310178_Compliance Evaluation Inspection_20200721

Cil Division of Water Resources?
° Facility Number , o j J $ 'O.Division of Soil and Water_ConserQation
0 '-
0 Other Agency °
Type of Visit: 7Routine
pliance Inspection 0 Operation Review 0 Structure Evaluation 0 Technical Assistance
Reason for Visit: 0 Complaint 0 Follow-up 0 Referral 0 Emergency 0 Other 0 Denied Access
Date of Visit:-11-aU101 Arrival Time: Departure Time: County: ®U tiri Region: IN i NO
Farm Name: A1I9h I V arSlr%a1k Owner Email:
Owner Name: Aiyen i{ 5,11'e5 Phone:
Mailing Address:
Physical Address:
Facility Contact:
Onsite Representative:
Title:
Integrator:
Phone:
Certified Operator: Kr.,rS$-oAk R;w'ps Certification Number: ?'31 T
Back-up Operator:
Location of Farm:
Latitude:
Certification Number:
Longitude:
Design 'Current Design `Current. Design •Current
Swine° : " Capacity, , Pop. VetPoultry Capacity ° Pop,. ° o Cattle' Capacity Pop.
Wean to Finish
Wean to Feeder 0
Feeder to Finish
Farrow to Wean
Farrow to Feeder
Farrow to Finish
Gilts
Boars
Other
Other
Layer
Non -Layer
4 Design Current
Dry Poultry :Capacity POD. a °°
Layers
Non -Layers
Pullets
Turkeys
Turkey Poults
Other
Dairy Cow
Dairy Calf
Dairy Heifer
Dry Cow
Non -Dairy
Beef Stocker
Beef Feeder
Beef Brood Cow
Discharges and Stream Impacts
1. Is any discharge observed from any part of the operation?
[—]Yes
Q'No
❑ NA
❑ NE
Discharge originated at: ❑ Structure ❑ Application Field ❑ Other:
a. Was the conveyance man-made?
❑ Yes
&� No
❑ NA
❑ NE
b. Did the discharge reach waters of the State? (If yes, notify DWR)
❑ Yes
&No
❑ NA
❑ NE
c. What is the estimated volume that reached waters of the State (gallons)?
d. Does the discharge bypass the waste management system? (If yes, notify DWR)
❑ Yes
[�(No
❑ NA
❑ NE
2. Is there evidence of a past discharge from any part of the operation?
❑ Yes
2( o
❑ NA
❑ NE
3. Were there any observable adverse impacts or potential adverse impacts to the waters
❑ Yes
VNo
❑ NA
❑ NE
of the State other than from a discharge?
Page I of 3 21412015 Continued

