. if discharge is observed, did it reach Surface Water? (If yes, notify DWQ)
c. If discharge is observed, what is the estimated flow in gal/min?
d. Does discharge bypass a lagoon system? (If yes, notify DWQ)
3. Is there evidence of past discharge from any part of the operation?
4. Were there any adverse impacts to the waters of the State other than from a discharge?
5. Does any part of the waste management system (other than 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
p Yes ® No
p Yes In No
p Yes ® No
nla
p Yes M No
p Yes ® No
p Yes ® No
p Yes ® No
p Yes ® No
p Yes ® No
Continued on back

Y f
8. Are there lagoons or storage ponds on site which need to be properly closed? p Yes ® No
Structures (Lasloons,Holding Ponds lush Pits, etc.)
9. Is storage capacity (freeboard plus storm storage) less than adequate? p Yes ® No
Structure 1 Structure 2 Structure 3 Structure 4
Structure 5 Structure 6
Identifier:
Freeboard(ft):..............2-5..............................4 0............................8 21............. ....................................
10. Is seepage observed from any of the structures?
p Yes
® No
11. Is erosion, or any other threats to the integrity of any of the structures observed?
p Yes
® No
12. Do any of the structures need maintenance/improvement?
p Yes
N No
(1f any of questions 9-12 was answered yes, and the situation poses an
immediate public health or environmental threat, notify DWQ)
13. Do any of the structures lack adequate minimum or maximum liquid level markers?
p Yes
® No
Waste Application
14. Is there physical evidence of over application?
p Yes
ig No
(If in excess of WMP, or runoff entering waters of the State, notify DWQ)
15. Crop type ....... am.(Silag e.&..drain)........ Small.Graitr.4W.h=L Badey...................... ayheam...............................................................................
16. Do the receiving crops differ with those designated in EnF Antimal Waste Management Plan (AWMP)? p Yes ®No
17. Does the facility have a lack of adequate acreage for land application?
18. Does the receiving crop need improvement?
19. Is there a lack of available waste application equipment?
20. Does facility require a follow-up visit by same agency?
21. Did Reviewer/Inspector fail to discuss review/inspection with on -site representative?
22. Does record keeping need improvement?
For Certified or Permitted Facilities Only
23. Does the facility fail to have a copy of the Animal Waste Management Plan readily available?
24. Were any additional problems noted which cause noncompliance of the Certified AWMP?
25. Were any additional problems noted which cause noncompliance of the Permit?
a • o' ti t ohs.(W e. icier-cFes'Were•riote dr. rig t is W t: 66. Will -rebeive Rio. rt er •
to esp"Oipo abCiut ffiis •visit:. ... .
Reviewer/Inspector Name
p Yes ® No
p Yes ®No
p Yes ®No
p Yes ®No
p Yes ®No
p Yes ® No
p Yes ® No
p Yes ® No
Yes ® No
IReviewer/Inspector Signature:' �_ �=sLG1 f w Date: ���� —T y

Facility Number 94 7 Date of Inspection 6/29/98
Time of Inspection 08:15 24 hr. (hh:mm)
13 Registered E Certified ® Applied for Permit © Permitted JE3 Not O erational Date Last Operated:
Farm Name: JAck.RWj*s.XalCrw ...................... County: W..ashingtaarL.................................... WaRA..-.....
OwnerName: Jack ......................................... RespeR& ....................................................... Phone No: 9.19-943:.20.1.8...................... .....................................
Facility Contact: ................................................. . Title: ....... Phone No:
MailingAddress: 25556.Hw.y.264.E................................................................................. pawege.NC ........................................................... Z7.8.60 .............
Onsite Representative: ,Jack..Respess....................... ......................... Integrator:............................................... ...............................
u2- y 3 - �1 3S7
Certified Operator:. Juk.0 ..................... ... RUpess............................................. Operator Certification Number: .1736.6 .............................
Location of Farm:
Latitude r--�0& Longitude a 6
❑ Wean to Feeder
® Feeder to Finish
2000
1100
❑ Farrow to Wean
❑ Farrow to Feeder
❑ Farrow to Finish
❑ Gilts
❑ Boars
General
1. Are there any buffers that need maintenance/improvement? © Yes ® No
2. Is any discharge observed from any part of the operation?
Discharge originated at: ❑ Lagoon ❑ Spray Field ❑ Other
a. If discharge is observed, was the conveyance man-made?
b. If discharge is observed, did it reach Surface Water? (If yes, notify DWQ)
c. If discharge is observed, what is the estimated flow in gal/min?
d. Does discharge bypass a lagoon system? (If yes, notify DWQ)
3. Is there evidence of past discharge from any part of the operation?
4. Were there any adverse impacts to the waters of the State other than from a discharge?
5. Does any part of the waste management system (other than lagoons/holding ponds) require
maintenance/improvement?
6. Is facility not in compliance with any applicable setback criteria in effect at the time of design?
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes
© No
❑ Yes
® No
❑ Yes
No
❑ Yes
® No
[:]Yes 0 No
7. Did the facility fail to have a certified operator in responsible charge?
7/25/97
❑ Yes ® No

