820098_Compliance Evaluation Inspection_20220606

Facility Number
(N-
Division of Water Resources 6j'rn S
0 Division of Soil and Water Conservation
1 (1}} //}}
0 Other Agency CO'CC1-1. g"
Type of Visit: 151 Compliance Inspection 0 Operation Review 0 Structure Evaluation 0 Technical Assistance
Reason for Visit: Routine 0 Complaint 0 Follow-up 0 Referral 0 Emergency 0 Other 0 Denied Access
Date of Visit:
ctb'�
Arrival Time:
- 00
Farm Name: &eave(zdam Fan
Owner Name: garn�,on CHau9nn
Mailing Address:
Physical Address:
Departure Time:
Owner Email:
Phone:
County: ARTA Region: FRO
ENTERED TO
LASERFICHF
DEQ/DWR WQROS
FAYETTEVILLE REGIONAL OFFICE
Facility Contact: CU tt1 j e 1 C\
Onsite Representative:
Certified Operator:
Back-up Operator:
Location of Farm:
game
Title: 1(J' P. Phone:
gill wa rrerJ
Latitude:
Integrator:
fres-op
Certification Number: 17 9
Certification Number:
Longitude:
Design Current
Capacity Pop.
Wean to Finish
Wean to Feeder
Feeder to Finish
Farrow to Wean
Farrow to Feeder
Farrow to Finish
Gilts
Boars
Design Current
Wet Poultry Capacity Pop.
Design Current
Dr Poultr Ca acity Po
Discharges and Stream Impacts
1. Is any discharge observed from any part of the operation?
Discharge originated at: ❑ Structure ❑ Application Field n 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?
Design Current
Capacity Pop.
Daily Cow
Dairy Calf
Dairy Heifer
Dry Cow
Non -Dairy
Beef Stocker
Beef Feeder
Beef Brood Cow
❑ Yes IN No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes
❑ Yes
No ❑ NA ❑ NE
No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes
❑ Yes
❑ Yes
No ❑ NA ❑ NE
No ❑ NA ❑ NE
No ❑ NA ❑ NE
Page 1 of 3
5/12/2020 Continued

1l
Facility Number:
c-F3
Date of Inspection: 67 IV'�d
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
Yes ❑ No ❑ NA El 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 part of the waste management system other than the waste structures require
maintenance or improvement?
Waste Application
10. Are there any required buffers, setbacks, or compliance alternatives that need
maintenance or improvement?
11. Is there evidence of incorrect land application? If yes, check the appropriate box below.
Waste Collection & Treatment
4. Is storage capacity (structural plus storm storage plus heavy rainfall) less than adequate?
a. If yes, is waste level into the structural freeboard?
Identifier:
Spillway?:
Designed Freeboard (in):
Observed Freeboard (in):
Structure 1
NO
19
Structure 2 Structure 3
Structure 4
❑ Yes
❑ Yes
Structure 5
No ❑ NA ❑ NE
No ❑ NA ❑ NE
Structure 6
7. Do any of the structures need maintenance or improvement?
❑ Yes
❑ Yes
❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes MNo El 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 ❑ vidence of Wind Drift ❑ Application Outside of Approved Area
12. Crop Type(s): \111U(iC? °Wei
.,
13. Soil Type(s): I `0 if O ( K
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
El Yes
❑ Yes
❑ Yes
❑ Yes
❑ Yes
❑ Yes I
❑ Yes
❑ Other:
❑ Yes
❑ Waste Tran
No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ NA ❑ NE
No ❑ NA ❑ NE
No ❑ NA ❑ NE
No ❑ NA ❑ NE
No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ 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
No
ers
❑ Yes cl No
❑ Yes Est No
❑NA ❑NE
El Weather Code
❑ Sludge Survey
❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ NA ❑ NE
5/12/2020 Continued

Facility Number:`
- 105
Date of Inspection: (,'
24. Did the facility fail to calibrate waste application equipment as required by the permit?
25. Is the facility out of compliance with permit conditions related to sludge? If yes, check
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:
❑ Yes
❑ Yes
No ❑ NA ❑ NE
No ❑NA ❑NE
26. Did the facility fail to provide documentation of an actively certified operator in charge? ❑ Yes No ❑ NA ❑ NE
27. Did the facility fail to secure a phosphorus loss assessments (PLAT) certification? ❑ Yes No ❑ NA ❑ NE
Other Issues
28. Did the facility fail to properly dispose of dead animals with 24 hours and/or document ❑ Yes ❑ No ❑ NA ❑ NE
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? ❑ Yes No ❑ NA ❑ NE
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 ❑ Yes ❑ No 0 NA ❑ NE
permit? (i.e., discharge, freeboard problems, over -application)
31. Do subsurface tile drains exist at the facility? If yes, check the appropriate box below. ❑ Yes No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ 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
❑ Yes
❑ Yes
No ❑ NA ❑ NE
No ❑ NA ❑ NE
No ❑ NA ❑ NE
Comments (refer to question #): Ex
Use drawings of facility to better ex
mow lacK,d4e Of iqqooN
NOte bile hey off fiqic)
ro�re. New owneR.
record ir�fa
Wasteannryrdis S°tuir1i:ana2.0 -(P•
aa
rcamr�u
ClUdge. �.X1en51cN a0g1
Sci I aoao
Cairbrai-iord. due i;� �r2a
IRRT ✓
Reviewer/Inspector Name:
Reviewer/Inspector Signature:
Page 3 of 3
ME F&nten
KOzT1( 2
oi21Of
Phone: 919 .f7' C(-1 1?
Date: (0- kp.o-)-
5/12/2020