670043_Compliance Evaluation Inspection_20200805

Division of Water Resources
Facility Number - 0 Division of Soil and Water Conservation
0 Other Agency
Type of Visit: ® 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: Q Departure Time: IT�f� County:
Farm Name: LV.j P (+� V'K4 '-v`1 Owner Email:
Owner Name:
Mailing Address:
Physical Address:
Facility Contact:
Title:
Phone:
OnsiteRepresentative: [-de.✓ F 1-4ky,al_ Integrator:
Certified Operator:
Back-up Operator:
Location of Farm:
Swine
Wean to Finish
Wean to Feeder
Feeder to Finish
Farrow to Wean
Farrow to Feeder
Farrow to Finish
Gilts
Boars
Other
Other
Latitude:
Region:
Phone: q 10 3,30'? q clD
Certification Number:
Certification Number:
Design Current Design Current
Capacity Pop. Wet Poultry Capacity Pop.
Layer I --d
Non -Layer
Design Current
Dry Poultry Canacitv Pon.
Layers
Non -Layers
Pullets
Turkeys
Turkey Poults
Other
Discharges and Stream Impacts
1. Is any discharge observed from any part of the operation?
Discharge originated at: ❑ Structure ❑ Application Field ❑ Other:
a. Was the conveyance man-made?
Longitude:
Design Current
Cattle Capacity Pop.
Dairy Cow
Dairy Calf
Dairy Heifer
Dry Cow
Non -Dairy
Beef Stocker
Beef Feeder
Beef Brood Cow
❑ Yes E3-f to ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes ❑ No []'NA ❑ NE
b. Did the discharge reach waters of the State? (If yes, notify DWR)
❑ Yes
❑ No
L_� 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
[j NA
❑ NE
2. Is there evidence of a past discharge from any part of the operation?
0 Yes
0 No
0 NA
❑ NE
3. Were there any observable adverse impacts or potential adverse impacts to the waters
❑ Yes
❑i No
❑ NA
❑ NE
of the State other than from a discharge?
Page 1 of 3 21412015 Continued

Facility Number: jDate of Inspection:
i
Waste Collection & Treatment 4. Is storage capacity (structural plus storm storage plus heavy rainfall) less than adequate? ❑ ,—
Yes 13J <o ❑ NA ❑ NE
a. If yes, is waste level into the structural freeboard? ❑ Yes 0 No &N'A ❑ NE
Structure 1 Structure 2 Structure 3 Structure 4 Structure 5 Structure 6
Identifier: I ` �,� a �# L
Spillway?:
Designed Freeboard (in):
Observed Freeboard (in):
5. Are there any immediate threats to the integrity of any of the structures observed? ❑Yes �No[—] ❑ 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 2rNo ❑ 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
i
7. Do any of the structures need maintenance or improvement? ❑Yes [ No ❑ NA ❑ NE
8. Do any of the structures lack adequate markers as required by the permit? ❑ Yes To ❑ 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 [�lo ❑ NA ❑ NE
maintenance or improvement?
Waste Application
10. Are there any required buffers, setbacks, or compliance alternatives that need
❑ Yes
To
❑ 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):
13. Soil Type(s):
14. Do the receiving crops differ from those designated in the CAWMP?
❑ Yes
�o
❑ NA
❑ NE
15. Does the receiving crop and/or land application site need improvement?
❑Yes
E/j lv❑
NA
❑ NE
16. Did the facility fail to secure and/or operate per the irrigation design or wettable
❑Yes
I �J 1V0
❑ NA
❑ NE
acres determination?
17. Does the facility lack adequate acreage for land application?
❑ Yes
J
❑j'N�o
❑ NA
❑ NE
18. Is there a lack of properly operating waste application equipment?
❑ Yes
[ZNo
❑ NA
❑ NE
Required Records & Documents
19. Did the facility fail to have the Certificate of Coverage & Permit readily available?
❑ Yes
[2[ No
❑ NA
❑ NE
20. Does the facility fail to have all components of the CAWMP readily available? If yes, check
❑ Yes
allo
❑ 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 [3No ❑ 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 [DfNo ❑ NA ❑ NE!
23. If selected, did the facility fail to install and maintain rainbreakers on irrigation equipment? ❑ Yes ❑ No ❑ NA [ NE
Page 2 of 3 21412015 Continued

Facility Number: - Date of Inspection: Y I
Z o
/
to
NA
❑ NE
24. Did the facility fail to calibrate waste application equipment as required by the permit?
s
❑Ze
❑
25. Is the facility out of compliance with permit conditions related to sludge? If yes, check
s
❑ No
❑ NA
❑ NE
the appropriate box(es) below.
❑ Failure to complete annual sludge survey ❑ Failure to develop a POA for sludge levels
0"Ni on -compliant sludge levels in any lagoon �'
%,
n a
4,
List structure(s) and date of first survey indicating non-compliance:
�l�
26. Did the facility fail provide documentation of an actively certified operator in charge?
[:]Yes
El -No
❑ NA
/NA
❑ NE
27. Did the facility fail to secure a phosphorus loss assessments (PLAT) certification?
❑ Yes
[:]No
❑ NE
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?
❑ Yes
allo
0 NA
❑ NE
❑ Yes
E3/N/o
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Yes
j.
o
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Yes
❑ No
❑ NA
❑i'�
❑ Yes
EKO
❑ Yes
PY�
[—]Yes
[Z No
❑ 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 additional pages as necessary).
Ab ,I C , , Poi- �� I 5 -7�
Reviewer/Inspector Name: W c.
Reviewer/Inspector Signature: _
Page 3 of 3
Phone: N -_-) Sao —
Date:
21412015