670039_Compliance Evaluation Inspection_20200805

Division of Water Resource"s` R
Facility lNumber, 0 Diyision'of Soil and Water Conservation
�— ,��
0 Other Agency
type of Visit: 0 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:
Farm Name: l z L.%r AN, va c, vt i-o, �V_--N Owner Email:
Owner Name: Phone:
Mailing Address:
Physical Address:
Facility Contact:
Title:
Onsite Representative: J e L J S Q L C� t-� Integrator:
Certified Operator:
Back-up Operator:
Location of Farm:
Design', Current °
Swine Capacity. Pop.
Wean to Finish
Wean to Feeder
Feeder to Finish Z
Farrow to Wean
Farrow to Feeder
Farrow to Finish
Gilts
Boars
Other~
Latitude:
Region:
Phone: I L 0 D9cjfD O
Certification Number:
Certification Number:
Design` Current
' `
Wet Poultry
Capacity Por. °
Layer
Non -Layer
Design °Current
Dry Paultrv,
'Canacity Poo.
Layers
Non -Layers
Pullets
Turkeys
Turkey Pouets
Other
Longitude:
° ,Design ° Gurrrent °
Cattile . ,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
/
[3--f4o
❑ 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
❑ 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
E] No
E2 A
❑ 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
To
❑ NA
❑ NE
of the State other than from a discharge?
Page I of 3 ° 21412015 Continued

Facility Number: - Date of Inspection: S'
Waste Collection & Treatment
4. Is storage capacity (structural plus storm storage plus heavy rainfall) less than adequate? ❑ Yes No ❑ NA, ❑ NE
F;�F�Aa. If yes, is waste level into the structural freeboard? ❑ Yes ❑ No ❑ NE
(Structure 1 Structure 2 Structure 3 Structure 4 Structure 5 Structure 6
Identifier: UA5 odh--t-
Spillway?:
Designed Freeboard (in):
Observed Freeboard (in): 31
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 2 No ❑ NA ❑ NE
i
❑ Yes [24o ❑ NA ❑ NE
If any of questions 4-6 were answered yes, and the situation poses an immediate public health or environmenta!Areat, notify DWR
7. Do any of the structures need maintenance or improvement? ❑ Yes No/ ❑ NA ❑ NE
i
8. Do any of the structures lack adequate markers as required by the permit? ❑ Yes ❑Xo ❑ 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
i
[:] o ❑ NA
❑ NE
maintenance or improvement?
i
11. Is there evidence of incorrect land application? If yes, check the appropriate box below. ❑ Yes
aKo ❑ 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):
13. Soil Type(s):
14. Do the receiving crops differ from those designated in the CAWMP?
❑ Yes
0'-l0' ❑ NA
❑ NE
15. Does the receiving crop and/or land application site need improvement?
❑ Yes
lo❑ NA
❑ NE
16. Did the facility fail to secure and/or operate per the irrigation design or wettable ❑ Yes
E?N/0 ❑ NA
❑ NE
acres determination?
/
17. Does the facility lack adequate acreage for land application?
❑ Yes
L.d l�o ❑ NA
❑ NE
18. Is there a lack of properly operating waste application equipment?
❑ Yes
No ❑ NA
❑ NE
Renuired Records & Documents
19. Did the facility fail to have the Certificate of Coverage & Permit readily available?
❑ Yes
[a No
❑ NA ❑ NE
20. Does the facility fail to have all components of the CAWMP readily available? If yes, check
❑ Yes
[D,"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
[],Ko
❑ 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
E3"No
❑ NA ❑ NE
23. If selected, did the facility fail to install and maintain rainbreakers on irrigation equipment? ❑ Yes ❑ No [2-NA- ❑ NE
Page 2 of 3 21412015 Continued

Facility Number: - Date of inspection:
24. Did the facility fail to calibrate waste application equipment as required by the permit? ❑ Yes EITUo ❑ 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 No ❑ NA i❑ NE
27. Did the facility fail to secure a phosphorus loss assessments (PLAT) certification? ❑ Yes ❑ No 0 NA ❑ NE
Other Issues
28. Did the facility fail to properly dispose of dead animals with 24 hours and/or document
❑ Yes
i
[3-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
Eallo
❑ 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
❑ No
❑ 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
❑ No
❑ NA Q NE
❑ Application Field ❑ Lagoon/Storage Pond ❑ Other:
32. Were any additional problems noted which cause non-compliance of the permit or CAWMP?
❑ Yes
❑ Nq
❑ NA ❑ NE
33. Did the Reviewer/Inspector fail to discuss review/inspection with an on -site representative?
❑ Yes
[✓] NO
❑ NA ❑ NE
34. Does the facility require a follow-up visit by the same agency?
❑ Yes
ED/No
❑ 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 pages as necessary).
C_'V\ cj ICA^\C2 W`rn, j Cd� s�,-c� �����Gr-C9 a�! 1' Z
J5
-To(' v11 c. � $ r 1 2 � f v�b � 0
Reviewer/Inspector Name: C
Reviewer/Inspector Signature: /` 10�
Page 3 of 3
Phone: 91 Q S Z b 3 S � 0
Date:'7L) I
S
21412015