860004_Compliance Evaluation Inspection_20181121

Division of Water Resources
Facility Number . m ®= ® Division of Soil and Water Conservation
&t 0 Other Agency t
Type of Visit: Compliance Inspection 0 Operation Review 0 Structure Evaluation 0 Technical Assistance
Reason for Visit: YRoutine 0 Complaint 0 Follow-up 0 Referral 0 Emergency 0 Other 0 Denied Access
Date of Visit: 1 ZD Arrival Time: Departure Time: �-I County: �� r Region: WS
Farm Name: 16 u bje- E FAAr M-5 Owner Email:
Owner Name: Eali e d- 6 t (mil To kn aySO n Phone:
Mailing Address: �'OL W hi+e- PA I K 1 `/1 .4NC— $ 6 Z 1
Physical Address: J� L cry Lz,-n 2
Facility Contact: EAl e— r0 h fl5 on Title: Phone: 334 -- 6 " 7 ZS %
Onsite Representative: Integrator:
Certified Operator: Certification Number:
Back-up Operator:
Certification Number:
Location of Farm: Latitude: 36 V71q 0s,�t Longitude: �Q� V6 �t
T —17 N � Z� h y r 2 •�fiO'� VU bpi+e
Design Current
Design
Current
Design Current
Swine Capacity Pop.
Wet Poultry
Capacity
Pop.
Cattle
Capacity ' Pop.
Wean to Finish
Poults
Layers
Non -Layers
Pullets
Discharges and Stream Impacts
1. Is any discharge observed from any part of the operation?
Discharge originated at: ❑ Structure ❑ Application Field ❑ Other:
a. Was the conveyance man-made?
Layer Dairy Cow
Cow
Dai Heifer
Beef Stocker 3 O
Beef Feeder
Beef Brood Cow
❑ Yes XNo ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes ❑ No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes ❑ No ❑ NA ❑ NE
b. Did the discharge reach waters of the State? (If yes, notify DWR)
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)
2. Is there evidence of a past discharge from any part of the operation?
3. Were there any observable adverse impacts or potential adverse impacts to the waters
of the State other than from a discharge?
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes ONo
❑ Yes CK"No
❑ NA ❑ NE
❑NA ❑NE
❑ NA ❑ NE
Page 1 of 3 2/4/2015 Continued
Discharges and Stream Impacts
1. Is any discharge observed from any part of the operation?
Discharge originated at: ❑ Structure ❑ Application Field ❑ Other:
a. Was the conveyance man-made?
Layer Dairy Cow
Cow
Dai Heifer
Beef Stocker 3 O
Beef Feeder
Beef Brood Cow
❑ Yes XNo ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes ❑ No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes ❑ No ❑ NA ❑ NE
b. Did the discharge reach waters of the State? (If yes, notify DWR)
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)
2. Is there evidence of a past discharge from any part of the operation?
3. Were there any observable adverse impacts or potential adverse impacts to the waters
of the State other than from a discharge?
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes ONo
❑ Yes CK"No
❑ NA ❑ NE
❑NA ❑NE
❑ NA ❑ NE
Page 1 of 3 2/4/2015 Continued
❑ Yes XNo ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes ❑ No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes ❑ No ❑ NA ❑ NE
b. Did the discharge reach waters of the State? (If yes, notify DWR)
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)
2. Is there evidence of a past discharge from any part of the operation?
3. Were there any observable adverse impacts or potential adverse impacts to the waters
of the State other than from a discharge?
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes ONo
❑ Yes CK"No
❑ NA ❑ NE
❑NA ❑NE
❑ NA ❑ NE
Page 1 of 3 2/4/2015 Continued
b. Did the discharge reach waters of the State? (If yes, notify DWR)
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)
2. Is there evidence of a past discharge from any part of the operation?
3. Were there any observable adverse impacts or potential adverse impacts to the waters
of the State other than from a discharge?
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes ONo
❑ Yes CK"No
❑ NA ❑ NE
❑NA ❑NE
❑ NA ❑ NE
Page 1 of 3 2/4/2015 Continued

