310593_Compliance Evaluation Inspection_20200129

& Division of Water Resources
Facility Number 3I - r3 0 Division of Soil and Water Conservation
0 Other Agency
Type of Visit: 0 7Routine
pliance Inspection 0 Operation Review 0 Structure Evaluation 0 Technical Assistance
Reason for Visit: 0 Complaint 0 Follow-up 0 Referral 0 Emergency 0 Other 0 Denied Access
Date of Visit: G 6a0 Arrival Time: ©p0 Departure Time: e 3 County: Region: JA) I Rb
Farm Name: Ma 1aT_ E0
Owner Name: 17w 1 G1 P �'1'�1 e�CUA1�i D
Mailing Address:
Physical Address:
Facility Contact:
Owner Email:
Phone:
Title: Phone:
Onsite Representative: i j,-j- r' Integrator: ,,, %1►�¢ )Cl'�
Certified Operator: byi l e, bHT Certification Number: t'743J6
Back-up Operator:
Location of Farm:
Design Current
Swine. Capacity Pop.
Wean to Finish
Wean to Feeder
Feeder to Finish
j 1t 6
°i 5L7
Farrow to Wean
Farrow to Feeder
Farrow to Finish
Gilts
Boars
Other
Other
-11
Certification Number:
Latitude:
Design Current
Vet Poultry Capacity Pop.
Layer
Non -Layer
Design Current
Dry Poultry Canacitv Poo.
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
No ❑ NA
❑ NE
Discharge originated at: ❑ Structure ❑ Application Field ❑ Other:
a. Was the conveyance man-made?
❑ Yes
03�❑ 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
' ❑ NA
❑ NE
2. Is there evidence of a past discharge from any part of the operation?
❑Yes
VNq ❑ NA
❑ NE
3. Were there any observable adverse impacts or potential adverse impacts to the waters
❑ Yes
NA
❑ NE
of the State -other than from a discharge?
Page l of 3 21412015 Continued

Facility Number: 31 - S93 I jDate of Inspection: p oa-d>
Waste Collection & Treatment
4. Is storage capacity (structural plus storm storage plus heavy rainfall) less than adequate? ❑ Yes VNo
❑ NA ❑ NE
a. If yes, is waste level into the structural freeboard? ❑ Yes ❑ NA ❑ NE
Structure 1 Structure 2 Structure 3 Structure 4 Structure 5 Structure 6
Identifier:
Spillway?:
Designed Freeboard (in): ►C�
Observed Freeboard (in):
5. Are there any immediate threats to the integrity of any of the structures observed? ❑ Yes [(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 2No ❑ 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 ❑ 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 0 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 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): Gt,-rrntjrta,- �v�Q
13. Soil Type(s):
14. Do the receiving crops differ from those designated in the CAWMP?
❑ Yes
❑ NA
❑ NE
15. Does the receiving crop and/or land application site need improvement?
El
VNo
❑ NA
❑ NE
16. Did the facility fail to secure and/or operate per the irrigation design or wettable
❑ Yes
❑ NA
❑ NE
acres determination?
17. Does the facility lack adequate acreage for land application?
❑ Yes yNo
❑ NA
❑ NE
18. Is there a lack of properly operating waste application equipment?
❑ Yes
❑ NA
❑ NE
Required Records & Documents
19. Did the facility fail to have the Certificate of Coverage & Permit readily available?
❑ Yes Zo
❑ NA
❑ NE
20. Does the facility fail to have all components of the CAWMP readily available? If yes, check
❑Yes [2No❑
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? ❑ YesVNo
❑ NA ❑ NE
23. If selected, did the facility fail to install and maintain rainbreakers on irrigation equipment? ❑ Yes ❑ NA ❑ NE
Page 2 of 3 21412015 Continued

Facility Number: 31 - 3 Date of Inspection: U°
24. Did the facility fail to calibrate waste application equipment as required by the permit?
El Yes
� o ❑ NA ❑ NE
25. Is the facility out of compliance with permit conditions related to sludge? If yes, check
ElYes
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
❑ 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
WNo ❑ 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
&o ❑ 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
ZNo NA ❑ NE
33. Did the Reviewer/Inspector fail to discuss review/inspection with an on -site representative?
❑ Yes
N ❑ NA ❑ NE
34. Does the facility require a follow-up visit by the same agency?
❑ Yes
No ❑ NA ❑ NE
Comments (refer to question #): Explain any YES answers and/or any additional recommendations or any other comments. I
Use drawinus of facility to better explain situations (use additional pages as necessary).
kt$v w ee k I S}ter I rnl.ly rz`e of S
I--- � �'rftlt_ � S
Z,6 c, 4 wc�; �n or iv,�{�ec-�;a,� �eirnrt� inS{�ec�cd.+ - S cr•► 01IRIP020
Reviewer/Inspector Name: �p }I1.i `' Phone: �� � 11- gg77
Reviewer/Inspector Signature: Date: m -m — J tl'el
Page 3 of 3 21412015