Facility Number: 94-7 Date of Inspection 6129198
8. Are there lagoons or storage ponds on site which need to be properly closed? ❑ Yes N No
Structures (Lagoons.Holding Ponds, Flush Pits, etc.)
9. Is storage capacity (freeboard plus storm storage) less than adequate? []Yes N No
Structure 1 Structure 2 Structure 3 Structure 4 Structure 5
Structure 6
Identifier:
Freeboard(ft):..............2,5............:.. ............. 4.Q.............................6.Q.....................................................................................
...................................
10.
Is seepage observed from any of the structures?
❑ Yes
® No
11.
Is erosion, or any other threats to the integrity of any of the structures observed?
❑ Yes
® No
12.
Do any of the structures need maintenance/improvement?
❑ Yes
No
(If any of questions 9-12 was answered yes, and the situation poses an
immediate public health or environmental threat, notify DWQ)
13.
Do any of the structures lack adequate minimum or maximum liquid level markers?
❑ Yes
N No
Waste Application
14.
Is there physical evidence of over application?
❑ Yes
N No
(If in excess of WMP, or runoff entering waters of the State, notify DWQ)
15.
Crop type ........ Axnl.( �lage..(alCaixl�....... ..................... polats .......................... ......
16.
Do the receiving crops differ with those designated in the Animal Waste Management Plan (AWMP)?
N Yes
d No
17.
Does the facility have a lack of adequate acreage for land application?
❑ Yes
N No
18.
Does the receiving crop need improvement?
❑ Yes
N No
19.
Is there a lack of available waste application equipment?
❑ Yes
N No
20.
Does facility require a follow-up visit by same agency?
❑ Yes
N No
21,
Did Reviewer/Inspector fail to discuss review/inspection with on -site representative?
❑ Yes
N No
22.
Does record keeping need improvement?
N Yes
© No
For Certified or Permitted Facilities Qnly
23.
Does the facility fail to have a copy of the Animal Waste Management Plan readily available?
❑ Yes
N No
24.
Were any additional problems noted which cause noncompliance of the Certified AWMP?
❑ Yes
N No
25.
Were any additional problems noted which cause noncompliance of the Permit?
❑ Yes
N No
No: violations ox-de%ie,rtsies,ivere'rtoted-dtdritig' tills visit. " Y*oo w'ill'irlCeivo'Ro id,riheY
.'.'.CO1:1'eiPCVa e'ni tihout'this.VjiiC'.'.'.'.'.'.'.'.'.'.'.'.'.'.'.'.
116. Applied waste to Irish potatoes at agronomic rates from NCDA soil test. Do not have RYE for N at this time.
Need to get acreage for each pull and have IRR-2 forms.
,&1
I Reviewer/Inspector Name
I Reviewer/Inspector Signature:
Date:

State of North Carolina
Department of Environment
and Natural Resources
Division of Water Quality
James B. Hunt, Jr., Governor
Wayne McDevitt, Secretary
A. Preston Howard, Jr., P-E., Director
December 16, 1997
Mr. Jack Respess
Jack Respess Farm
25556 N.C. Hwy 264 East
Pantego, North Carolina 27860
SUBJECT: Animal Feedlot Operation Site Inspection
Jack Respess Farm
Facility No. # 94-7
Washington County
Dear Mr. Respess:
Enclosed please find a copy of the Animal Feedlot Operation Site Inspection conducted at the referenced
facility by the Division of Water Quality from the Washington Regional Office. Please read this inspection
and keep it with all other documents pertaining to your animal operation.
In general, this inspection included verifying that. (1) the farm has a Certified Animal Waste Management
Plan (CAWMP); (2) the farm is complying with requirements of the State Rules 15 NCAC 2H.0217, Senate
Bill 1217, and the Certified Animal Waste Management Plan; (3) the farm operation's waste management
system is being operated properly under the direction of a Certified Operator; (4) the required records are
being kept; (5) there are no signs of seepage, erosion, and/or runoff.
The following items are conditions of the Certified Animal Waste Management Plan and are conditions of
the general permit therefore these items must be implemented:
- Keep lagoons/storage ponds free of foreign debris including, but not limited to tires, bottles, plastic
products, light bulbs, gloves, syringes or any other solids waste.
- Pipes discharging wastes into the lagoon should be extended beneath the surface of the lagoon to avoid
releasing gases from agitated wastes.
- The lagoon areas should be kept mowed or otherwise controlled and accessible. High grass does not
allow you to conduct a thorough inspection of the lagoon area for seepage, rodent damage, etc.
- An analysis of the liquid animal waste from the lagoon shall be conducted as close to the time of
application as practical and at least within 60 days (before or after) of the date of application. This
analysis shall include the following parameters: Nitrogen, Phosphorus, Zinc and Copper.
- Soil analysis is required annually
- All grassed waterways shall have a stable outlet with adequate capacity to prevent ponding or flooding
damages. The outlet can be another vegetated channel, an earth ditch, stabilization structure, or other
suitable outlets.
- It is suggested to keep crop yield information for future use to update your waste management plan.
- Lagoon levels must be maintained within the permanent and temporary storage and at a minimum must
always have nineteen inches of freeboard.
- A gauged pump marker must be installed upon certification.
943 Washington Square Mall, Washington, North Carolina 27889 Telephone [phone] FAX [phone]
An Equal Opportunity Affirmative Action Employer

