310789_Compliance Evaluation Inspection_20200924

49 Division of Water Resources
Facility Number - - O Division of Soil and Water Conservation
O Other Agency
'type of Visit ® Compliance Inspection 0 Operation Review Q Structure Evaluation 0 Technical Assistance
Reason for Visit: 0 Routine O Complaint O Follow-up O Referral O Emergency 0 Other O Denied Access
Date of Visit: Arrival Time: ® Departure Time: County: \ Region: NKj9Q
Farm Name: N I ('men :k Z Owner Email: (� -f' O [�
Owner Name: �C nt �rmC p Phone: o-%Qj-Ito
ky
Mailing Address: J
Physical Address:
Facility Contact: &I
�es l f'WeO iUQ{rj Title: Phone: /'�
Onsite Representative:
�.�,� Integrator: �s Q LC
Certified Operator: I I'1 1(S\� N . l-.CYV(a' 1(�13A') Certification Number: T5 Z 9
Back-up Operator: i(�f�ClfiQl CIYUG [7�WY1 Certification Number:�fOP`523
Location of Farm: Latitude: 31� Longitude: T�� O 1901
Swine
to
Other
Other
Design Current Design Current
Capacity
TPop. Wet Poultry Capacity Pop.
Lacer
Inn -Laver
Design Current
Dry Poultry Capacity Pop.
La ers
Non -La ers
Pullets
Tmke s
Turke Poults
Other
Discharees and Stream Impacts
I. Is any discharge observed from any part of the operation'?
Discharge originated at: ❑ Structure ❑ Application Field ❑ Other: _
a. Was the conveyance man-made?
b. Did the discharge reach waters of the State? (If yes, notify DWR)
c. What is the estimated volume that reached waters of the State (gallons)? _
d. Does the discharge bypass the waste management system? (If yes, notify DWR)
2. Is there evidence of a past discharge from any part of the operation?
3. Were there any observable adverse impacts or potential adverse impacts to the waters
of the State other than from a discharge?
Page I of
Design Current
Cattle Capacity Pop.
Dairy Cow
Dairy Calf
Dairy Heifer
Dry Cow
Non-Dai
Beef Stocker
Beef Feeder
Beef Brood Cow
[-]Yes ® No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes [4 No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes 5q No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes ® No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes [4 No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes ® No ❑ NA ❑ NE
214120I5 Continued

Facility Number: Date of Inspection: 714
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): 1�
5. Are there any immediate threats to the integrity of any of the structures observed?
❑ Yes
No
❑ NA
❑ NE
(i.e., large trees, severe erosion, seepage, etc.)
6. Are there structures on -site which are not properly addressed and/or managed through a
❑ Yes
No
❑ NA
❑ NE
waste management or closure plan?
If any of questions 4-6 were answered yes, and the situation poses an immediate public health or environmental threat,
notify DWR
7. Do any of the structures need maintenance or improvement?
[—]Yes
® No
❑ NA
❑ NE
8. Do any of the structures lack adequate markers as required by the permit?
❑ Yes
® No
❑ NA
❑ NE
(not applicable to roofed pits, dry stacks, and/or wet stacks)
9. Does any pan of the waste management system other than the waste structures require
❑ Yes
No
❑ NA
❑ NE
maintenance or improvement?
Waste Application
10. Are there any required buffers, setbacks, or compliance alternatives that need
[:]Yes
No
❑ NA
❑ NE
maintenance or improvement?
11. Is there evidence of incorrect land application? If yes, check the appropriate box below.
❑ Yes
® No
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Excessive Ponding ❑ Hydraulic Overload ❑ Frozen Ground ❑ Heavy Metals (Cu, Zn, etc.)
❑ PAN ❑ PAN> 10% or 10 lbs. ❑ Total Phosphorus ❑ Failure m Incorporate Manure/Sludge into Bare Soil
❑ Outside of Acceptable Crop Window [:]Evidence of Wind Drift ❑ Application
Outside of Approved
Area
12. Crop Type(s):
13. Soil Type(s):
14. Do the receiving crops differ from those designated in the CAW MP? ❑ Yes tKNo ❑ NA ❑ NE
15. Does the receiving crop and/or land application site need improvement? ❑ Yes No ❑ NA ❑ NE
16. Did the facility fail to secure and/or operate per the irrigation design or wettable ❑ Yes No ❑ NA ❑ NE
acres determination?
17. Does the facility lack adequate acreage for land application?
❑ Yes
No
❑ NA
❑ NE
18. Is there a lack of properly operating waste application equipment?
❑ Yes
No
❑ NA
❑ NE
Reunited Records & Documents
19. Did the facility fail to have the Certificate of Coverage & Permit readily available?
❑ Yes
[a No
❑ NA
❑ NE
20. Does the facility fail to have all components of the CAWMP readily available? Ifyes, check
❑ Yes
E4 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
ld No
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Waste Application ❑ Weekly Freeboard ❑ Waste Analysis ❑ Soil Analysis
❑ Waste Transfers
❑ Weather Code
❑ Rainfall ❑ Stocking ❑ Crop Yield ❑ 120 Minute Inspections ❑ Monthly and 1" Rainfall Inspections
❑ Sludge Survey
22. Did the facility fail to install and maintain a rain gauge?
❑ Yes
®No
❑ NA
❑ NE
23. If selected, did the facility fail to install and maintain minbreakers on irrigation equipment?
❑ Yes
[2K No
❑ NA
❑ NE
Page 2 of 3
21412015 Continued

Facili Number: Date of Inspection:
24. Did the facility fail to calibrate waste application equipment as required by the permit?
❑ Yes
0 No
❑ NA ❑ NE
25. Is the facility out of compliance with permit conditions related to sludge? If yes, check
[:]Yes
0 No
❑ NA ❑ NE
the appropriate box(es) below.
❑ Failure to complete annual sludge survey ❑ Failure to develop a PDA for sludge levels
❑ Non -compliant sludge levels in any lagoon
List structure(s) and date of first survey indicating noncompliance:
26. Did the facility fail provide documentation of an actively certified operator in charge?
❑ Yes
0 No
❑ NA ❑ NE
27. Did the facility fail to secure a phosphorus loss assessments (PLAT) certification?
❑ Yes
IN No
❑ NA ❑ 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
®No
[:]NA
❑ NE
[—]Yes
M No
❑ NA
❑ NE
[:]Yes
Z]No
[]NA
❑ NE
❑ Yes
0 No
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Yes
W No
[:]NA
❑ NE
❑ Yes
[ No
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Yes
No
❑ NA
❑ NE
Comments (refer to question H): 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).
t�as+e An�l�ss zi 20Z0 ZeOB Cc�l'Ibjon �I I L�i'1�
0(9,03'w2U Z.U9 I�o36VM
ol-)O- 202ci Z-11
g - I l9- zo19 2.05
Sot1l: �' 5-22-2019
1-kc�i1e�1 G�m,e.lo�-�kn�Ltine
9'1
Z-gyp+
�� s
rreRY���
Cyo( (�leld (bmQ)c c IGYa-e-d Cwplc, 0oy, yld
01�ko �wdfainfiles,ar�`' wt'O'r(�Ian
� �m-hfl l TP�-Z sa�IyeaPRec#�
Reviewer/Inspecror Name: I n'1 Phone:
Reviewer/Inspector Signature: Date:
c
Page 3 of 21412015