Facility Number: -6 1 - I --Ig I jDate of Inspection:-7— A I-� oa
Waste Collection & Treatment
4. Is storage capacity (structural plus storm storage plus heavy rainfall) less than adequate? ❑ Yes UNo
No ❑ NA ❑ NE
a. If yes, is waste level into the structural freeboard? ❑ Yes ❑ NA ❑ NE
Structure 1 Structure 2 Structure 3 Structure 4 Structure 5 Structure 6
Identifier: f
Spillway?:
Designed Freeboard (in):� , S
'7
Observed Freeboard (in): �j Q J >
5. Are there any immediate threats to the integrity of any of the structures observed? ❑ Yes EU/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 M No ❑ NA ❑ NE
waste management or closure plan?
If any of questions 4-6 were answered yes, and the situation poses an immediate public health or environmental threat, notify DWR
7. Do any of the structures need maintenance or improvement? ❑ Yes E o ❑ NA ❑ NE
8. Do any of the structures lack adequate markers as required by the permit? ❑ Yes [jNNo ❑ 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 VINo ❑ NA ❑ NE
maintenance or improvement?
Waste Application
10. Are there any required buffers, setbacks, or compliance alternatives that need ❑ Yes 2No ❑ NA ❑ NE
maintenance or improvement?
11. Is there evidence of incorrect land application? If yes, check the appropriate box below. ❑ Yes No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Excessive Ponding ❑ Hydraulic Overload ❑ Frozen Ground ❑ Heavy Metals (Cu, Zn, etc.)
❑ PAN ❑ PAN > 10% or 10 lbs. ❑ Total Phosphorus ❑ Failure to Incorporate Manure/Sludge into Bare Soil
❑ Outside of Acceptable Crop Window ❑ Evidence of Wind Drift ❑ Application Outside of Approved Area
12. Crop Type(s): C S 9 11 cc,,
13. Soil Type(s):
14. Do the receiving crops differ from those designated in the CAWMP?
15. Does the receiving crop and/or land application site need improvement?
16. Did the facility fail to secure and/or operate per the irrigation design or wettable
acres determination?
17. Does the facility lack adequate acreage for land application?
18. Is there a lack of properly operating waste application equipment?
Required Records & Documents
19. Did the facility fail to have the Certificate of Coverage & Permit readily available?
20. Does the facility fail to have all components of the CAWMP readily available? If yes, check
the appropriate box.
❑ WUP ❑ Checklists ❑ Design ❑ Maps ❑ Lease Agreements
21. Does record keeping need improvement? If yes, check the appropriate box below
❑ Waste Application ❑ Weekly Freeboard ❑ Waste Analysis ❑ Soil Analysis ❑ Waste Transfers
❑ Rainfall ❑ Stocking ❑ Crop Yield ❑ 120 Minute Inspections ❑ Monthly and 1" Rainfall Inspections
22. Did the facility fail to install and maintain a rain gauge?
23. If selected, did the facility fail to install and maintain rainbreakers on irrigation equipment?
Page'2 of 3
❑ Yes
[g No
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Yes
[ No
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Yes
F2�/No
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Yes
o
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Yes
�No
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Yes L i ❑ NA ❑ NE
[—]Yes 90 ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Other:
❑ Yes RfNo ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Weather Code
❑ Sludge Survey
[:]Yes �No ❑ NA ❑ NE
[:]Yes No ❑ NA ❑ NE
21412015 Continued

Facility Number: jDate of Inspection:
24. Did the facility fail to calibrate waste application equipment as required by the permit? ❑ Yes d ❑ NA ❑ NE
25. Is the facility out of compliance with permit conditions related to sludge? If yes, check [:]Yes VNoo ❑ NA ❑ NE
the appropriate box(es) below.
❑ Failure to complete annual sludge survey ❑ Failure to develop a POA for sludge levels
❑ Non -compliant sludge levels in any lagoon
List structure(s) and date of first survey indicating non-compliance:
26. Did the facility fail provide documentation of an actively certified operator in charge? ❑ Yes No VNA
A ❑ NE
27. Did the facility fail to secure a phosphorus loss assessments (PLAT) certification? ❑ Yes ❑ No ❑ 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
dNo
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Yes
[/No
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Yes
No
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Yes
❑ No
❑ NA
S3/NE
❑ Yes 12� o ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes �-No
No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes ❑ NA ❑ NE
Comments (refer to question ft Explain any YES answers and/or any additional recommendations or any other comments.
Use drawings of facility to better explain situations (use additional pages as necessary).
(,ter w ip �" � 5 J
0�60�0
G 1 Pj,Ar- d�- 3 - a;0
S „die reme"j— �O 1tS PAr✓
p -�- - �v--.� C rUp (-Q-n) �e� � S; ill_
Siud -re Cl'ek (?t d eL+ �qT�;S we.S W&ble ftovSe51 A )&Idon wlqs
Ic'j-- %\(\ CO3'o%-Cktice 41, 0-14 kcs
hlavnj me-m ve a".y c�e6r, /�►�s
--_1�,%'Ai,( rain4v,I1 7,e1
e eekl S}oc�i'�i��,I,I,1 , 0cords o���ti�, to
r.clUd vJ y
urf7
Reviewer/Inspector Name: rJ Ry't"'
Reviewer/Inspector Signature:
Page 3 of 3
Phone: rL7 7-9 S74
Date: -�- ;z da O
21412015