310582_Compliance Evaluation Inspection_20200806

& Division of Watesources
Facility Number ,, $ o"% O
'F-Division of Soil and Water Conservation,
�.... r' Re ..
70 Other Agency
Type of Visit: & Co Hance Inspection Operation Review O Structure Evaluation O Technical Assistance
Reason for Visit: 70utine O Complaint O Follow-up O Referral O Emergency O Other O Denied Access
Date of Visit: —E —,gyp Arrival Time: Departure Time: County:. v Region: W I P, 0
Farm Name:Owner Email:
Owner Name: 10,LL1AM GLEN SkoLpp, Phone:
Mailing Address:
Physical Address:
Facility Contact:
Onsite Representative:
Title:
Integrator:
Phone:
Certified Operator: s b of ow-, Certification Number:
Back-up Operator:
Location of Farm:
Latitude:
Certification Number:
Longitude:
Design Current, ; ` Design: Current a �. Desigh Current
Swine ° Capacity fop. ° .. " Wet poultry Capacity' Pop:"• Cattle " Capacity Pop:
Wean to Finish
Wean to Feeder
Feeder to Finish
Farrow to Wean
Farrow to Feeder
Farrow to Finish
Gilts
Boars
Other
Other
Layer
Non -Layer
° e Desigo Current .
Dry Poultrv, Canacity
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
o
❑ NA
❑ NE
Discharge originated at: ❑ Structure ❑ Application Field ❑ Other:
a. Was the conveyance man-made?
❑ Yes
N
❑ NA
❑ NE
b. Did the discharge reach waters of the State? (If yes, notify DWR)
[:]Yes
L� 1V 0
❑ 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
M4
❑ NA
❑ NE
3. Were there any observable adverse impacts or potential adverse impacts to the waters
[:]Yes
�I�To
❑ NA
❑ NE
of the State other than from a discharge?
Page 1 of 3 21412015 Continued

Facility Number: ?s - ction: -
Waste Collection & Treatment
-'No
4. Is storage capacity (structural plus storm storage plus heavy rainfall) less than adequate?
❑ Yes
Ed
❑ NA
❑ NE
a. If yes, is waste level into the structural freeboard?
❑ Yes
[q/No
❑ NA
❑ NE
Structure 1 Structure 2 Structure 3 Structure 4
Structure 5
Structure 6
01
Identifier:
Spillway?:
Designed Freeboard (in): q l c�_
Observed Freeboard (in):�
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
Eg/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 dlqo ❑ NA ❑ NE
8. Do any of the structures lack adequate markers as required by the permit? ❑ Yes 6/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 ❑ Yes [ENo ❑ 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 [VNo ❑ 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): G J & V .� A,
13. Soil Type(s):
14. Do the receiving crops differ from those designated in the CAWMP?
P
❑ Yes
e No
❑ NA
❑ NE
15. Does the receiving crop and/or land application site need improvement?
❑ Yes
0No
❑ NA
❑ NE
16. Did the facility fail to secure and/or operate per the irrigation design or wettable
❑ Yes
62'-'No
❑ NA
❑ NE
acres determination?
17. Does the facility lack adequate acreage for land application?
❑ Yes
❑N o
❑ NA
❑ NE
18. Is there a lack of properly operating waste application equipment?
❑ Yes
E/No
❑ NA
❑ NE
Required Records & Documents
19. Did the facility fail to have the Certificate of Coverage & Permit readily available?
,--,�,
LOCI r es
❑ No
❑ NA
❑ NE
20. Does the facility fail to have all components of the CAWMP readily available? If yes, check
❑ Yes
EJ/No
❑ NA
❑ NE
the a ropriate box
P ❑ WUP ❑ Checklists ❑ Design ❑ Maps ❑ Lease Agreements ❑ Oth r: _0'-26
dy
oes record keeping need improvement? If yes, check the appropriate box below.es o ❑ NA ❑ NE
Ww
aste 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 dNo ❑ NA ❑ NE
23. If selected, did the facility fail to install and maintain rainbreakers on irrigation equipment? ❑ Yes No ❑ NA ❑ NE
Page 2 of 3 21412015 Continued

Facility Number: '-!>- St a. I jDate of Inspection: -1�- �O ()
24. Did the facility fail to calibrate waste application equipment as required by the permit? ❑ Yes �go ❑ NA ❑ NE
25. Is the facility out of compliance with permit conditions related to sludge? If yes, check ❑ Yes o ❑ 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 ❑ NA ❑ NE
27. Did the facility fail to secure a phosphorus loss assessments (PLAT) certification? [—]Yes [—]No dNA ❑ 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
2/No
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Yes
�No
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Yes
❑ No
❑ NA
R/NE
❑ Yes dNo ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes 4No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes YNo ❑ NA ❑ NE
Comments (refer to question #): Explain any YES answers and/or any additional recommendations or any other comments.
Use drawines of facility to better explain situations (use additional pages as necessary).
�vne vj o5 � ,sS+ ++me. �pj S _je M Ced Pr(z_5iqy,,
�v P S/g/� 0
clVae 1-N�' -%� �m�(cocas U � 1vl Do oK
�erzrs , ��SS''r17 q'i ' ctCS, MA iQ'P' aalq Rec�s�S
— 1-nd vde rnn4 'Iv< (e cocd� ,
�- plgn to r ���a�y- mar �� wS' 5'
Reviewer/Inspector Name: -:5� 4 N pf_2 r-'�
Reviewer/Inspector Signature:
Page 3 of 3
M U SV ae fR'► ''h
ap W% a�� bm W q .
Phone:C910)�p��` 1
Date:—(�— Oa©
21412015