Facili Number: - Olt jDate of Inspection: / _ 2 — �®
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? ❑ Yes ❑ No ❑ NA ❑ NE
Structure 1 Structure 2 Structure 3 Structure 4 Structure 5 Structure 6
Identifier:
Spillway?:
Designed Freeboard (in):
Observed Freeboard (in):
9- C -
5. Are there any immediate threats to the integrity of any of the structures observed?
(i.e., large trees, severe erosion, seepage, etc.)
❑ Yes 0 No ❑ NA ❑ NE
6. Are there structures on -site which are not properly addressed and/or managed through a ❑ Yes XNo ❑ 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 I No ❑ NA • ❑ NE
8. Do any of the structures lack adequate markers as required by the permit? ❑ Yes ❑ No OOA ❑ 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? 77��
11. Is there evidence of incorrect land application? If yes, check the appropriate box below. ❑ Yes 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):
JO 1-7
13. Soil Type(s):
14. Do the receiving crops differ from those designated in the CAWMP? ❑ Yes hNo ❑ NA ❑ NE
15. Does the receiving crop and/or land application site need improvement? ❑ Yes N'No ❑ NA ❑ NE
16. Did the facility fail to secure and/or operate per the irrigation design or wettable ❑ Yes ❑ No JR'NA ❑ NE
acres determination?
17. Does the facility lack adequate acreage for land application?
18. Is there a lack of properly operating waste application equipment?
ReQuired Records & Documents Records & Documents
19. Did the facility fail to have the Certificate of Coverage & Permit readily available?
20. Does the facility fail to have all components of the CAWMP readily available? If yes, check
the appropriate box.
❑ WUP ❑ Checklists ❑ Design ❑ Maps ❑ Lease Agreements
6Ka
es record keeping need improvement?��;5ste Application �� Waste Analysis Soil Analysis
❑ Yes No
❑ Yes �] No
❑ Yes kVNo
[—]Yes
❑NA ❑NE
❑NA ❑NE
❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ NA ❑ NE
❑No ❑NA ❑NE
ans€es [Weather Code
Rainfall Z] stZilfto
ing Crop Yield � i 20 Minute Inspections Monthly and 1" Rainfall Inspections ��
22. Did the facility install and maintain a rain gauge.? 5 t�6�ie—�p� ❑Yes �No ❑ NA ❑ NE
1"
23. If selected, did the facility fail to install and maintain rainbreakers on irrigation equipment? ❑ Yes ❑ No �WNA ❑ NE
Page 2 of 3 21412015 Continued
❑ Other:_
0 Yes

Facili Number: - Q Date of Inspection: —
24. Did the facility fail to calibrate waste application equipment as required by the permit? ❑ Yes U� No ❑ NA ❑ NE
25. Is the facility out of compliance with permit conditions related to sludge? If yes, check ❑ Yes ❑ No 5 to ❑ 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?
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
X No
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Yes
CR�No
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Yes
CR'No
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Yes jjj No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes jj'No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes MNo ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes, 0 No
❑ Yes,V"No
❑ Yes NrNo
❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ NA ❑ NE
%ny w&6te, o r\Pti t&,Wov%5 s i nGe- ;q Iy /2-017 ? ye✓6 - Se-C
�zt . (�.o-li l�ra,•�-� c�� w �s � e�'�°-P P li �a�i o v� rec o v�d s , Lu u.s �-� sau lin� l �� o i 1 �-e��s
R e-a ro-e,t Q-M*(bV-&J 0_d z- ip - 2-6o
�3 Lttvid S to city = 1 • (01 Ids. N1l600 Jvri ci,h'®v, Sauupl
�,� = I •!vim i Ias • NI IODD 6 �eEoPe v trPi c� ,
o-
11 he,
Reviewer/Inspector Name: W4556 . RoSA MCV Phone:'36p --"4 - 9631
Reviewer/Inspector Signature: AL" Date: I I /z 11 2-6Is
Page 3 of 3 21412015