310297_Compliance Evaluation Inspection_20200702

;Division of Water Resources
q. Facility Number' `3 - ® O Division of Soil and Water'Conservatiion °
.O Other Agency. °
Type of Visit: CC pliance Inspection O Operation Review O Structure Evaluation O Technical Assistance
Reason for Visit: Routine O Complaint O Follow-up O Referral O Emergency O Other O Denied Access
Date of Visit: - - a0o1 Arrival Time: Departure Time: ;Od County: aj; y1 Region: W 19,0
Farm Name: RAes g .NuRStpy 11a -d' 3 Owner Email:
Owner Name: M (KC, C. 12 �A T600 Phone:
Mailing Address:
Physical Address:
Facility Contact: (-r RE E2 MOO RE Title:
Onsite Representative: /_,- ETL MPRr
Certified Operator:
Back-up Operator:
Location of Farm:
Swine °
Wean to Finish
Wean to Feeder $60 4o SO
Feeder to Finish
Farrow to Wean
Farrow to Feeder
Farrow to Finish
Gilts
Boars
Other `
Other
Design Current
Capacity Pop.
Latitude:
Phone:
Integrator:
Certification Number:
Certification Number:
Longitude:
Design ° Current
. ° Wet Poultry . Capacity Pop.
Layer
Non -Layer
Design Current
nry Pnnitry Canacity ' Pon. -
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 M No
❑ NA
❑ NE
Discharge originated,at: ❑ Structure ❑ Application Field ❑ Other:
a. Was the conveyance man-made?
❑ Yes
❑ 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 FOIN
❑ NA
❑ NE
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

Facility Number: "S - Date of Inspection:-;- a - a('%a, 0
Waste Collection & Treatment
4. Is storage capacity (structural plus storm storage plus heavy rainfall) less than adequate? ❑ Yes ENo ❑ 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: �t1$ a. a4$3 2L(? f
Spillway?:
Designed Freeboard (in): LQ . S
Observed Freeboard (in): ; d X-i- a
5. Are there any immediate threats to the integrity of any of the structures observed? N6 Yes--E o ❑ NA ❑ NE
(i.e., large trees, severe erosion, seepage, etc.) 3° 7- ;L-;o
6. Are there structures on -site which are not properly adllressed and/or managed through a ❑ Yes �/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�Yes0
v ronmental threat, notify DWR
7. Do any of the structures need maintenance or improvement? No ❑ NA ❑ NE
8. Do any of the structures lack adequate markers as required by the permit? ❑ Yes [R/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 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 EZ/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): 914.0 S G6 Gra2edl
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
[�
❑ NA
❑ NE
16. Did the facility fail to secure and/or operate per the irrigation design or wettable
❑ Yes
L"J�No
❑ NA
❑ NE
acres determination?
17. Does the facility lack adequate acreage for land application?
❑ Yes
M�N
❑ NA
❑ NE
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
o
❑ NA
❑ NE
20. Does the facility fail to have all components of the CAWMP readily available? If yes, check
❑ Yes
�o
❑ NA
❑ NE
the appropriate box.
❑ WUP ❑ Checklists ❑ Design ❑ Maps ❑ Lease Agreements ❑ Other: 7 i- V-a0
21. Does record keeping need improvement? If yes, chV"Waste
appropriate box below. ❑ Yes o ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Waste Application ❑ Weekly Freeboard 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 WINWo ❑ NA ❑ NE
23. If selected, did the facility fail to install and maintain rainbreakers on irrigation equipment? [:]Yes ❑ NA ❑ NE
Page 2 of 3 21412015 Continued

Facility Number: - Date of Inspection: - a -Do'A O
24. Did the facility fail to calibrate waste application equipment as required by the permit? ❑ Yes
25. Is the facility out of compliance with permit conditions related to sludge? If yes, check [:]Yes VNo
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 Ej2"No
27. Did the facility fail to secure a phosphorus loss assessments (PLAT) certification? ❑ Yes E 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 ❑ NE
❑NA ❑NE
❑ NA ❑ NE
❑NA ❑NE
❑ Yes [7jNo ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes [YI/No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes [/NNo ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes ❑ No ❑ NA [q] NE
❑ Yes ✓dNo ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes rNo
❑ NA ❑ NE
[:]Yes ❑ 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 paces as necessary).
aha i h CCM? IiAn W-1
+a m n roc ^ av, ok d-- 60; lC 1ZA) U) $A _ie
w►,ere
1
I — —
o [9
�e e�a:�si M 3anu�� l9 . MACE SvR� yovr- (A Covers 0�i l PvroP'
W cv! ' nolr d i h oa0l ; vvrOve�e rl-1 need -k �
P � � c�odee( �erPas,
Cover, 5aw�e
Reviewer/Inspector Name: Jo N 9 z)' Phone
Reviewer/Inspector Signature:
Page 3 of 3
Date:
-a-aoa
21412015