100018_INSPECTIONS_20171231

Q Division of Soil and Water Conservation ❑ Other Agency
It Division of Water Quality
HZ�Routine O Complaint a Follow-uE of DWQ inspection © Follow-up of DSWC. review © Other
Date of Inspection
Facility Number
Time of Inspection: 24 hr. (hh:rnm)
E3Registered JUCertified [3 Applied for Permit [3Permitted 113 Not Operational Date Last Operated:..
Farm Name: .... t�M... ................ County:.. :C ............. ...
Ommer Name:....Y"A. !!t............. .. ................Phone No: }.. %....... 1 f................................. ..........
Facility Contact ew.c,1.2..V... �'��..•.�. TitIe:..( .11�l..... .... J146'4......... Phone No:,.�?11...........`fa�al
Mailing Address: � � G rr�o �/ �
615 - � n
Onsite Representative:. ... C�.L��
......... Integrator:.......................................... ......_....._.............................
..
Certified Operator;,...:... ,.L;. ...., :5 f�L %W �...................... Operator Certification Number:.-.-..........................--.........
Location of Farm:
Latitude ` ° =c Longitude Q" 4 66
Resign Current
LJ Dairy
Non-Dairy
Total SSI3FV'
Number of Lagoons LHolding`Ponds..Q ❑ Subsurface Drains Present ❑ Lagoon Area ❑ Spray Field Area
❑ No Liquid Waste Management System
General
1. Are there any buffers that need maintenance/improvement? ❑ Yes [&No
2. Is any discharge observed from any part of the operation? ❑ Yes Q No
Discharge originated at: ❑ Lagoon ❑ Spray Field D Other
a. If discharge is observed, was the conveyance man-made? ❑ Yes ® No
b. If discharge is observed, did it reach Surface Water? (If yes, notify DWQ) ❑ Yes 12 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 i� No
3. Is there evidence of past discharge from any part of the operation? ❑ Yes ® No
4. Were there any adverse impacts to the waters of the State other than from a discharge? ❑ Yes ® No
5. Does any part of the waste management system (other than lagoons/holding ponds) require © Yes ® No
maintenance/improvement?
6. Is facility not in compliance with any applicable setback criteria in effect at the time of design? ❑ Yes ®. No
7. Did the facility fail to have a certified operator in responsible charge? ❑ Yes 09 No
7/25/97
Continued on back

Facility tiumber: b —
8. Are there lagoons or storage ponds on site which need to be properly closed? ❑ Yes JK No
Structures lLa oons Iloldin Ponds Flush Pits etc.
9. Is storage capacity (freeboard plus storm storage) less than adequate? ❑ Yes ONo
Structure I Structure 2 Structure 3 Structure 4 Structure 5 Structure 6
Identifier:
Freeboard{ft);.. ..............................................................................................................................................................................................
10_ Is seepage observed from any of the structures?
11. Is erosion, or any other threats to the integrity of any of the structures observed'?
I2. Do any of the structures need maintenance/improvement?
(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?
Waste.Application
14. Is there physical evidence of over application?
(If in excess of WMP, or, runoff entering waters of the State, notify DWQ)
15. Crop type ............. &1.1................................................... a............................... .... ............ ................................ I............
16. Do the receiving crops differ with those designated in the Animal Waste Management Plan (i',WMP)?
I7. 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 fait 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?
❑ No.violations or deficiencies were noted during this visit. Youmill receive no further
correspondence about this visit:
❑ Yes [Z No
El Yes ® No
(IYes (3 No
❑ Yes @ No
❑ Yes [-No
Q Yes RNo
❑ Yes 21 No
[ Yes No
❑ Yes ) No
El Yes KI No
[} Yes B No
❑ Yes 2 No
Yes ® No
Yes EZ No
❑ Yes 0 No
.. _ _......
Comments (refer to question #): Explain any YES answers and/or any recommendations or any ether comments
Use. drawings of facility to better explain situations. (use additional pages as necessary)
wpce <,
7/25/97
Reviewer/Inspector Dame
Reviewer/Inspector Signature: ' _� Date:

