310516_Compliance Evaluation Inspection_20191219

Division of Water Resources
Facility Number ®- S I 0 Division of Soil and Water Conservation
0 Other Agency
Type of Visit: (V Compliance Inspection 0 Operation Review 0 Structure Evaluation 0 Technical Assistance
Reason for Visit: ® Routine 0 Complaint 0 Follow-up 0 Referral 0 Emergency 0 Other 0 Denied Access
Date of Visit: Arrival Time: ] Departure Time: F71_,)L-/ I County:
Farm Name: :1;=_ivh�o C �QOwner Email:
Owner Name:
Mailing Address:
Physical Address:
Facility Contact:
Title:
Phone:
Onsite Representative: -D'2� r ; clL -f-0 Integrator:
Certified Operator:
Back-up Operator:
Location of Farm:
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
Latitude:
Phone:
Certification Number:
Certification Number:
Design Current
Wet Poultry Capacity Pop.
Layer
Non -Layer
Design Current
Dry Poultry Canacitv POD.
Layers
Non -Layers
Pullets
Turkeys
Turkey Poults
Other
Longitude:
Region:
Design Current
Cattle Capacity Pop.
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 ❑ No NA ❑ NE
b. Did the discharge reach waters of the State? (If yes, notify DWR) ❑ Yes ❑ No E2 A ❑ 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 ❑ 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 I of 3 21412015 Continued

Facility Number: jDate of Inspection: I
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 Structure 4 Structure 5
Identifier:
Spillway?:
Designed Freeboard (in):
Observed Freeboard (in):
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?
No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ No �lA ❑ NE
Structure 6
❑ Yes o ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes O/No ❑ NA ❑ NE
If any of questions 4-6 were answered yes, and the situation poses an immediate public health or enviro'946rital threat, notify DWR
7. Do any of the structures need maintenance or improvement? es E 1 o ❑ NA ❑ NE
8. Do any of the structures lack adequate markers as required by the permit? [:]Yes FZ/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 EY<o ❑ NA ❑ NE
maintenance or improvement?
Waste Application
10. Are there any required buffers, setbacks, or compliance alternatives that need ❑ Yes Flo ❑ NA ❑ NE
maintenance or improvement?
11. Is there evidence of incorrect land application? If yes, check the appropriate box below. ❑ Yes 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?
15. Does the receiving crop and/or land application site need improvement?
16. Did the facility fail to secure and/or operate per the irrigation design or wettable
acres determination?
17. Does the facility lack adequate acreage for land application?
18. Is there a lack of properly operating waste application equipment?
❑ Yes
ElYes ��o
o
0 Yes ❑Xo
❑NA ❑NE
❑ NA ❑ NE
❑NA ❑NE
0 Yes rXNoO
❑NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes NA ❑ NE
Required Records & Documents
19. Did the facility fail to have the Certificate of Coverage & Permit readily available?
❑ Yes
ZNo
❑ NA
❑ NE
20. Does the facility fail to have all components of the CAWMP readily available? If yes, check
❑ Yes
[l]No
❑ 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
, No
❑ 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?
23. If selected, did the facility fail to install and maintain rainbreakers on irrigation equipment?
❑ Yes
❑Yes
ff No
❑ No
❑ NA
❑ NA
❑ NE
NE
Page 2 of 3 21412015 Continued

Facilitv Number: - Date of Inspection:
24. Did the facility fail to calibrate waste application equipment as required by the permit? ❑ Yes L_'1VU ❑ NA ❑ NE
25. Is the facility out of compliance with permit conditions related to sludge? If yes, check ❑ Yes F��o❑ 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 No ❑ NA ❑ NE
27. Did the facility fail to secure a phosphorus loss assessments (PLAT) certification? ❑ Yes ❑ No EKA ❑ 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:
❑ Yes No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes ["NNo ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes D4o ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes ❑ No ❑ NA LJ 1 m
32. Were any additional problems noted which cause non-compliance of the permit or CAWMP? ❑ Yes E2<o ❑ NA ❑ NE
33. Did the Reviewer/Inspector fail to discuss review/inspection with an on -site representative? ❑ Yes ❑ NA ❑ NE
34. Does the facility require a follow-up visit by the same agency? ❑ Yes �Noo ❑ NA ❑ NE
(Comments (refer to question #): Explain any YES answers and/or any additional recommendations or any other comments. I
Use drawings of facility to better explain situations (use additional pages as necessary).
Reviewer/Inspector Name:
Reviewer/Inspector Signature:
Page 3 of 3
Phone: of 1() 1 Cl% —7 Z 1 S
Date: Z ci
21412015