310843_Compliance Evaluation Inspection_20200709

Division of Water Resources
Facility, Number $ 3 O Division° of Soil and Water Conservation' M
O Other Agency
Type of Visit: Compliance Inspection Operation Review O Structure Evaluation O Technical Assistance
Reason for Visit:U/ Routine O Complaint O Follow-up O Referral O Emergency O Other O Denied Access
Date of Visit: Arrival Time: Departure Time: Qt U6 County: P, ', Region: NN I RORO
Farm Name: R(, J Fa r« M 5 Owner Email:
Owner Name: J r 2Y W i t Ll fi r✓i S Phone:
Mailing Address:
Physical Address:
Facility Contact:
Onsite Representative:
Title:
Integrator:
Phone:
Certified Operator: W;W ,. S Certification Number: 19 1 _� 9
Back-up Operator:
Location of Farm:
Latitude:
Certification Number:
Longitude:
Design . Current , Design . Current,. " ` " :: " Desiga.• ,Current
Swine ' Capacity Pop. ` ` Wet Poultry Capacity . 'Pop." . Cattle ' Capacity: p6p.o "�
Wean to Finish
Wean to Feeder
Feeder to Finish a
Farrow to Wean
Farrow to Feeder
Farrow to Finish
Gilts
Boars
Layer
Non -Layer
Design Current
11ry Poultry " Capacty, .'Pon.
Layers
Non -Layers
Pullets
M
Turkeys
Turkey Poults
Other
i
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 1240 ❑ 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 VNNo ❑ 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 E2'/No ❑ 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 E KNo ❑ NA ❑ NE
of the State other than from a discharge?
Pagel of 3 ' 21412015 Continued

Facility Number: 1 - Date of Inspection: p -, -;t0d d
Waste Collection & Treatment
4. Is storage capacity (structural plus storm storage plus heavy rainfall) less than adequate? [:]Yes No
a. If yes, is waste level into the structural freeboard? ❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ NA ❑ NE
❑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?
(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?
❑ Yes EdNo ❑ NA ❑ NE
[:]Yes 21'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 N ❑ 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/ No ❑ NA ❑ NE
maintenance or improvement?
Waste Application
10. Are there any required buffers, setbacks, or compliance alternatives that need ❑ Yes No ❑ NA ❑ NE
maintenance or improvement?
11. Is there evidence of incorrect land application? If yes, check the appropriate box below. ❑ Yes ❑ No ❑ 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): P&
13. Soil Type(s):
14. Do the receiving crops differ from those designated in the CAWMP?
15. Does the receiving crop and/or land application site need improvement?
16. Did the facility fail to secure and/or operate per the irrigation design or wettable
acres determination?
17. Does the facility lack adequate acreage for land application?
18. Is there a lack of properly operating waste application equipment?
❑ Yes fidNo
❑ Yes [ No
❑ Yes [2'<o
❑NA ❑NE
❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes MNo ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes �No ❑ NA ❑ NE
Required Records & Documents
19. Did the facility fail to have the Certificate of Coverage & Permit readily available?
❑ Yes 021 o
❑ NA
❑ NE
20. Does the facility fail to have all components of the CAWMP readily available? If yes, check
❑ Yes Ej/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 EdNo
❑ 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
❑ NA
❑ NE
23. If selected, did the facility fail to install and maintain rainbreakers on irrigation equipment?
❑Yes VNo
❑ NA
❑ NE
Page 2 of 3 21412015 Continued

Facility Number: 31 - RiJ3 I I -Date of Inspection:
24. Did the facility fail to calibrate waste application equipment as required by the permit?
❑ Yes
tZf No
❑ NA ❑ NE
25. Is the facility out of compliance with permit conditions related to sludge? If yes, check
❑ Yes
FU/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
No
❑ NA ❑ NE
27. Did the facility fail to secure a phosphorus loss assessments (PLAT) certification?
❑ Yes
1d240
YNA ❑ NE
Other Issues
T 7-9-2a
28. Did the facility fail to properly dispose of dead animals with 24 hours and/or document
❑ Yes
❑ 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?
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 yNo ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes [dNo ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes -�10 ❑ NA dNE
v ?�-`i-ao
❑ Yes
dNo ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes
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).
pwrzwall Sep -flle
Reviewer/Inspector Name: 50 H M F12/Ly
Reviewer/Inspector Signature:
Page 3 of 3
Phone: 10) 61 7 - 9 57-+
Date: T_ 9 30;
21412015