310355_Compliance Evaluation Inspection_20200625

.Division of Water Resources .. ,
Faciliiy Number31 0 'Division, of Soil and Water Conservation
0 0
0 Other Agency
Type of Visit: Compliance 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: Arrival Time: Departure Time: County: ' — Region: V 1,R0
Farm Name: . StEgA ,FormS I nL � � Owner Email:
Owner Name: Le, �e C-co— rl WxRD Phone:
Mailing Address:
Physical Address:
Facility Contact:
Title:
Onsite Representative: G1zF_F_ ft MOOEF Integrator:
Certified Operator:
Back-up Operator:
Location of Farm:
Latitude:
Phone:
Certification Number:
Certification Number:
Longitude:
Design Current Design . Current ° ` o , ti 'Design . Current
Swine Capacity Pop-- Wet Poultry Capacity ;Pop, Cattle . e CApacity o Pop. a
Wean to Finish
Wean to Feeder
Feeder to Finish a 0®
Farrow to Wean
Farrow to Feeder
Farrow to Finish
Gilts
Boars
Other
Layer
Non -Layer
Design Current `
DrvPoultry ° Canaeity . 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
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 DWR)
❑ 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
�To
❑ NA
❑ NE
3. Were there any observable adverse impacts or potential adverse impacts to the waters
❑ YesFgl�4o
❑ NA
❑ NE
of the State other than from a discharge?
Page I of 3 21412015 Continued

Facility Number: - 35 Date of Inspection: —ate Joao
Waste Collection & Treatment
4. Is storage capacity (structural plus storm storage plus heavy rainfall) less than adequate?
❑ Yes
V51
❑ NA
❑ NE
a. If yes, is waste level into the structural freeboard?
❑ Yes
i No
❑ NA
❑ NE
Structure 1 Structure 2 Structure 3 Structure 4
Structure 5
Structure 6
Identifier:
Spillway?:
Designed Freeboard (in):
Observed Freeboard (in): a4
5. Are there any immediate threats to the integrity of any of the structures observed?
❑ Yes
[ 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
E2'**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
[2'�o
❑ NA
❑ NE
8. Do any of the structures lack adequate markers as required by the permit?
❑ Yes
[DXo
❑ 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
lo
❑ NA
❑ NE
maintenance or improvement?
Waste Application
10. Are there any required buffers, setbacks, or compliance alternatives that need
❑ Yes
ENo
❑ NA
❑ NE
maintenance or improvement?
11. Is there evidence of incorrect land application? If yes, check the appropriate box below. ❑ Yes ET o
❑ 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): S 6,0 j B 14
13. Soil Type(s):
14. Do the receiving crops differ from those designated in the CAWMP?
❑ Yes 2No
❑ 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 [12No
❑ NA
❑ NE
acres determination?
17. Does the facility lack adequate acreage for land application?
❑ Yes E24 o
❑ 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 VNo ❑ NA ❑ NE
20. Does the facility fail to have all components of the CAWMP readily available? If yes, check ❑ Yes E2*"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 dNo ❑ NA ❑ NE
23. If selected, did the facility fail to install and maintain rainbreakers on irrigation equipment? ❑ Yes E3 No ❑ NA ❑ NE
Page 2 of 3 21412015 Continued

Facility Number: A jDate of Inspection: g-a6�
24. Did the facility fail to calibrate waste application equipment as required by the permit? 0 Yes [!fNo ❑ 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 ZNo ❑ NA ❑ NE
27. Did the facility fail to secure a phosphorus loss assessments (PLAT) certification? ❑ Yes �lo ❑ NA ❑ NE
Other Issues
28. Did the facility fail to properly dispose of dead animals with 24 hours and/or document
❑ Yes
E?(No
❑ NA
❑ NE
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
2No
❑ NA
❑ NE
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
❑ Yes
D3 o
❑ NA
❑ NE
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
EXO
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Application Field ❑ Lagoon/Storage Pond ❑ Other:
32. Were any additional problems noted which cause non-compliance of the permit or CAWMP?
❑ Yes
❑Xo
❑ NA
❑ NE
33. Did the Reviewer/Inspector fail to discuss review/inspection with an on -site representative?
❑ Yes
EL�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).
- LRGooN MAR.ftR. GaAs RE-SHO-F/No aolq 8Y SAM i6DW44-DS
'jopSol G M tv LD wi iil Cry fA A "UfLE WAS A poEe> P IS A" SecTS ON LAC7cofI
C', Ltj(3 A1"/o-+►J Dvlz ac�a.o
—�eee wee*Ir 5� '"�j"� dS
--C,L►W+je w-A ?o Ncw wA A512 e &- I- aoao
Reviewer/Inspector Name: -� I) Pen.R-Y
Reviewer/Inspector Signature:
Page 3 of 3
Phone: 016 0«—asI2
Date: doa`C)
21412015