310605_Compliance Evaluation Inspection_20181018

Facility Number r3T--] - LT d,s
Division of Water Resources
0 Division of Soil and Water Conservation
p Other Agency
Type of Visit: O Compliance Inspection O Operation Review IR Structure Evaluation Q Technical Assistance
Reason for Visit: 0 Routine 0 Complaint 0 Follow-up Q Referral VEmergency O Other 0 Denied Access
Date of Visit: ID Arrival Time: Departure Time: County: tr Region• W (
Farm Name: ePC6 S, I 1'42� Owner Email:
Owner Name:
Mailing Address:
Physical Address:
Facility Contact:
Phone:
Title:
Onsite Representative: & Lec+ jd kA Sxjn
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:
integrator:
Certification Number:
Certification Number:
Longitude:
Design Current
Wet Poultry Capacity Pop.
La er
Non -La er
Design Current
Dry Pmdtry Cnnacity Pon -
Layers
Non -Layers
Pullets
Turkeys
Turkey Pouets
Other
'schar es and Stream Impacts
1. Is any discharge observed from any part of the operation?
Discharge originated at: IX I Structure ❑ Application Field ❑ Other:
a. Was the conveyance man-made?
b. Did the discharge reach waters of the State? (if yes, notify D W R)
c. What is the estimated volume that reached waters of the State (gallons)?
Design Current
Cattle Capacity Pop.
Dairy Cow
Dairy Calf
Dairy Heifer
Dry Cow
Non -Dairy
Beef Stocker
Beef Feeder
Beef Brood Cow
Vf Yes ❑ No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes No ❑ NA ❑ NE
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 f om any part of the operation? ❑ Yes No ❑ 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? ///��Kfff
Page I of 3 21412015 Continuer)

Facility Number: Date of Inspection: PS
Waste Collection & Treatment
4. Is storage capacity (structural plus storm storage plus heavy rainfall) less than adequate?
❑ Yes
No
❑ NA
❑ NE
a. If yes, is waste level into the structural freeboard?
❑ Yes
KNo
❑ NA
❑ NE
Structure I Structure 2 Structure 3 Structure 4
Structure 5
Structure 6
Identifier:
Spillway?:
Designed Freeboard (in):
Observed Freeboard (in):_
0i.re there any immediate threats to the integrity of any of the structures observed?
Yes
K
❑ No
❑ NA
❑ NE
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 environmental threat, notify DWR
7. Do any of the structures need maintenance or improvement? ❑ Yes ❑ No ❑ NA NE
8. Do any of the structures lack adequate markers as required by the permit? ❑ Yes [—]No ❑ NA ANE
(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 [—]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? T�
11. Is there evidence of incorrect land application? If yes, check the appropriate box below. ❑ Yes ❑ No ❑ NA j� NE
❑ Excessive Pending ❑ Hydraulic Overload ❑ Frozen Ground El Heavy Metals (Cu, Zn, etc.) X `
❑ 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?
❑ Yes
❑ No
❑ NA
NE
15. Does the receiving crop and/or land application site need improvement?
❑ Yes
❑ No
❑ NA
NE
16. Did the facility fail to secure and/or operate per the irrigation design or wettable
❑ Yes
❑ No
❑ NA
NE
acres determination?
17. Does the facility lack adequate acreage for land application?
❑ Yes
❑ No
❑ NA
NE
18. Is there a lack of properly operating waste application equipment?
❑ Yes
❑ 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
❑ 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?
❑ Yes
❑ No
❑ 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: - 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 ❑ 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:
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 ❑ NA NE
Other Issues �.,
28. Did the facility fail to properly dispose of dead animals with 24 hours and/or document ❑ Yes ❑ No ❑ NA y��l NE
and report mortality rates that were higher than normal? X
29. At the time of the inspection did the facility pose an odor or air quality concern? ❑ Yes ❑ No ❑ NA KNE
If yes, contact a regional Air Quality representative immediately. �.,ii''
30. Did the facility fail to notify the Regional Office of emergency situations as required by the ❑ Yes p�I No ❑ NA ❑ NE
permit? (i.e., discharge, freeboardA
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 ❑ No ❑ NA p(1 NE
33. Did the Reviewer/Inspector fail to discuss review/inspection with an on -site representative? ❑ Yes No ❑ 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.
Use drawings of facility to better explain situations (use additional pages as necessary).
Fes► R'ff - T (44 ,s-eer� t %ssu-6. 8/ U� will o
"( It A/Vo --wry►ce 0� ey �l�cc
block a4d waf-f�w n t'e
I-e o(cJi'�t�s l�f ���ff . �Y trd i2AacC Qfl�h
(;y„0i�'hl�z l ws� wl bvvK k-Ke, rvwk k3w f.
� Imo, f 0ytM -'�" y",�j
wall �Ird 6P
bwK
g1'4k/P-'. pdtq F9 duhiq �hr� FUW ce
Ic.I,M^',q •e7.0,vt, mv,.. q(A-E.t2d-
0
Reviewer/Inspector Name:
Reviewer/Inspector Signature:
Page 3 of 3
hone: 90-7�1y-730
Date: 16 $
21412015