310276_Compliance Evaluation Inspection_20200331

(D Division of Water Quality
a.1Ms .T°
Facility Nunkber '� -°,® O•Division of Soil and Water�Conservation•T
0 Other Agency
Type of Visit: Coumliance Inspection 0 Operation Review 0 Structure Evaluation 0 Technical Assistance
Reason for Visit: Routine 0 Complaint 0 Follow-up 0 Referral 0 Emergency 0 Other 0 Denied Access
Date of Visit: 13 -31- 0-2 01 Arrival Time: p 3 p„, Departure Time: County: 0,20evi
Farm Name: Uy; c h e Gy'd Owner Email:
Owner Name: Seo1'1 5 a4wr1 Phone:
Mailing Address:
Physical Address:
Facility Contact:
Title:
OnsiteRepresentative: ScOTI gf-6wn1 Integrator:
Phone:
Region: IM ► RD
Certified Operator: SGo-rT g-Qt„aiJ Certification Number: 13t a 1
Back-up Operator:
Location of Farm:
Latitude:
Certification Number:
Design Current Design Current.
Swine n Capacity Pop. Y Wet Poultry Capacity Pop.
Wean to Finish
Wean to Feeder
Feeder to Finish b 3
Farrow to Wean
Farrow to Feeder
Farrow to Finish
Gilts
Boars
Other- " •_ e
Other
Layer
Non -Layer
Design. Current
nry Pnnitrv:. Vanaeity ° Pon -
Layers
Non -Layers
Pullets
Turkeys
M
Turkey Poults
Other
i
Longitude:
Design •Cd relit
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
dNo
❑ NA
❑ NE
Discharge originated at: ❑ Structure ❑ Application Field ❑ Other:
a. Was the conveyance man-made?
❑ Yes
ZNo
❑ NA
❑_NE
b. Did the discharge reach waters of the State? (If yes, notify DWQ)
❑ Yes
E3 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 DWQ)
❑ Yes
i2rNo
❑ NA
❑ NE
2. Is there evidence of a past discharge from any part of the operation?
❑ Yes
[] No
❑ NA
❑ NE
3. Were there any observable adverse impacts or potential adverse impacts to the waters
❑ Yes
To
❑ NA
❑ NE
of the State other than from a discharge?
%, 1
Page 1 of 3 21412011 Continued

Facility Number: °3 j - jDate of Inspection: - 3
Waste Collection & Treatment
4. Is heavy less than
Yes
gNo
NA
NE
storage capacity (structural plus storm storage plus rainfall) adequate?
❑
❑
❑
a. If yes, is waste level into the structural freeboard?
❑ Yes
�4o
❑ NA
❑ NE
Structure 1 Structure 2 Structure 3 Structure 4
Structure 5
Structure 6
Identifier: a.
Spillway?:
Designed Freeboard (in):
Observed Freeboard (in):
5. Are there any immediate threats to the integrity of any of the structures observed?
❑ Yes
21'*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
[2<o
❑ 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 �To
❑ 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 <o
❑ NA
❑ NE
maintenance or improvement?
Waste Application
10. Are there any required buffers, setbacks, or compliance alternatives that need
❑ Yes [�To
❑ NA
❑ NE
maintenance or improvement?
11. Is there evidence of incorrect land application? If yes, check the appropriate box below. ❑ Yes to
❑ 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 El -go ❑ NA ❑ NE
15. Does the receiving crop and/or land application site need improvement? ❑ Yes <o ❑ NA ❑ NE
16. Did the facility fail to secure and/or operate per the irrigation design or wettable ❑ Yes To ❑ NA ❑ NE
acres determination?
17. Does the facility lack adequate acreage for land application?
❑ Yes
E9,<o
❑ NA
❑ NE
18. Is there a lack of properly operating waste application equipment?
❑ Yes
�o
❑ NA
❑ NE
Required Records & Documents
19. Did the facility fail to have the Certificate of Coverage & Permit readily available?
❑ Yes
�,�
LD'leo
❑ NA
❑ NE
20. Does the facility fail to have all components of the CAWMP readily available? If yes, check
❑ Yes
10
❑ 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
�o
❑ 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
[g,*N/0
❑ NA
❑ NE
23. If selected, did the facility fail to install and maintain rainbreakers on irrigation equipment?
❑ Yes
F�o
❑ NA
❑ NE
Page 2 of 3
21412015 Continued

Facility Number: jDate of Inspection:
24. Did the facility fail to calibrate waste application equipment as required by the permit? ❑ Yes [qNo ❑ NA ❑ NE
25. Is the facility out of compliance with permit conditions related to sludge? If yes, check 0 Yes E2**NNo ❑ 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
[tErNo
27. Did the facility fail to secure a phosphorus loss assessments (PLAT) certification?
❑ Yes
®'No
Other Issues
28. Did the facility fail to properly dispose of dead animals with 24 hours and/or document
❑ Yes
[El"No
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
�No
If yes, contact a regional Air Quality representative immediately.
'No
30. Did the facility fail to notify the Regional Office of emergency situations as required by the
❑ Yes
[
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
❑ Application Field ❑ Lagoon/Storage Pond ❑ Other:
32. Were any additional problems noted which cause non-compliance of the permit or CAWMP?
❑ Yes
E3"No
33. Did the Reviewer/Inspector fail to discuss review/inspection with an on -site representative?
❑ Yes
[]"No
34. Does the facility require a follow-up visit by the same agency?
❑ Yes
[2�`No
❑ NA ❑ NE
DNA ❑NE
❑NA ❑NE
❑NA ❑NE
❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ 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).
CAI; bra}i (�" due Se,ffiber aas l
4,5 Il vd ye
Reviewer/Inspector Name: S o u w R yml-f Phone: (910) 61 -f '`9
Reviewer/Inspector Signature:
Page 3 of 3
Date:
21412015