670023_Compliance Evaluation Inspection_20200220

Division of°Water Resources
Facility Number ®, - ® 0 Division of Soff and Water Conservation
0°Other Agency
'ype of Visit: a Compliance Inspection 0 Operation Review 0 Structure Evaluation 0 Technical Assistance
teason for Visit: ® Routine 0 Complaint 0 Follow-up 0 Referral 0 Emergency 0 Other 0 Denied Access
Date of Visit: 'z 1 Arrival Time: (C?� Departure Time: Q County:
Farm Name: �t 1 (�'� T (i�(yvOwner Email:
Owner Name: Phone:
Mailing Address:
Physical Address:
Facility Contact: I
Onsite Representative:
Certified Operator: _
Back-up Operator:
Location of Farm:
i
Title:
Latitude:
Region:
Phone: Q1 0 3 3v -11 oa
Integrator:
Certification Number:
Certification Number:
Longitude:
Design Current DesignCurrent " Design` Current
Swine Capacity Pop. Wet Podltry ° ° Capacity ° Pop. Cattle Capacity Pop.
Wean to Finish
Wean to Feeder
Feeder to Finish
Farrow to Wean
Farrow to Feeder
Farrow to Finish
oars
Other
Other
Layer
Non -Layer
Design Current
Dry Pnnitry (" anaeity • Pon."
Layers
Non -Layers
Pullets
Turkeys
Turkey Poults
Other
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 E2No ❑ NA ❑ NE
Discharge'originated at: ❑ Structure ❑ Application Field ❑ Other: /
a. Wds the conveyance man-made? ❑ Yes ❑ No rNA
❑ NE
g
b. Did the discharge reach waters of the State? (If yes, notify DWR) ❑ Yes ❑ No ❑ 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)
2. Is there evidence of a past discharge from any part of the operation?
3. Were there any observable adverse impacts or potential adverse impacts to the waters
of the State other than from a discharge?
❑ Yes ❑ No E�XA ❑ NE
[-]Yes 01<o ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes, [/No ❑ NA ❑ NE
Page 1 of 3 21412015 Continued
a

Facility Number: jDate of Inspection:
Waste Collection & Treatment
4. Is storage capacity (structural plus storm storage plus heavy rainfall) less than adequate? ❑ Yes D_�o ❑ NA ❑ NE
a. If yes, is waste level into the structural freeboard? ❑ Yes [:]No Eg I A ❑ NE
Structure 1 Structure 2 Structure 3 Structure 4 Structure 5 Structure 6
Identifier:
Spillway?:
Designed Freeboard (in):
Observed Freeboard (in): i
5. Are there any immediate threats to the integrity of any of the structures observed? ❑ Yes [3No ❑ 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 Ike ❑ 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 1 To ❑ NA ❑ NE
8. Do any of the structures lack adequate markers as required by the permit? ❑ Yes F3 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 to ❑ NA ❑ NE
maintenance or improvement?
Waste Application
10. Are there any required buffers, setbacks, or compliance alternatives that need ❑ Yes io ❑ NA ❑ NE
maintenance or improvement?
11. Is there evidence of incorrect land application? If yes, check the appropriate box below. ❑ Yes IE 1V o ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Excessive Ponding ❑ Hydraulic Overload ❑ Frozen Ground ❑ Heavy Metals (Cu, Zn, etc.)
❑ PAN ❑ PAN > 10% or 101bs. ❑ 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? ❑ Yes EKNo ❑ NA ❑ NE
15. Does the receiving crop and/or land application site need improvement? ❑ Yes E2"No ❑ NA ❑ NE
16. Did the facility fail to secure and/or operate per the irrigation design or wettable ❑ Yes Q No ❑ NA ❑ NE
acres determination?
17. Does the facility lack adequate acreage for land application?
❑ Yes
4
❑ NA
❑ NE
18. Is there a lack of properly operating waste application equipment?
❑ Yes
V.No
❑ NA
❑ NE
Required Records & Documents
19. Did the facility fail to have the Certificate of Coverage & Permit readily available?
EZes
o
❑ NA
❑ NE
20. Does the facility fail to have all components of the CAWMP readily available? If yes, check
[Yes
VN o
❑ 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. L_1 r es ❑ No
❑ Waste Application ❑ Weekly Freeboard ❑ Waste Analysis ❑ Soil Analysis ❑ Waste Transfers
❑ Rainfall dStocking ❑ Crop Yield ❑ 120 Minute Inspections ❑ Monthly and 1" Rainfall Inspections
22. Did the facility fail to install and maintain a rain gauge? ❑ Yes No
23. If selected, did the facility fail to install and maintain rainbreakers on irrigation equipment?
❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Weather Code
�ludge Survey
❑NA ❑
❑ Yes ❑ No ❑ NA [�] E
Page 2 of 3 21412015 Continued

.�- .
Facility 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 [DYes ❑ No ❑ NA ❑ NE
the appropriate box(es) below.
[3] 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: S 1� S'�%(� e%
26. Did the facility fail provide documentation of an actively certified operator in charge? ETYes ❑ No ❑ NA ❑ NE
27. Did the facility fail to secure a phosphorus loss assessments (PLAT) certification? ❑ Yes ❑ No E lit' ❑ 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 E], o ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes 1 <0 ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes �No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes ❑ No ❑ NA [ rE
32. Were any additional problems noted which cause non-compliance of the permit or CAWMP? ❑ Yes �o ❑ NA ❑ NE
33. Did the Reviewer/Inspector fail to discuss review/inspection with an on -site representative? ❑ Yes F-34o ❑ NA ❑ NE
34. Does the facility require a follow-up visit by the same agency? ❑ Yes E?<o ❑ NA ❑ NE
Comments (refer to question ft 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).
cc-e
'rD -Ck"_
!S-�Pu-e_ 4 \� e�t
Reviewer/Inspector Name:
Reviewer/Inspector Signature:
Page 3 of 3
C N V_, �Oj
VA".
Phone:
Date:i
274120