310298_Compliance Evaluation Inspection_20200827

.: Col Division of Water'Resources ",R
jv6
Facility Number � � � - aZ�Q $ %� O Divis on,of �5oi1•and Watex Conservation .
0 Other °Agency .
of Visit: C�o Nance Inspection 0 Operation Review 0 Structure Evaluation 0 Technical Assistance
in for Visit: 70utine 0 Complaint 0 Follow-up 0 Referral 0 Emergency 0 Other 0 Denied Access
Date of Visit: Arrival Time: Departure Time: : oo County: UN Region: MAO
Farm Name: 2AI L 3 6 G c,YuB Nupsc,,Y Owner Email:
Owner Name: E pLJA2D DA 1 L Phone:
Mailing Address:
Physical Address:
Facility Contact:
Onsite Representative: L l Woe'd C"Mcher
Certified Operator: t JUJOA L—"1 J (..,
Back-up Operator:
Location of Farm:
Design .,Current'
Swine Capacity Pop..o
Wean to Finish
Wean to Feeder
Feeder to Finish
Farrow to Wean
Farrow to Feeder
Farrow to Finish
Gilts
Boars
Title:
Integrator:
Phone:
Certification Number:'$a
Certification Number:
Latitude:
. Design - Current
Wet Poultry capacity, . Pop.
R': Layer
Non -Layer
Design. Current
Dry Poultrv' Capacity Pon..
Layers
Non -Layers
Pullets
Turkeys
Turkey Poults
Other
Longitude:
Design` Curre t
Cattle 'Capacity' ' Pops
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
01<0 ❑ NA
❑ NE
Discharge originated at: ❑ Structure ❑ Application Field ❑ Other:
a. Was the conveyance man-made?
❑ Yes
o ❑ NA
No
❑ NE
b. Did the discharge reach waters of the State? (If yes, notify DWR)
❑ Yes
❑ ❑ 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
N ❑ NA
❑ NE
2. Is there evidence of a past discharge from any part of the operation?
❑ Yes
LJ 1V e ❑ NA
❑ NE
3. Were there any observable adverse impacts or potential adverse impacts to the waters
❑ Yes
To ❑ NA
❑ NE
of the State'other than from a discharge?
Page 1 of 3 21412015 Continued

Facility Number: 3 k - -DL 9 jDate of Inspection: a� —aOoZO
Waste Collection & Treatment
4. Is storage capacity (structural plus storm storage plus heavy rainfall) less than adequate? ❑ Yes
a. If yes, is waste level into the structural freeboard? ❑ Yes
Structure 1 Structure 2 Structure 3
Identifier: 0
Spillway?:
Designed Freeboard (in):
Observed Freeboard (in):
Structure 4 Structure 5
5. Are there any immediate threats to the integrity of any of the structures observed?
(i.e., large trees, severe erosion, seepage, etc.)
6. Are there structures on -site which are not properly addressed and/or managed through a
waste management or closure plan?
U-�o ❑ NA ❑ NE
LVJ�o ❑ NA ❑ NE
Structure 6
❑ Yes �NoD ❑ NE
❑ Yes No ❑ NA ❑ NE
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 �Wo
V❑ NA ❑ NE
8. Do any of the structures lack adequate markers as required by the permit? ❑ Yes ❑ 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 2No ❑ 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 40 ❑ 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): r� , S&O
13. Soil Type(s):
14. Do the receiving crops differ from those designated in the CAWMP?
❑ Yes
02'No
❑ NA
❑ NE
15. Does the receiving crop and/or land application site need improvement?
❑ Yes
[j,/No
❑ NA
❑ NE
16. Did the facility fail to secure and/or operate per the irrigation design or wettable
❑ Yes
�to
❑ NA
❑ NE
acres determination?
17. Does the facility lack adequate acreage for land application?
❑ Yes
E2/No
❑ NA
❑ NE
18. Is there a lack of properly operating waste application equipment?
❑ Yes
�No
❑ NA
❑ NE
Required Records & Documents ^�
19. Did the facility fail to have the Certificate of Coverage & Permit readily available? ❑ Yes g ❑ NA ❑ NE
20. Does the facility fail to have all components of the CAWMP readily available? If yes, check ❑ Yes ❑ 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 E to ❑ 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 LINO ❑ NA ❑ NE
23. If selected, did the facility fail to install and maintain rainbreakers on irrigation equipment? ❑ Yes '1'0 ❑ NA ❑ NE
Page 2 of 3 21412015 Continued

Facility Number: 3) - a9$ jDate of Inspection: —
_P.0::ko
24. Did the facility fail to calibrate waste application equipment as required by the permit?
❑Yes
No
❑ NA
❑ NE
25. Is the facility out of compliance with permit conditions related to sludge? If yes, check
❑ Yes
[a'IVo
❑ 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?
27. Did the facility fail to secure a phosphorus loss assessments (PLAT) certification?
❑ Yes
❑ Yes
Eg"N
No
❑ NA
�KNA
❑ NE
❑ NE
T
Other Issues
28. Did the facility fail to properly dispose of dead animals with 24 hours and/or document
4 ..
]':Yes
E2/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?
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 ET'No
❑ Yes �No
❑NA ❑NE
❑NA ❑NE
❑ Yes ❑ No ❑ NA ONE
❑ Yes o
❑ Yes To
❑ Yes E3,X/o
❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ NA ❑ NE
❑NA ❑NE
Comments (refer to question ft Explain any YES answers and/or any,additional recommendations or anyother comments.
Use drawings of facility to better explain situations (use additional pages as necessary).
.-„elude slack! "n/m6VjVjjt RcOA3 Wee&/y `a...
M � SS, wf NA Erg l� OF ftIJ/g-O�/ 1 " AR— �(p�mPiv��j
A p CoL -To &UwdS V J
Reviewer/Inspector Name: Iola-ti pe-n-" Phone: G,t4 -as 711
Reviewer/Inspector Signature:
Page 3 of 3
Date: F-26-20a0
21412015