- x ❑ DSWC Anil al Feedlot Operation Revzew
I DWO-A.nimaI Feedlot Op&ation Site. Inspection -
'- 0 Routine O Complaint O Folloiv-up of DWQ inspection O Follo-,-up of DS«`C review O Other
Date of Inspection q
Facility Number � Q
Time of Inspection Use 24 hr. time
Farm Status: - C_e-- U � i
Total Time (in hours) Spent onReviety
or Inspection (includes travel and processing)
Farm Naine: r�.�: _� U �s:Y_,^'� ` _ _. _.. — County: B r v."5. ? fir,........ _ .a. P"Q
Owner Narne: _M r- 1-_c o .,., CY r t s s t i�- --- Phone No: S 11-- LIS I I
Mailing Address:
Onsite. Representative: S o _ _+r -- -r__r___•_.u..+ e.t Integrator•
Certified Operator: 9,.,c ._. GL+ s - Operator Certification Number:
Location of Farm: UU
Latitude • + Longitude ' _ Is
❑ Not Ot3erstiona! Date Last Operated:
--' Type of Operation and Design Capacity
p`
UIXiltumber Caatde NbrSwine Number
Wean
❑ to Feeder
❑ Laver
❑ Dairy
❑ Feeder to Finish
Laver
❑ Be�fNon f
Farrow to Wean
Farrow Feeder
I O
to
Farrow to Finish
❑ Other Type of Ltvestocl:
"Number of La�oans 1 Haldta Fonds °'^ ": ❑ Subsurface Drains Present
�-� d�'"�""= '. �.,.'�x"x ;d ^`3�'�-c��' v.aa•+ k"k-"�*'"`4.t"S.��t's�Z�`.
-�.:
❑ Lagoon Area ❑ Spray Field Area
'�� %^1� X""� :`.`.Ysr^, .L`.Y•r....., ..:�?i±T. ans»ef,}?.. K? d., #r.,T- ..,r +cv"k. „� � £..:',..�'
General
1. Are there any btuie:s that need maintettance/improvement? ❑ Yes JR No
2. Is any discharge observed from any part of the operation? ❑ Yes V No
a- If discharge is observed, was the conveyance man-made? ❑ Yes ®-No
b. If discharge is observed, did it reach Surface Water? (If yes, notify DWQ) ❑ Yes Ej No
c. If discharge is observed, what is the estimated flow in Qal/min?
d. Does discharge bypass a lagoon system? (If yes, notify DWQ) ❑yes No
d
Is there evidence of past discharge from any part of the operation? ❑Yes El No
4. Was there any adverse impacts to the waters of the State other than from a discharge? ❑ Yes ® No
5. Does any part of the waste management system (other than lagoons/holding ponds) require Q Yes ❑ No
tr ainte:tance<%impro%-erncnf?
rnnr;7,,,,-d ny, back:

