790003_Compliance Evaluation Inspection_20181128

C Division of Water Resource
Facility Number -- O Division of Soil and Water L-aservation
O Other Agencyprn
Type of Visit: Compliance Inspection 0 Operation Review O Structure Evaluation O Technical Assistance 1
Reason for Visit: Routine O Complaint O Follow-up O Referral O Emergency O Other O Denied Access
Date of Visit: Arrival Time: Departure Time: County: I RYIJ\ Region:
Farm Name: Toe hn Owner Email:
Owner Name: —rQ LAI Aop'e, Phone: l
Mailing Address: Vt (0 �. lj"Vgns sornyy"'t tvG
Physical Address: C 0 f+oln r—d l VZA(Aso I e, N G 9-1�3 d
Facility Contact: 0Irl 0 �,�� Title: Phone:
Onsite Representative: \/ Integrator:
Certified Operator: -Vey-" Awp 6 Certification Number:
Back-up Operator: '� 11' *Ut hS 'A t S
Certification Number: y� 4- Pay
Location of Farm: Latitude: Longitude:
°Y� (L E1rn C1y-bV,(, GAUrdh tZct. --) 'L AA%2?Rh CNNUV* Eck 7
Design Current Design Current Design Current
Swine Capacity Pop. Wet Poultry Capacity Pop. Cattle Capacity Pop.
Wean to Finish Layer Dairy Cow
Wean to Feeder HNon-Layer Dairy Calf
Feeder to Finish S Dairy Heifer
Farrow to Wean Design Current Dry Cow
Farrow to Feeder Dry Poultry Capacity Pop. Non-Dairy
Farrow to Finish I Layers I I 113eef Stocker
Gilts Non-Layers Beef Feeder
Boars Pullets Beef Brood Cow
Turkeys
Other Turkey Poults
Other Other
Discharizes and Stream Impacts
1. Is any discharge observed from any part of the operation? ❑ Yes [A No ❑ NA ❑ NE
Discharge originated at: ❑ Structure ❑ Application Field ❑ Other:
a. Was the conveyance man-made? ❑ Yes ❑ No ❑ NA ❑ NE
b. Did the discharge reach waters of the State?(If yes,notify DWR) ❑ Yes ❑ No ❑ 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 No ❑ NA ❑ NE
3. Were there any observable adverse impacts or potential adverse impacts to the waters ❑ Yes No ❑ NA ❑ NE
of the State other than from a discharge?
Page 1 of 3 21412015 Continued

°1 3
Facili Number: - Date of Inspection:
Waste Collection&Treatment
4.Is storage capacity(structural plus storm storage plus heavy rainfall)less than adequate? Yes ❑ No ❑ NA ❑ NE
a. If yes,is waste level into the structural freeboard? V( N h ❑ Yes No ❑ NA ❑ NE
Structure 1 Structure 2 Structure 3 Structure 4 Structure 5 Structure 6
Identifier: V�V�L 1�pWeq/
Spillway?:
Designed Freeboard(in):
Observed Freeboard(in):
5.Are there any immediate threa Ro the i tegrity of any of the structures observed? ❑ Yes [4 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
7.Do any of the structures need maintenance or improvement? [ Yes ❑ No ❑ NA ❑ 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 ❑ Yes No ❑ 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 OQ No ❑ 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): W KJGl+
13. Soil Type(s):
14. Do the receiving crops differ from those designated in the CAWMP? ❑ Yes No ❑ NA ❑ NE
15. Does the receiving crop and/or land application site need improvement? ❑ Yes No ❑ NA ❑ NE
16.Did the facility fail to secure and/or operate per the irrigation design or wettable ❑ Yes 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 R No ❑ NA ❑ NE
Required Records&Documents
19. Did the facility fail to have the Certificate of Coverage&Permit readily available? ❑ Yes No ❑ NA ❑ NE
20. Does the facility fail to have all components of the CAWMP readily available?If yes,check ❑ Yes No ❑ N A ❑ NE
the appropriate box.
❑WUP El Checklists ❑Design ❑Maps ❑ Lease Agreements ❑Other:
21.Does record keeping need improvement?If yes,check the appropriate box below. ❑ Yes No ❑ NA ❑ NE
aste Application Weekly Freeboard Waste Analysis �� ' " ' "'- T.."^c'�_s ,Weather Code
Ivi
Rainfall Stocking Crop Yield 120 Minute Inspections 94 Monthly and 1" Rainfall Inspections y��q
111Q VQ
22. Did the facility fail to install and maintain a rain gauge? ❑ Yes M No ❑ NA ❑ NE
23. If selected,did the facility fail to install and maintain rainbreakers on irrigation equipment? ❑ Yes �j No ❑ NA ❑ NE
Page 2 of 3 21412015 Continued

_10�
Facili Number: - Date of Inspection: \ x�
24. Did the facility fail to calibrate waste appi,.,ation equipment as required by the permit? ❑ Yes 4 No ❑ NA ❑ NE
25. Is the facility out of compliance with permit conditions related to sludge? If yes,check ❑ Yes � No ❑ 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 Lg No ❑ NA ENE
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 ❑ 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? ❑ Yes ] No ❑ NA ❑ NE
33.Did the Reviewer/Inspector fail to discuss review/inspection with an on-site representative? ❑ Yes [ No ❑ NA ❑ NE
34.Does the facility require a follow-up visit by the same agency? ❑ Yes 19
No ❑ NA ❑ NE
Comments(refer to question#): 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).
0 St AW U�' Glh vJ riS� A-0 bz r.e..m OVe .
Ev�nbAhkw�e�v� Cmn�l�ti tM5 eeS remove dl eed 1-b (w,fyS1
Y. be r'6'U((*-4q2d —CMtV f\(12C ar�►I c�J�(C Pam' N
bnaYS s rx sad
�c11YI/ v�X Vc c e rc��,�� �sY►
G1'' Yaen 0JUMS %nS�ee -ed rvui
�-�- (a l�1orcxfi oV fi txr
ve_-4m-3 �e (aovl) - Q\jz Ck CLI n .^ r2�
Sedge Surrey eve s year (90\q1
j L)I� .
)ovfi 5
LP `D
9
Reviewer/Inspector Name: a \2V Phone: ?j --J16—CI-16 5
Reviewer/Inspector Sig ture: Date: \\ l
Page 3 of 3 2/4/2015