310685_Compliance Evaluation Inspection_20200730

(0 Division of Water- Resources
Facility Nurnbex r�� - $ `O Division of Soil and Water. Conservation '-
O Other Agency
Type of Visit: 7Routine
pliance Inspection O Operation Review O Structure Evaluation O Technical Assistance
Reason for Visit: O Complaint O Follow-up O Referral O Emergency O Other O Denied Access
Date of Visit:-3o-oto Arrival Time: Departure Time: °0 County: (Ouplln Region: IN I P? 0
Farm Name: A y� e- rr, n!) fa r M Owner Email:
Owner Name: :Aryl ti We rn m Phone:
Mailing Address:
Physical Address:
Facility Contact: n v%- in WIP- r", Title: Phone:
Onsite Representative:
Certified Operator: �a-4r-�/a� ��rP�e•�
Back-up Operator:
Location of Farm:
Design► "Current
Swine Capacity Pop.
Wean to Finish
Wean to Feeder ;200 9
Feeder to Finish
Farrow to Wean
Farrow to Feeder
Farrow to Finish
Gilts
Boars
Other- "
Other
Latitude:
Integrator: p
Certification Number: 100 36 /
Certification Number:
Design Current "
Wet Poultry Capacity" Pop.
Layer
Non -Layer
Design` ' Current
Dry Poultry" Canacity Pon:
Layers
Non -Layers
Pullets
Turkeys
Turkey Poults
Other
Discharges and Stream Impacts
1. Is any discharge observed from any part of the operation?
Discharge originated at: ❑ Structure ❑ Application Field ❑ Other:
a. Was the conveyance man-made?
b. Did the discharge reach waters of the State? (If yes, notify DWR)
c. What is the estimated volume that reached waters of the State (gallons)?
Longitude:
.Design, ° Current
Cattle. Capacity Pop. `
Dairy Cow
Dairy Calf
Dairy Heifer
Dry Cow
Non -Dairy
Beef Stocker
Beef Feeder
Beef Brood Cow
❑ Yes RNo ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes [2/No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes [�To ❑ NA ❑ NE
d. Does the discharge bypass the waste management system? (If yes, notify DWR) ❑ Yes El No ❑ NA ❑ NE
2. Is there evidence of a past. discharge from any part of the operation? ❑ - Yes F5ZNc ❑ NA ❑ NE
3. Were there any observable adverse impacts or potential adverse impacts to the waters ❑ Yes No ❑ NA ❑ NE
of the State other than from a discharge?
Page I of 3 21412015 Continued

