310692_Compliance Evaluation Inspection_20200127

W Division of Water Resources o% S
Facility Number ®- EMIO Division of Soil and Water Conservation
O Other Agency
Type of Visit: 0 Hance Inspection O Operation Review O Structure Evaluation O Technical Assistance
Reason for Visit: Co7outine O Complaint O Follow-up O Referral O Emergency O Other O Denied Access
Date of Visit: pl /a Arrival Time: ® Departure Time: a YS County: Region: INJ R b
Farm Name: 111BE-P-11y f-jiP_fti Owner Email:
Owner Name: Eu52.-ne- Ne.+he(C.t Phone:
Mailing Address:
Physical Address:
Facility Contact:
Onsite Representative: Euqt.,q qmc'kra� )
Certified Operator: 'r'jyyi®t64 & e±ktcQ:H
Back-up Operator:
Location of Farm:
Swine
Wean to Finish
Wean to Feeder
Feeder to Finish
Farrow to Wean
Farrow to Feeder
Farrow to Finish
Gilts
Other
Other
Title:
Latitude:
Phone:
Integrator: g010 fie1,%< lira ,•a 6 7 C Q nj
Certification Number:
Certification Number:
• Design Current Design Current
Capacity Pop. Wet Poultry Capacity Pop.
Layer
Non -Layer
Design Current
Dry Pnultry Canacity Pon.
Layers
Non -Layers
Pullets
Turkeys
Turkey Poults
Other
Longitude:
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 [VNo ❑ 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 WNo ❑ 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 -ENE
2. Is there evidence of a past discharge from any part of the operation? ❑ Yes ,ij o ❑ NA ❑ NE
3. Were there any observable adverse impacts or potential adverse impacts to the waters ❑ Yes Vo ❑ NA ❑ NE
of the State other than from a discharge?
Page 1 of 3 21412015 Continued

Facility Number: 1 - Date of inspection: 0M Ro
Waste Collection & Treatment
4. Is storage capacity (structural plus storm storage plus heavy rainfall) less than adequate? ❑ Yes � o ❑ 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)
6� 1
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?
EYes No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes �No ❑ NA ❑ NE
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 E� o ❑ NA ❑ NE
8. Do any of the structures lack adequate markers as required by the permit? ❑ Yes o ❑ 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 e No ❑ NA ❑ NE
maintenance or improvement?
Waste Application
10. Are there any required buffers, setbacks, or compliance alternatives that need ❑ Yes E� 0 ❑ NA ❑ NE
maintenance or improvement?
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): &-t r n U d cl c S CT-O
13. Soil Type(s):
14. Do the receiving crops differ from those designated in the CAWMP?
❑ YesVNo
❑ NA
❑ NE
15. Does the receiving crop and/or land application site need improvement?
❑ Yes
❑ NA
❑ NE
16. Did the facility fail to secure and/or operate per the irrigation design or wettable
❑ Yes
dNo
❑ NA
❑ NE
acres determination?
17. Does the facility lack adequate acreage for land application?
❑ Yes
mll' c
0 NA
❑ NE
18. Is there a lack of properly operating waste application equipment?
❑ Yes
G/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
To
❑ 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
eNo
❑ 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 Inspectio;/N�
❑ Sludge Survey
22. Did the facility fail to install and maintain a rain gauge?
❑ Yes
❑ NA
❑ NE
23. If selected, did the facility fail to install and maintain rainbreakers on irrigation equipment?
❑ Yes
No
❑ NA
❑ NE
Page 2 of 3 21412015 Continued

Facility Number: ?j - �n Date of Inspection: Ol p- - a®�0
24. Did the facility fail to calibrate waste application equipment as required by the permit? ❑ Yes ❑/o ❑ 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: ,x �C. �, aoa3
26. Did the facility fail provide documentation of an actively certified operator in charge? ❑ Yes V ❑ NA ❑ NE
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 [g 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 EdNo ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Application Field ❑ Lagoon/Storage Pond ❑ Other:
32. Were any additional problems noted which cause non-compliance of the permit or CAWMP? ❑ Yes [0/N0
33. Did the Reviewer/Inspector fail to discuss review/inspection with an on -site representative? ❑ Yes
❑ Yes LJd No
34. Does the facility require a follow-up visit by the same agency?
❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ 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).
` HA-5 ex4ensr6n tzar SlUcC!k 100at V"+ii 20a3
�G'GOr�
7�'�?C`Q,til�
.r�,is wor�J I iti�
qjP f
/
6
(eC"S Oh Week l'l
177 DY i lj'' awe- w0Se r Fof M S
v1Jv" `t ��ib �r 6t ear A S S corn A t , Am1-rJ,1k t1qjUser di a{
— AveI ; e-A -to t e rm u lc, 1%A Ocio&er Tnee A t6 mow Nkoc ' �A,7_ + of &0 r IN
I S -Prne,
Reviewer/Inspector Name: ::5:n 11 pJ R as
Reviewer/Inspector Signature:
Page 3 of 3
Phone: (2/0) —q ✓�
Date: O (6o?7Lc?a a
21412015