310318_Compliance Evaluation Inspection_20200924

_ (9'Division of'.Water Resources
Facilidumber ` _.0 Division of Soil and Water C MervAtion
0 Other. Agency o
Type of Visit: Co liance Inspection 0 Operation Review 0 Structure Evaluation 0 Technical Assistance
Reason for Visit: (�'_Itoutine 0 Complaint 0 Follow-up 0 Referral 0 Emergency 0 Other 0 Denied Access
Date of Visit: -24- u` ` Arrival Time: Departure Time: County: �Uejj`)A Region: W IRE)
Farm^Name: t�' A1� 1'1�lit rAOn S Owner Email:
Owner Name:, Qytjt4%.0 Sff►RmA►- Phone:
Mailing Address:
Physical Address:
Facility Contact:
OnsiteRepresentative: --SoSpok lanio-r
Certified Operator: 1 CJy _�o.C^_C1n.
Back-up Operator:
Location of Farm:
Title:
Latitude:
Phone:
Integrator:
Certification Number: 'TT -570
Certification Number:
Longitude:
Design Current„ ti Design .'Current , , Design• Current .
,'Swine Capacity Pop. WetPoultry Capacity. ''Pop. a -Cattle �` Capacity ..'Fop., •�
Wean to Finish
Wean to Feeder
Feeder to Finish a 4tt-�r y40.
Farrow to Wean
Farrow to Feeder
Farrow to Finish
Gilts
Boars
Other
Layer
Non -Layer
Diesigi' `Current
Dry Poultry Ca �acity . Pop. _
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
[�No ❑ NA
❑ NE
Discharge originated at: ❑ Structure ❑ Application Field ❑ Other:
a. Was the conveyance man-made?
❑ Yes
o ❑ NA
❑ NE
b. Did the discharge reach waters of the State? (If yes, notify DWR)
❑ Yes
7No ❑ 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
r❑ NA
❑ NE
3. Were there any observable adverse impacts or potential adverse impacts to the waters
❑ Yes❑
VN NA
❑ NE
of the State other than from a discharge?
Page 1 of 3 21412015 Continued

Facility Number: - 311 Date of Inspection: A-�Lq-
07
Waste Collection & Treatment
4. Is storage capacity (structural plus storm storage plus heavy rainfall) less than adequate?
�,(
C Yes
0 No
❑ NA
❑ NE
a. If yes, is waste level into the structural freeboard?
❑ Yes
Ej/No
❑ NA
❑ NE
Structure 1 Structure 2 Structure 3 Structure 4
Structure 5
Structure 6
Identifier:
Spillway?:
Designed Freeboard (in): C'i • S
Observed Freeboard (in): A
5. Are there any immediate threats to the integrity of any of the structures observed?
❑ Yes
E�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
ErNo
❑ 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 VNo
�❑ 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 U31<0 ❑ NA ❑ NE
maintenance or improvement?
Waste Application
10. Are there any required buffers, setbacks, or compliance alternatives that need ❑ Yes WNo ❑ NA ❑ NE
maintenance or improvement?
11. Is there evidence of incorrect land application? If yes, check the appropriate box below. ❑ Yes ❑'I<To ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Excessive Ponding ❑ Hydraulic Overload ❑ Frozen Ground ❑ Heavy Metals (Cu, Zn, etc.)
❑ PAN ❑ PAN > 10% or 101bs. ❑ 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): �, S , Sb
13. Soil Type(s):
14. Do the receiving crops differ from those designated in the CAWMP?
❑ Yes
Sa�No
❑ NA
❑ NE
15. Does the receiving crop and/or land application site need improvement?
❑ Yes
i�l
❑ NA
❑ NE
16. Did the facility fail to secure and/or operate per the irrigation design or wettable
❑ Yes
Fg/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
�J`No
❑ NA
❑ NE
Required Records & Documents
19. Did the facility fail to have the Certificate of Coverage & Permit readily available?
❑ Yes
�o
❑ NA
❑ NE
20. Does the facility fail to have all components of the CAWMP readily available? If yes, check
❑ Yes
�FNo
❑ 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 EyNo ❑ 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 VyNN ❑ NA ❑ NE
23. If selected, did the facility fail to install and maintain rainbreakers on irrigation equipment? ❑ Yes ❑ NA ❑ NE
Page 2 of 3 21412015 Continued

Facility Number: - jDate of Ins ection:- .`,a4 -a'6
24. Did the facility fail to calibrate waste application equipment as required by the permit? ❑ Yes VO
❑ NA ❑ NE
25. Is the facility out of compliance with permit conditions related to sludge? If yes, check ❑ Yes ❑ 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 ETo ❑ NA ❑ NE
27. Did the facility fail to secure a phosphorus loss assessments (PLAT) certification? ❑ Yes ❑ No F�(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 E No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes 2r<o ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes ❑ No ❑ NA Ea"NE
❑ Yes ET/No
❑ Yes 2/No
❑ Yes 9-KO
❑NA ❑NE
❑NA ❑NE
❑NA ❑NE
Comments (refer to question ft 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).
+6
J Cj1 ��n. Cats, b ce�r- F-�rw-t
R"'s Ce���d��c-0.��d
rj Y;2z CoL R3,
Reviewer/Inspector Name: Sy 411) 311k�ti
Reviewer/Inspector Signature:
Page 3 of 3
Phone: C`110) 61-4--QS_
Date: 9 019— aoa a
21412015