Cont. Mr. Respess
Page 2
In accordance to the Senate Bill 1217, all animal facility that fall within the requirements of State Rules 15
NCAC 2H.0217 must be inspected twice a year. The Division of Soil and Water, a local Soil and Water
Conservation District or the federal Natural Resources Conservation Services conducts an operational review
and the Division of Water Quality conducts a compliance operation site inspection.
If you have any questions, please contact your local Technical Specialist or me at 919/946-6481, ext. 318.
Sincerely,
�-,-
Lyn nB. Hardison
Environmental Specialist
Cc: WaRO
943 Washington Square Mall, Washington, North Carolina 27889 Telephone [phone] FAX [phone]
An Equal Opportunity Affirmative Action Employer

DSWC Animal Feedlot Operation Review
DWQ Animal Feedlot Operation Site Inspection
19 Routine p Complaint p o ow -up of UWQ inspection p Follow-up of DSWC review p Other
Date of Inspection 'l 0 T
Facility Number
Time of Inspection © 24 hr. (hh:mm)
Farm Status: o Registered 13 Applied for Permit
0 Certified p Permitted
In Not Operational I Date Last Operated:
Farm Name: Jack Respess Farms
County: 12 BAWnglon..................................... .W.aRG........
OwnerName- Jack ........................................ EUMP s....................................................... Phone No: 91M4. rM1.8.................................---.--...................
FacilityContact: .............................................................. .Title: ... Phone No: ................................................................................................................................
MailingAddress: 2555b.Ham.2.61E................................................................................ Eantcgo..N.0 ............................................................ 22861t..............
Onsite Representative: Jack.Respm.............................................................................. Integrator: IndepEentlent............................................................
Certified Operator%lark C.................................... Res,piss..............................................
Operator Certification Number:17.3.66 .............................
Location of Farm:
Latitude ©*I on ® Longitude ®• ® ®°
Type of Operation Design ;Current _ Design= Current Design Current
Capacity Population Poultry': Capacity` Population: Cattle Capacity Population
13 Wean to Feeder p ayer
® ee er to mis �; ClNon-Layer
p Farrow to can ' e
p arrow to Fee er -Total Design Capae�ty T 2,000
_-
Farrow to Finish
13 Other __m
Total a s - _ ,
Number of Lagoons 1 Holding Ponds p u sur ace rams resent p agoon rea p pray ie rea
General
1. Are there any buffers that need maintenance/improvement? p Yes H No
2. Is any discharge observed from any part of the operation? p Yes N No
Discharge originated at: p Lagoon p Spray Field p Other
a. If discharge is observed, was the conveyance man-made? p Yes p No
b. If discharge is observed, did it reach Surface Water? (If yes, notify DWQ) p Yes p No
c. If discharge is observed, what is the estimated flow in gal/min?
d. Does discharge bypass a lagoon system? (If yes, notify DWQ) p Yes p No
3. Is there evidence of past discharge from any part of the operation? p Yes ® No
4. Were there any adverse impacts to the waters of the State other than from a discharge? p Yes a No
5. Does any part of the waste management system (other than lagoons/holding ponds) require p Yes ® No
4/30/97 maintenance/improvement?

