510028_Compliance Evaluation Inspection_20200716

QD Division of Water Resources
Facility Number - a1 ! O Division of Soil and Water Conservation
O Other Agency
Type of Visit: QD Compliance Inspection 0 Operation Review O Structure Evaluation O Technical Assistance
Reason for Visit: f Routine O Complaint O Fo low -up O Referral O Emergency O Other O Denied Access
Date of Visit: Arrival Time: Departure Time: County: job Region: (RI�o
Farm Name: I`Fl 1-J � Owner Email: et,dad 3 0! amal L W-M _-
9 — to SLY
Owner Name: 4• Phone: 390 200I
Mailing Address:
Physical Address:
Facility Contact:
Title:
Phone:
Onsite Representative: A Integrator: — ix L C
v
Certified Operator: &t%±Qra eAl"nn] _ _ 4r?t' Certification Number: (;.LVIA
Back-up Operator: Certification Number:
Location of Farm:
Swine
Wean to Finish
Wean to Feeder
Feeder to Finish
Farrow to Wean
Farrow to Feedei
Farrow to Finish
Gilts
Boars
Other
Other
Latitude:
Design Current Design Current
Capacity Pop. Wet Poultry Capacity Pop.
Layer
Non -La er
Pullets
Poults
Design Current
Longitude:
Design Current
Cattle Capacity Pop.
Dairy Cow
Daity Calf
Dairy Heifer
Dry Cow
Non-Dai
Beef Stocker
Beef Feeder
Beef Brood Cow
Discharges and Stream Impacts
No
I. Is any discharge observed from any part of the operation?
❑ Yes
P]
❑ NA
❑ NE
Discharge originated at: ❑ Structure ❑ Application Field ❑ Other:
a. Was the conveyance man-made?
❑ Yes
No
❑ NA
❑ NE
b. Did the discharge reach waters of the State? (If yes, notify DWR)
❑ Yes
�J'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
ZNo
❑ NA
❑ NE
2_ Is there evidence of a past discharge from any part of the operation?
❑ Yes
eNo
❑ NA
❑ NE
3. Were there any observable adverse impacts or potential adverse impacts to the waters
❑ Yes
WNo
❑ NA
❑ NE
of the State other than from a discharge?
Page I of 3 21412015 Continued

Facility Number: Date of Inspection. /
Waste Collection & Treatment
4. Is storage capacity (structural plus storm storage plus heavy rainfall) less than adequate? ❑ Yes [�' No ❑ NA ❑ NE
a. If yes, is waste level into the structural freeboard? ❑ Yes No ❑ NA ❑ NE
Structure I Structure 2 Structure 3 Structure 4 Structure 5 Structure 6
Identifier:
Spillway?: 0,0
Designed Freeboard (in): 19
Observed Freeboard (in):
5. Are there any immediate threats to the integrity of any of the structures observed? ❑ Ycs 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 [6 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 [A No
❑ NA
[] NE
8. Do any of the structures lack adequate markers as required by the permit?
❑ Yes [Zf 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 [A No
❑ NA
❑ NE
maintenance or improvement?
Waste AR21ication
10. Arc 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 u No
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Excessive Ponding ❑ Hydraulic Overload ❑ Frozen Ground
❑ Heavy Metals (Cu, Zn, etc.)
❑ PAN ❑ PAN > 10% or 10 lbs. ❑ Total Phosphorus ❑ FaiIure 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
❑ 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 ar wettable
❑ Yes
[%f No
❑ NA
❑ NE
acres determination?
17. Does the facility lack adequate acreage for land application?
❑ Yes
No
❑ 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 [6 No
❑ NA
❑ NE
20. Does the facility fail to have all components of the CAWMP readily available? If yes, check
❑ Yes 0 No
❑ NA
❑ NE
the appropriate box.
❑ WUP []Checklists ❑ Dcsign ❑ 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 I" Rainfall Inspections
❑ Sludge Survey
22. Did the facility fail to install and maintain a rain gauge?
❑ Yes No
9No
❑ 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: -'6 Date of Inspection;
24. id the facility�fail to calibrate waste application a ui ment s r quired by the permit?
Y..L� ate:�d C 1 I
b
❑ Yes ❑ No ❑ NA ❑ NE
Q11 1�N '^"`�' oZ©f
25. Is the facil ity out of comp lance with permit conditions related to sludge? If yes, check
❑ Yes D No ❑ NA ❑ NE
the appropriate box(es) below. a© i at . , e
❑ 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 ❑ No ❑ NA ❑ NE
Other Issues
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?
❑ Yes ❑ No ❑ 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
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 Revicwcdlnspector fail to discuss review,rinspection with an on -site representative?
34. Does the facility require a follow-up visit by the same agency?
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ 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 adddlljtionai es ss as neceary).
q
E
0
t�s wL.�
u
OX�tF�
t
1P I do c
31— P
cn ,�—c c>I►
I
.LS
1` o tv 0 ttj
¢4 N �i
as 9s
J
t
b
Iz
[A
ReviewerAnspcctor Name:
Reviewer/Inspector Signatu
Page 3 of 3
Q-LU 919 Rio "I
Phone: q j q j q i -I.
Date: 7 ' 10 ram%
21412015