310082_Structure Evaluation_20200604

W Diyision °of Water Resources �' ,511'I ,; �
Facility, Number "3 oZ O Division of Soil and Water Coinsei anon , q
to
0 Other Agency
Type of Visit: 0 Compliance Inspection 0 Operation Review Structure Evaluation 0 Technical Assistance
Reason for Visit: 0 Routine 0 Complaint 0 Follow-up 0 Referral 0 Emergency (D/Other 0 Denied Access
Date of Visit: j6bjOWOArrivalTime: UU Departure Time: County: 1UPLOJ Region: W I R)
Farm Name: VES 1 4 L_ Owner Email:
Owner Name: Phone:
Mailing Address:
Physical Address:
Facility Contact: Title: Phone:
OnsiteRepresentative: G-REED... N\wp ' Integrator:
Certified Operator:
Back-up Operator:
Location of Farm:
Design -Current
Swine. , " Capacity Pop.
Wean to Finish
Wean to Feeder
Feeder to Finish q a
Farrow to Wean
Farrow to Feeder
Farrow to Finish
Gilts
Boars
Other
Other
Latitude:
Certification Number:
Certification Number:
Longitude:
Design : pCurrent,
Wet,Poultry' Capacity Pop,
Layer
Non -Layer
- Design -Current
Drv'Poultrv- Capacity =Pou:
Layers
Non -Layers
Pullets
Turkeys
Turkey Poults
Other
°Design 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
[]/No
❑ NA
❑ NE
Discharge originated at: ❑ Structure ❑ Application Field ❑ Other:
a. Was the conveyance man-made?
❑ Yes
<o
❑ NA
❑ NE
b. Did the discharge reach waters of the State? (If yes, notify DWR)
❑ Yes
E?<o
❑ 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
UTNo
❑ NA
❑ NE
2. Is there evidence of a past discharge from any part of the operation?
❑ Yes
IVo
❑ NA
❑ NE
3. Were there any observable adverse impacts or potential adverse impacts to the waters
0 Yes
To
❑ NA
❑ NE
of the State other than from a discharge?
Page I of 3 21412015 Continued

Facility Number: � 1 - Date of Inspection: 8 j, -6 Lj- ). Ga o
Waste Collection & Treatment
4. Is storage capacity (structural plus storm storage plus heavy rainfall) less than adequate? ❑ Yes E�No ❑ NA ❑ NE
a. If yes, is waste level into the structural freeboard? ❑ Yes , dNo ❑ NA ❑ NE
Structure 1 Structure 2 Structure 3 Structure 4 Structure 5 Structure 6
Identifier: I
Spillway?:
Designed Freeboard (in): 2,-i , a
Observed Freeboard (in): 4 a
5. Are there any immediate threats to the integrity of any of the structures observed? ❑ Yes �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 Fj;r'�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 Eg"No ❑ NA ❑ NE
8. Do any of the structures lack adequate markers as required by the permit? ❑ Yes ONo ❑ 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 No ❑ NA ❑ NE
maintenance or improvement?
Waste Application
10. Are there any required buffers, setbacks, or compliance alternatives that need ❑ Yes ❑ No ❑ NA [l. NE
maintenance or improvement?
11. Is there evidence of incorrect land application? If yes, check the appropriate box below. ❑ Yes ❑ No ❑ NA MNE
❑ 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
❑ No
❑ NA
[2rNE
15. Does the receiving crop and/or land application site need improvement?
❑ Yes
❑ No
❑ NA
Ej'�E
16. Did the facility fail to secure and/or operate per the irrigation design or wettable
❑ Yes
❑ No
❑ NA
ENE
acres determination?
NE
17. Does the facility lack adequate acreage for land application?
❑ Yes
❑ No
❑ NA
E3
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
2/NE
20. Does the facility fail to have all components of the CAWMP readily available? If yes, check
❑ Yes
❑ No
❑ NA
[I�E
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 C!f 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 [�
23. If selected, did the facility fail to install and maintain rainbreakers on irrigation equipment? ❑ Yes ❑ No ❑ NA [NNE
Page 2 of 3 21412015 Continued

Facility Number: '3 - SaL I jDate of Inspection: ob-o4-'ao-3,7
24. Did the facility fail to calibrate waste application equipment as required by the permit? ❑ Yes ❑ No
25. Is the facility out of compliance with permit conditions related to sludge? If yes, check ❑ Yes ❑ No
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
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
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?
❑ NA aNE
❑ NA EjN_"/E
❑ NA Q NE
❑ NA [I'NE
❑ Yes ❑ No ❑ NA 53'1NE
❑ Yes dNo ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes R3 No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes ❑ No ❑ NA EJ4E
❑ Yes EffNo ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes [El"No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes 6"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).
Siry UL�vr0.I V ALUATIOr) �,1-AS Peaaa-rnC W r1IL� 7��C INS�EGTa� W � S 6N' S I I E� UPS IAL
1 s W+IE RG -SA M Pz CLOY A Na (Awa4:-� WE- w H 9 N Cso, n►C- "' C' "'L-E K 14 11
rGuovo E D G-R-ee L le, CIIZCLC �`' TO Pl-,06�.►-) A sCA040lE'%i '3+rvdu M EVALVATi
So
C To CU�11C7 �R rNE /rUSPEcTo� W��� A FACE MASIrl SP�I�L V(6TANC-Ir'I� P1pA-16CC)"
wZ12.E Fouo')fP AINC) j1U SPLC Io►j foRkynS WClZ6 SCANNL;> An b
Reviewer/Inspector Name: J ." rJ p r-R-'
Reviewer/Inspector Signature:
Page 3 of 3
Phone: Cqlu) b17-gS'37
Dat OL "26ac)
-T 6-q-a 214/2015