aei �ty j umber: 94_7
6. Is faci not in compliance with any applicable setback criteria in effect at the time of design?
p Yes N No
7. Did the facility fail to have a certified operator in responsible charge?
13 Yes ® No
8. Are there lagoons or storage ponds on site which need to be properly closed?
p Yes ® No
Structures (Laizoons and/or Holding Ponds)
9. Is storage capacity (freeboard plus storm storage) less than adequate?
p Yes ig No
Freeboard (ft): Structure 1 Structure 2 Structure 3 Structure 4 Structure 5
Structure 6
.....-------'--.4.0................. ................6.0............................... 10A............... ....................................... ......................................
10. Is seepage observed from any of the structures?
p Yes Ig No
11. Is erosion, or any other threats to the integrity of any of the structures observed?
la Yes ® No
12, Do any of the structures need maintenance/improvement?
p Yes ® No
(If any of questions 9-I2 was answered yes, and the situation poses an
immediate public health or environmental threat, notify DWQ)
13. Do any of the structures lack adequate minimum or maximum liquid level markers?
p Yes ® No
Waste Application
14. Is there physical evidence of over application?
p Yes ® No
(if in excess of WMP, or runoff entering waters of the State, notify DWQ)
....................Sn]aea�as....----.............S�.all.i``,xa�.n. .i3az...........................................................
15. Crop type .......C.amkSiJ.age.&.Gjain.) ...... y k. Y«
Milo ats)
13
Yes
16. Do the receiving crops differ with those designated in the Animal Waste Management an (AWMP)?
p ® No
17. Does the facility have a lack of adequate acreage for land application?
p Yes ®No
18. Does the receiving crop need improvement?
p Yes ®No
19. Is there a lack of available waste application equipment?
13 Yes ®No
20. Does facility require a follow-up visit by same agency?
p Yes R No
21. Did Reviewer/inspector fail to discuss review/inspection with on -site representative?
p Yes N No
For Certified Facilities Only
22. Does the facility fail to have a copy of the Animal Waste Management Plan readily available?
p Yes N No
23. Were any additional problems noted which cause noncompliance of the Certified AWMP?
p Yes ®No
24. Does record keeping need improvement?
p Yes ® No
ComaientsE{refer to gees#E _n #€) Explain any YES answersrandfor any omr»endaiions many atlier comments
Use drawingof�a¢ility to better eaplain's�tuations (use additional pages as necessary) - -- �` _
- -
ettiwith#Jack'and Hunter Respess
-�w
A
e Certz£teYYd plan was available for review and the lagoon design for the old lagoon was not available The spray�urigation
area
ap was very_hard to read It�is suggested to a better map from the NRCS office.:- _
o..d,4.-_..,
get
w -_ - r.7
llFneCEssary're&fds were available and were found "satisfactory'
-
•iii yrir-�`'�-
t
unals'are'bi ied a
other waste;analysis is necessary if waste ----application is done
--
„vit '...w.. 3k 4 i
.. +�r�..�3e^un. �r.L•.i" _r[a+.v�:µsw' _.s.n._.♦ . .w.. _. .. s.LT.v� f.._G ._. .-r [-1-.,.,.__... i- • _. -.... 5.. 1 �- r «tL[ ..r...•d.i-w .�,w..�4. �w-.« F� _ rv..
7!
Reviewer/Inspector Name !Ly
L1._
Reviewer/Inspector Signature:
Date: '7---30 _-17 7

Site Requires Immediate Attenti n:
(Ije,,
Facility No.
DIVISION OF ENVIRONMI NTAL MANAGEMENT
ANIMAL FEEDLOT OPERATI NS SITE VISITATION RECORD
Date: g 0,1V , 1995
Time: jj'•3 a
Farm Name/Owner: AN ATFURP
Mailing Address:
County:
Integrator: Phone:
on Site Representative: Phone:
Physical Address/Location:
Type of Operation: Swine >< Poultry Cattle
Design Capacity: No. of Animals on Site:
DEM Certific Lion o.: ACE DEM Certification No.: ACNEW
Latitude: Longitude: Elevation: Ft
? (n Circle Yeor No
Does the Animal Waste Lagoon have sufficient f eeboard of 1 Pt + 25 year 24 hour
storm event? (approximately 1 Ft + 7 in) or No
Actual Freeboard: '2' 9 Ft Inches
Was any seepage observed from the lagcon(s)? Yes r � � n ��j
Was any erosion observed? Yes or(No)
Is adequate land available for spray? Yes or No l Puri
Is the cover crop adequate?
Craps) being utilized:
Yes or No
Does the facility meet Sffor
nimum setback criteria?
200 Ft from Dwellings? No 100 Ft from Wells? 10 or No
Is the mal waste stockpiled within 100 Ft of USGS Elue Line Stream?
Yes or No
Is animal waste -land applied or spray irrigated within 25 Ft of a USGS Map Blue
Line? Yes o
Is animal waste discharged into waters of the state by man-made ditch, flushing
system, or ether similar man-made devices? My, or No
If Yes, please explain: 'arc XS G 009 Lti'"I...
lr..4� jw ate-
Does the facility maintain adequate waste management records (volumes of manure,
land applied, spray irrigated on specific acreage with cover crop)? Yes or No
In_tec=or Name Signature
CC: Facilimv Assessment Unit
Comments & Sketch on Back of Sheet

DEM
SITE VISITATION RECORD
Page Two
Comments:
F/,4.5
S k e i-- ch -