6. Is facility not in compliance with any applicable setback criteria? L] Yes ESNo
7. Did the facility fail to have a certified operator in responsible charge (if inspection after 111/97)? ❑ Yes ® No
8. Are there lagoons or storage ponds on site which need to be properly closed? ❑ Yes ® No
Structures (Lagoons and/or Holding Ponds)
9. Is structural freeboard less than adequate? Yes Z1 No
Freeboard (ft): Lagoon I lagoon 2 Lzaaon 3 Lagoon 4
10. Is seepage observed from any of the structures?
11. Is erosion, or any other threats to the integrity of any of the structures observed?
12. Do any of the structures need maintenance%improvement?
(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 structues lack adquate markers to identify start and stop pumping levels?
NVaste Application
14. Is there physical evidence of over application?
(If in excess of WMP, or runoff entering waters of the State, notify DWQ)
15. Crop type !n e: r van v ck-a \-4-" -
16. Do the active crops differ with those designated in the Animal Waste Management Plan?
17. Does the facility have a lack of adequate acreage for land application?.
18. Does the cover crop need improvement?
19. Is there a lack of available irrigation equipment?
For Certified Facilities Only
20. Does the facility fail to have a copy of the Animal Waste Management Plan readily available?
21. Does the facility fail to comply with the A.nimal.Waste Management Plan in any way?
22. Does record keeping need improvement?
23. Does facility require a follow-up visit by same agency?
24. Did Reviewer/Inspector fail to discuss review/inspection with owner or operator in change?
p Yes RNo
❑ Yes ® No
® Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes ENO
❑ Yes Z.No
❑ Yes IKtiro
Yes 9 No
p Yes 0 l\To
❑ Yes 5d No
0Yes RNIO
Yes ONO
❑Yes ®No
0 Yes ONO
❑ Yes R No
CZ-1
ments refer`to estioa� �E laiaaa _ -..
Zdrawuigs o_ffaciiity,to better expi�aiiz.sztuatons (use aclditianal pagescessarr) y; �.:
r
5• rr,�a{Cia�n
F1pes '%v%
12_. La-rf�ry�
SU1 iplrt"4Pd
LGr). f:Jr►eii}• gaV-e.
o •1 "
o r e-ei f-d r- e< ram, S f 0 ,,
GLS is E
v ee.cL {-o Ice bv,rtea.
be ctov� ie p��,acL av,d lz ffe.�
4t 00, yW 4 1 1 vti ael t= eo
C. ,•� GI y- e S ie H{ n ct ti vi 9- c e: s set
Reviewer/Inspector!Yame '' e '° w�7.
Reviwer/Inspector Si;nature: ��� Date: T�
cc. Division of haler Oualioy, Water Quality Section, Facility Assessment Linn 11/14/96

JUL-14-199-� 15:22 FROM DEN WRTER. QUALITY SECTION TO
1dIR0 P.02/132
Site Requires Immediatc Attention:
Facility No. LD -1_
DIVISION OF EN VIRO1VMENTAL MANAGEMENT
r ANIMAL FEEDLOT OPERATIONS SITE VISITATION RECORD
DATE: _ 7I/ /7 _ , 1995
Time: - cam°
Farris Name/Owner:
Mailing Address: -j, ��'� fa 5�4/ • 6 t-,� .ter (.� c- 7 S'Y b `,
County: _ i W V,M to ct'&-
integrator. _ "� ( _ Phone:
On Site Representative ( F fnK r u _c _ Phan" b Y
Physical Address/Location:�cl D t(
Type of Operation: Swine ✓ Poultry ' Cattle
Design Capacity: � S�V 9A— S Number of Animals on Site:
DEM Certification Number: ACE_________ DEM Certification Number: ACNEW
Latitude: Longitude: ` � _" Elevation: , Feet
Circle Yes or No
Does the Animal Waste Lagoon have sufficient freeboard of 1 Foot + 25 year 24 hour storm event
(approximately I Foot + 7 inches) e or No Actual Frecboard: Ft. U Inches
Was any seepage observed from the lagoon(s)? Yes or�P Was any erosion observed? Yes or
Is adequate land available for spray? Yes or No Is the cover crop adequate? Yr No
Crop(s) being utilized. 4,e)Altjl 1�JA-
Does the facility meet SCS minimum setback criteria? 200 Feet from. Dwellings? Cepor No
100 Feet from Wells? Y4or No
Is the animal waste stockpiled within 100 Feet of USES Blue Line Stream? Yes or 69
Is animal waste land applied or spray irrigated within 25 Feet 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? Yes or 6V If Yes, Please Explain.
Does the facility maintain adequate waste management records (vA umes of ruanure, land applied,
spray irrigated on specific acreage with cover cro )? Yes or
Addidonal Comments: ,fAlr • C,4z,w-e v c
• �Iokat--
Inspector Name
cc: Facility Assessment Unit
- k14—k- )�— " C
Si a ure
Use Atta.chmcnis if Needed.
5u,