310099_Compliance Evaluation Inspection_20200304 (2)

CJ Division of Water Resources Q (m S _ .S
Facility Number - ® O Division of Soil and Water Conservation �J
O Other Agency
Type of Visit: Compliance Inspection 0 Operation Review O Structure Evaluation O Technical Assistance
Reason for Visit: C/ Routine O Complaint O Follow-up O Referral O Emergency O Other O Denied Access
Date of Visit: © Arrival Time: t r p Departure Time: I u m County: :jZj.n(_, LJ Region: y l po
Farm Name: M to'&E RUN FARMS Owner Email:
Owner Name: NI E I L B ARW I Cif. Phone:
Mailing Address:
Physical Address:
Facility Contact:
Onsite Representative: E I G bawl o-",
Certified Operator: VEIL ww' Gy
Back-up Operator:
Location of Farm:
Swine
Wean to Finish
Wean to Feeder
Feeder to Finish
Farrow to Wean
Farrow to Feede
Farrow to FinisY
Other
Other
Title:
Latitude:
Phone:
Integrator: SMiTNFIELDS CAR 040 NOM
Certification Number: 3.1-1 0
Certification Number:
Design Current Design Current
Capacity Pop. Wet Poultry Capacity Pop.
NNon--
La er
Design Current
Dry Poultry Capacity POD.
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 EgAo ❑ NA ❑ NE
b. Did the discharge reach waters of the State? (If yes, notify DWR) ❑ Yes MIN110 ❑ 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 o ❑ NA ❑ NE
2. Is there evidence of a past discharge from any part of the operation? ❑ Yes EQ ❑ NA ❑ NE
3. Were there any observable adverse impacts or potential adverse impacts to the waters ❑Yes
go ❑ NA ❑ NE
of the State other than from a discharge?
Page I of 21412015 Continued

Facili Number: Date of Inspection: 0->)-0- )a7
Waste Collection & Treatment
4. Is storage capacity (structural plus storm storage plus heavy rainfall) less than adequate? ❑ Yes dNo ❑ NA ❑ NE
a. If yes, is waste level into the structural freeboard? ❑ Yes Io ❑ NA ❑ NE
Structure I Structure 2
Structure 3 Structure 4 Structure 5 Structure 6
Identifier: �_ FC a
�— Tf(_
Spillway?:
Designed Freeboard (in): a 1 '�'%
I
Observed Freeboard (in):
5. Are there any immediate threats to the integrity of any of the structures observed? ❑ Yes [211�o ❑ 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 �No ❑ 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 environment,] threat, notify DWR
7. Do any of the structures need maintenance or improvement? ❑ Yes [lNo ❑ 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 02'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 ONo ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Excessive Pending ❑ 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): 5C,4)4 &rMQ,4c . PVA") /nille­'
13. Soil Type(s):
14. Do the receiving crops differ from those designated in the CAWMP?
❑ Yes
[�V<o
❑ NA
❑ NE
15. Does the receiving crop and/or land application site need improvement?
❑ Yes
E3 o
❑ NA
❑ NE
No
16. Did the facility fail to secure and/or operate per the irrigation design or wettable
❑ Yes
E
❑ NA
❑ NE
acres determination?
17. Does the facility lack adequate acreage for land application?
❑ Yes
[2/No
❑ NA
❑ NE
18. Is there a lack of properly operating waste application equipment?
❑ Yes
61 o
❑ NA
❑ NE
Required Records & Documents
19. Did the facility fail to have the Certificate of Coverage & Permit readily available?
❑ Yes
ff]No
❑ NA
❑ NE
20. Does the facility fail to have all components of the CAWMP readily available? If yes, check
❑ Yes
E(No
❑ NA
❑ NE
the appropriate box.
❑WUP El 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 V Rainfall Inspections ❑ Sludge Survey
22. Did the facility fail to install and maintain a rain gauge? ❑ Yes lq<o ❑ NA ❑ NE
23. If selected, did the facility fail to install and maintain rambreakers on irrigation equipment? ❑ Yes 1 0 ❑ NA ❑ NE
Page 2 of 3 21412015 Continued

Fae(li Number:
Date of Inspection:
24. Did the facility fail to calibrate waste application equipment as required by the permit? ❑ Yes
25. Is the facility out of compliance with permit conditions related to sludge? If yes, check ❑ Yes
the appropriate box(es) below.
❑ Failure to complete annual sludge survey ❑ Failure to develop a POA for sludge levels
&NO ❑ NA ❑ NE
Dj'*'No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ 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 Eo ❑ 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 E�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?
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 2/No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes 0 No ❑ NA ❑ NE
El Yes ONo ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes
❑ Yes
❑ Yes
No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ NA ❑ NE
�,�,o
❑ 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).
4LRT NEE1M To gt RUNtCoMTACT 0M EDWAAVS NC -PA
-Ccsrlbrur VNr"- , l 6� 60.�-e Spoh aF kgooV.I y
Reviewer/Inspector Name: SO1IN ?EARY
Phone:igtn��l� 95}�
Reviewer/Inspector Signature:
Page 3 of 3
Date:
21412015