Facility Number: - Date of Inspection: -30 _a a 95
Waste Collection & Treatment
4. Is storage capacity (structural plus storm storage plus heavy rainfall) less than adequate? ❑Yes No ❑ NA ❑ NE
a. If yes, is waste level into the structural freeboard? ❑ Yes �/No ❑ NA ❑ NE
Structure 1 Structure 2 Structure 3 Structure 4 Structure 5 Structure 6
Identifier:_
Spillway?:
Designed Freeboard (in):
Observed Freeboard (in): 3a
5. Are there any immediate threats to the integrity of any of the structures observed? El Yes No ❑ NA ❑ NE
(i.e., large trees, severe erosion, seepage, etc.)
6. Are there structures on -site which are not properly addressed and/or managed through a ❑ Yes MNo ❑ NA ❑ NE
waste management or closure plan?
If any of questions 4-6 were answered yes, and the situation poses an immediate public health or environmental threat, notify DWR
7. Do any of the structures need maintenance or improvement? ❑ Yes [ o ❑ NA ❑ NE
8. Do any of the structures lack adequate markers as required by the permit? ❑ Yes [ xo ❑ NA ❑ NE
(not applicable to roofed pits, dry stacks, and/or wet stacks)
9. Does any part of the waste management system other than the waste structures require ❑ Yes 02"No ❑ NA ❑ NE
maintenance or improvement?
Waste Application
10. Are there any required buffers, setbacks, or compliance alternatives that need ❑ Yes U No ❑ NA ❑ NE
maintenance or improvement?
11. Is there evidence of incorrect land application? If yes, check the appropriate box below. [:]Yes P No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Excessive Ponding ❑ Hydraulic Overload ❑ Frozen Ground ❑ Heavy Metals (Cu, Zn, etc.)
❑ PAN ❑ PAN > 10% or 10 lbs. ❑ Total Phosphorus ❑ Failure to Incorporate Manure/Sludge into Bare Soil
❑ Outside of Acceptable Crop Window ❑ Evidence of Wind Drift ❑ Application Outside of Approved Area
12. Crop Type(s): , S B I W
13. Soil Type(s):
14. Do the receiving crops differ from those designated in the CAWMP?
❑ Yes
❑ NA
❑ NE
15. Does the receiving crop and/or land application site need improvement?
❑ Yes VNo
❑ NA
❑ NE
16. Did the facility fail to secure and/or operate per the irrigation design or wettable
❑ Yes fo
❑ NA
❑ NE
acres determination?
17. Does the facility lack adequate acreage for land application? ❑ Yes E2/No ❑ NA ❑ NE
18. Is there a lack of properly operating waste application equipment? ❑ Yes [2/No ❑ NA ❑ NE
Required Records & Documents
19. Did the facility fail to have the Certificate of Coverage & Permit readily available? ❑ Yes ❑ NA ❑ NE
20. Does the facility fail to have all components of the CAWMP readily available? If yes, check ❑ Yes No ❑ NA ❑ NE
the appropriate box.
❑ WUP ❑ Checklists ❑ Design [:]Maps [:]Lease Agreements ❑ Other:
21. Does record keeping need improvement? If yes, check the appropriate box below. ❑ Yes EdNo ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Waste Application ❑ Weekly Freeboard ❑ Waste Analysis ❑ Soil Analysis ❑ Waste Transfers ❑ Weather Code
❑ Rainfall ❑ Stocking ❑ Crop Yield ❑ 120 Minute Inspections ❑ Monthly and 1" Rainfall Inspections ❑ Sludge Survey
22. Did the facility fail to install and maintain a rain gauge? El Yes WNo
❑ NA ❑ NE
23. If selected, did the facility fail to install and maintain rainbreakers on irrigation equipment? ❑ Yes ❑ NA ❑ NE
Page 2 of 3 21412015 Continued

Facility Number: 11 - f E 5 I jDate of Ins ection:7- 3 p-aoa
24. Did the facility fail to calibrate waste application equipment as required by the permit? ❑ Yes El No ❑ NA ❑ NE
25. Is the facility out of compliance with permit conditions related to sludge? If yes, check ❑ Yes [!] No ❑ NA ❑ NE
the appropriate box(es) below.
❑ Failure to complete annual sludge survey ❑ Failure to develop a POA for sludge levels
❑ Non -compliant sludge levels in any lagoon
List structure(s) and date of first survey indicating non-compliance:
26. Did the facility fail provide documentation of an actively certified operator in charge? ❑ Yes o ❑ NA ❑ NE
27. Did the facility fail to secure a phosphorus loss assessments (PLAT) certification? ❑ Yes ❑ No ZNA ❑ NE
Other Issues
28. Did the facility fail to properly dispose of dead animals with 24 hours and/or document
and report mortality rates that were higher than normal?
29. At the time of the inspection did the facility pose an odor or air quality concern?
If yes, contact a regional Air Quality representative immediately.
30. Did the facility fail to notify the Regional Office of emergency situations as required by the
permit? (i.e., discharge, freeboard problems, over -application)
31. Do subsurface tile drains exist at the facility? If yes, check the appropriate box below
❑ Application Field ❑ Lagoon/Storage Pond ❑ Other:
32. Were any additional problems noted which cause non-compliance of the permit or CAWMP?
33. Did the Reviewer/Inspector fail to discuss review/inspection with an on -site representative?
34. Does the facility require a follow-up visit by the same agency?
❑ Yes MNo ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes al/No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes [D/�o ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes ❑ No ❑ NA ]d�E
❑ Yes [2/No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes NO
/ ❑ NA ❑ NE
[:]Yes ❑ NA ❑ NE
Comments (refer to question #): Explain any YES answers and/or any additional recommendations or any other comments. I
Use drawings of facility to better explain situations (use additional pages as necessary).
— P1 o` 4, b m -r�
Reviewer/Inspector Name:
CS hi -
Phone: 010 )
Reviewer/Inspector Signature:
Page 3 of 3
Date:
21412015