310574_Compliance Evaluation Inspection_20200402

(YDivisiori of Water Resources. . K
Facility Number 3 -" 5�� CO Division of Soil and. Watex Conservation ° ; •' ;'•: =. - `
0-Other Agency
Type of Visit: Co
Hance Inspection 0 Operation Review 0 Structure Evaluation 0 Technical Assistance
Reason for Visit: 0 Complaint 0 Follow-up 0 Referral 0 Emergency 0 Other 0 Denied Access
Date of Visit: -p - "kq Arrival Time: I 11 0D Ark I Departure Time: County: U i;Y) Region:
Farm Name: W h ; �+e; of M Owner Email:
Owner Name: WA' i' e °4 Phone:
Mailing Address:
Physical Address:
Facility Contact:
Onsite Representative: 1ec ! i ? WA ; h ed
Certified Operator: (c 0r a wl,� Pe A
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
F—To—ther
Title:
Latitude:
Phone:
Integrator:
Certification Number: /660;Z
Certification Number:
DesignCurrent
P" Wet Poultry ° s Capacity.' Pop. °
Layer
Non -Layer
Design Current .
Dry Pnultry Ganaeity Pon.
Layers
Non -Layers
Pullets
Turkeys
Turkey Poults
Other
Longitude:
n ° ° Design: Current
,-,Cattle ° Capacity Pop.
Discharges and Stream Impacts
1. Is any discharge observed from any part of the operation? ❑ Yes No 0 NA ❑ NE
Discharge originated at: ❑ Structure ❑ Application Field ❑ Other:
a. Was the conveyance man-made? ❑ Yes ENo ❑ NA ❑ NE
b. Did the discharge reach waters of the State? (If yes, notify DWR) 0 Yes ["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 DWR) ❑ Yes No ❑ NA ❑ NE
2. Is there evidence of a past discharge from any part of the operation? ❑ Yes Vo
❑ NA ❑ NE
D
3. Were there any observable adverse impacts or potential adverse impacts to the waters ❑ Yes ❑ NA ❑ NE
of the State other than from a discharge?
Page I of 3 21412015 Continued
Page I of 3 21412015 Continued

Facility Number: ?j 1 - ; 4 jDate of Inspection: — CSa.�a,6
Waste Collection & Treatment
4. Is storage capacity (structural plus storm storage plus heavy rainfall) less than adequate? ❑ Yes 2No
o
a. If yes, is waste level into the structural freeboard? ❑ Yes
Structure 1 Structure 2
Identifier:
Spillway?:
Designed Freeboard (in):
Observed Freeboard (in): 7 b
❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ NA ❑ NE
Structure 3 Structure 4 Structure 5 Structure 6
5. Are there any immediate threats to the integrity of any of the structures observed?
(i.e., large trees, severe erosion, seepage, etc.)
6. Are there structures on -site which are not properly addressed and/or managed through a
waste management or closure plan?
Ey-e-si No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes 1� No ❑ NA ❑ NE
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 [jNo ❑ NA ❑ NE
8. Do any of the structures lack adequate markers as required by the permit? ❑ Yes E�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 ff� No ❑ NA ❑ NE
maintenance or improvement?
Waste Application
10. Are there any required buffers, setbacks, or compliance alternatives that need
❑ Yes
ZNo
❑ NA
❑ NE
maintenance or improvement?
11. Is there evidence of incorrect land application? If yes, check the appropriate box below.
❑ Yes
No
DNA
❑ 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 ❑ Evidence of Wind Drift ❑ Application Outside of Approved Area
,Window
12. Crop Type(s): S$ W
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
[S�No
❑ NA
❑ NE
16. Did the facility fail to secure and/or operate per the irrigation design or wettable
❑ Yes
[I/No
❑ NA
❑ NE
acres determination?
17. Does the facility lack adequate acreage for land application?
❑ Yes
E No
0 NA
❑ NE
18. Is there a lack of properly operating waste application equipment?
❑ Yes
2/No
❑ NA
❑ NE
Required Records & Documents
19. Did the facility fail to have the Certificate of Coverage & Permit readily available?
❑ Yes
allo
❑ NA
❑ NE
20. Does the facility fail to have all components of the CAWMP readily available? If yes, check
❑ Yes
EvKNo
❑ 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 E5No ❑ 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 [ J N" o ❑ NA ❑ NE
Page 2 of 3 21412015 Continued

Facility Number: 31 - Date of Inspection: 6—o 4 fv
24. Did the facility fail to calibrate waste application equipment as required by the permit? ❑ Yesil�c ❑ NA ❑ NE
25. Is the facility out of compliance with permit conditions related to sludge? If yes, check ❑ Yes o ❑ 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 o ❑ NA ❑ NE
27. Did the facility fail to secure a phosphorus loss assessments (PLAT) certification? El Yes VNo ❑ NA ❑ 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
[R No
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Yes
[/No
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Yes
[�J/No
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Yes
[I/No
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Yes
[JNo
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Yes
EDA
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Yes
Eil- 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).
Gl,Ar�e Flo., Mtz oh lRRas a 6&.5 V-0 &u- pumP -;,v,,s c0.1; 64-,.+eel 11415 w� 1t C'o-ve
Q � IJ hisc, JJ We.,tbcr- candt}lGns ahoy. -0-0 m y\- InWctl w) in,'f iaL1S w rpw Purnpi,99 forms,
410- ReC4Ynr V_y)A d PA tJ Vo.(U s -fo p rn p I r) ern-, (u1�. k� iv re -�PA tJ..
gQPI i 2-A }-a `. �1r.�cC% w1f-Y1 Corn 1�01[ G­1S O.C. i Vis4r- c"{ e a b. -tlg LJU P No4r-a z
M"
�` �,nc�, ih �1d:�cec.lEe� w�;vc�-w;`>•�7,. gch v�� 'f�����'
Reviewer/Inspector Name: :[p H f J 3! RtZy- Phone: r9I D) w m 5 }i'
Reviewer/Inspector Signature: �\ �G� Date: ©q -oa_ ao
Page 3 of 3 v V 21412015