310678_Compliance Evaluation Inspection_20200402

J
Division of Water Resources
°Facility Number•• FT17 FFTX1CO Division of Soil and Water -Conservation. ,
0 Other Agency
Type of Visit: Compliance Inspection 0 Operation Review 0 Structure Evaluation 0 Technical Assistance
Reason for Visit: �T®TRoutine 0 Complaint 0 Follow-up 0 Referral 0 Emergency 0 Other 0 Denied Access
Date of Visit: Arrival Time: 04 Departure Time: 713n l County: Region:
Farm Name: `— tij Owner Email:
Owner Name:
Mailing Address:
Physical Address:
Facility Contact:
Title:
Phone:
Onsite Representative: 1 " `� J G-f—A N �qLC `.� Integrator:
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:
Certification Number:
Certification Number:
-,Design Current .
Wet,Poultry Capacity Pop,
Layer
Non -Layer
Design Current
Dry Poultry Capacity . Pon..'
Layers
Non -Layers
Pullets
Turkeys
Turkey Poults
Other
Longitude:
' ! resign: 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
0To
❑ NA
❑ NE
Discharge originated at: ❑ Structure ❑ Application Field ❑ Other:
a. Was the conveyance man-made?
❑ Yes
❑ No
ErNA
❑ NE
b. Did the discharge reach waters of the State? (If yes, notify DWR)
❑ Yes
❑ No
Ej A
❑ 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
❑ NE
2. Is there evidence of a past discharge from any part of the operation?
❑ Yes
eNo
❑ NA
❑ NE
3. Were there any observable adverse impacts or potential adverse impacts to the waters
❑ Yes
E25fio
❑ NA
❑ NE
of the State other than from a discharge?
Page 1 of 3 21412015 Continued

Facility Number: - Date of Inspection:
Waste Collection & Treatment �
4. Is storage capacity (structural plus storm storage plus heavy rainfall) less than adequate? ❑ Yes L Ko' ❑ N ❑ NE
a. If yes, is waste level into the structural freeboard? ❑ Yes ❑ No L NA ❑ NE
Structure 1 Structure 2 Structure 3 Structure 4 Structure 5 Structure 6
Identifier:
Spillway?:
Designed Freeboard (in):
Observed Freeboard (in):
5. Are there any immediate threats to the integrity of any of the structures observed? ❑ Yes E2<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 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 Flo ❑ 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 ERNO ❑ NA ❑ NE
maintenance or improvement?
Waste Application
10. Are there any required buffers, setbacks, or compliance alternatives that need ❑ Yes o ❑ NA ❑ NE
maintenance or improvement? /
11. Is there evidence of incorrect land application? If yes, check the appropriate box below. ❑ Yes 13'1�0 ❑ 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):
13. Soil Type(s):
14. Do the receiving crops differ from those designated in the CAWMP? ❑ Yes L—I'<o ❑ NA ❑ NE
15. Does the receiving crop and/or land application site need improvement? ErYes ❑ No ❑ NA ❑ NE
16. Did the facility fail to secure and/or operate per the irrigation design or wettable ❑ Yes Mo ❑ NA ❑ NE
acres determination?
17. Does the facility lack adequate acreage for land application?
18. Is there a lack of properly operating waste application equipment?
Required Records & Documents
❑ Yes E3<o
El Yes 1 I0
❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ NA ❑ NE
19. Did the facility fail to have the Certificate of Coverage & Permit readily available?
❑ Yes
E '4
❑ NA ❑ NE
20. Does the facility fail to have all components of the CAWMP readily available? If yes, check
❑ Yes
LS <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.
❑ Yes
E3No
❑ 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
22. Did the facility fail to install and maintain a rain gauge? ❑ Yes Inspections
❑ Sludge Survey
❑ NA ❑ NE j
23. If selected, did the facility fail to install and maintain rainbreakers on irrigation equipment? [:]Yes ❑ No ❑ NA
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?
0 Yes
Q'No
❑ NA ❑ NE
25. Is the facility out of compliance with permit conditions related to sludge? If yes, check
es
❑ No
❑ NA ❑ NE
the appropriate box(es) below.
❑ure to complete annual sludge survey ❑ Failure to develop a POA for sludge levels
0 Non -compliant sludge levels in any lagoon n
®T
1 Z i 3 119
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
[2'No
❑ NA ❑ NE
27. Did the facility fail to secure a phosphorus loss assessments (PLAT) certification?
❑ Yes
❑ No
F3<A ❑ 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:
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 No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes YNo ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes ❑ No ❑ NA Q�lE
❑ Yes [-No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes 2 No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes r�eo ❑ 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).
W'e-- !?
F
Reviewer/Inspector Name:
skfCQ's� -\ Z.\ 1­� / 19 ,
Z 1w . u (� •(g S 11 i 2 vj% kow\'_ b
Reviewer/Inspector Signature: e
Page 3 of 3
Phone: 7—U
Date: I-
2/4/2 J15