010028_Compliance Evaluation Inspection_20180605

� Division of WaterResource421'_
Facility Number . = .-T O Diviser Conservation!
OtherA' ".I"A ._ veil
Type of Visit:
Reason for Visit:
.�7
Compliance Inspection 0
(XRoutine 0 Complaint
Operation Review 0 Structure Evaluation 0 Technical Assistance
0 Follow-up 0 Referral 0 Emergency 0 Other 0 Denied Access
6 0,97 d_0 `%
Date of Visit:
Al -rival Time:
Departure Time: QS County:@
Region:
Farm Name: ��
�
+ [! i clld�
Owner Email:
,
A,'b Q1
j
Owner Name:
vi 1 0.li"
Phone:
C-
-7 7
Mailing Address: DJ-4— U i rvo, I j 1n 1 t l K-r"&M 1-4
Physical Address:
Facility Contact: &A-' &py'A E j OWd Title: Phone: C, 7 '
Onsite Representative: Integrator:
& 5 'R % I z /3 il
Certified Operator: Certification Number:
Back-up Operator:
Location of Farm:
Latitude
�7 So Ot(i �. oln+a L i e Y
Design Current
Swine Capacity Pop.
Wean to Finish
Wean to Feeder
Feeder to Finish
Farrow to Wean
Farrow to Feeder
Farrow to Finish
Gilts
Boars
Other
Other
Certification Number:
u g A u7
q� Longitude:
Design
Current,
Wet Poultry
Capacity
Pop.
Layer
Non -La er
Design
Current
Dry Poultry
Capacity
Pop.
La ers
Non -Layers
Pullets
Turkeys
-Turkey Poults
Other
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?
b. Did the discharge reach waters of the State? (If yes, notify DWR)
tle
y Cow
y Calf
y Heifer
Cow
iN VI, -Cali y
Beef Stocker
Beef Feeder
Beef Brood Cow
❑ Yes X No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes
❑ No
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ 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 IN No ❑ NA ❑ NE
3. Were there any observable adverse impacts or potential adverse impacts to the waters ❑ Yes 0 No ❑ NA ❑ NE
of the State other than from a discharge?
Page I of 3 21412015 Continued

[,FacilityYyNumber: Q1 - jDate of Inspection: u Quo 16S�12 O 1"
Waste Collection & Treatment
4. Is storage capacity (structural plus storm storage plus heavy rainfall) less than adequate? ❑ Yes D?"'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
o Identifier:
I Spillway?:
Designed Freeboard (in):
Observed Freeboard (in):
5. Are there any immediate threats to the integrity of any of the structures observed? NrYes ❑ 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 �q o ❑ 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? MYes []No ❑ NA ❑ NE
8. Do any of the structures lack adequate markers as required by the permit? ❑ Yes 5;�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 RNo ❑ NA ❑ NE
maintenance or improvement?
Waste Application ,�,,,/
10. Are there any required buffers, setbacks, or compliance alternatives that need ❑ Yes I �'No ❑ NA ❑ NE
maintenance or improvement? 7'
11. Is there evidence of incorrect land application? If yes, check the appropriate box below. ❑ Yes eNo ❑ 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):
13. Soil Type(s):
14. Do the receiving crops differ from those designated in the CAWMP?
DirYes
❑ No
❑ NA
❑ NE
15. Does the receiving crop and/or land application site need improvement?
❑ Yes
XNo
❑ NA
❑ NE
16. Did the facility fail to secure and/or operate per the irrigation design or wettable
❑ Yes
5�No
❑ NA
❑ NE
acres determination?
17. Does the facility lack adequate acreage for land application?
❑ Yes
1ja0f4o
❑ NA
❑ NE
18. Is there a lack of properly operating waste application equipment?
❑ Yes
PrNo
❑ NA
❑ NE
Required Records & Documents
19. Did the facility fail to have the Certificate of Coverage & Permit readily available?
❑ Yes
D?*No
❑ NA
❑ NE
20. Does the facility fail to have all components of the CAWMP readily available? If yes, check
❑ Yes
[SY1No
❑ 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
[WNo
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Waste Application ❑ Weekly Freeboard ❑ Waste Analysis ❑ Soil Analysis
❑ Weather
Code
❑ Rainfall ❑ Stocking ❑ Crop Yield ❑ 120 Minute Inspections ❑ Monthly and 1" Rainfall Inspections
E 94 lge
Stirrer
22. Did the facility fail to install and gauge?
❑ Yes
�No
❑ NA
❑ NE
�maintain,a'rain
23. If selected, did the faces ail tf' o install and maintain rainbreakers on irrigation equipment?
❑ Yes
❑ No
�NA
❑ NE
Page 2 of 3
21412015 Continued

Facili Number: - Date of Inspection:
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 ❑ No IWA ❑ 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 WNo ❑ NA ❑ NE
27. Did the facility fail to secure a phosphorus loss assessments (PLAT) certification? ❑ Yes DeNo ❑ NA ❑ NE
Other Issues
28. Did the facility fail to properly dispose of dead animals with 24 hours and/or document ❑ Yes 0 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
0 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
;rNo
❑ 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
P�No
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Application Field ❑ Lagoon/Storage Pond ❑ Other:
77��
32. Were any additional problems noted which cause non-compliance of the permit or CAWMP?
❑ Yes
P�'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
T' No
❑ NA
❑ NE
�f nS-o► l -%�5 6 ue Z/ 3 ! 17- 01 � ,(� � �t"�� � 21c4 s r0-C 4 sV n j v,as i-�e
f
pC I bmjj�oh5 d u e� I r) 9-0 1 1�, (5p eaAe r ) Sofld Set') .
°�- <5 `1-
�" p
I\J6 uj Q
00'.a'� "Ld tt
Jticd-moo P-b--aP
LA-1 I" i_ar7.3- CsC-H Auz-aL4
®�
coup
Reviewer/Inspector Name:
Reviewer/Inspector Signatuc
Page 3 of 3
Phone: �� 7&-Rjq
Date:
21412015