310391_Compliance Evaluation Inspection_20200811

Facility Number
Type of Visit: Ah CCopliance Ins
Reason for Visit: Routine 0
(9Division of Water Resources S—�
0 Division of Soil and Water Conservation
0 Other Agency
Operation Review 0 Structure Evaluation 0 Technical Assistance
0 Follow-up 0 Referral 0 Emergency 0 Other 0 Denied Access
Date of Visit: Arrival Time: ®'foo Ot Departure Time: County: a,, pjc4Region: R I R ()
Farm Name: j�{?rnm�'�� �l���»7 31-- 37
Owner Name:
Mailing Address:
Physical Address:
Facility Contact:
Onsite Representative:
Title:
Owner Email:
Phone:
Integrator:
Phone:
Certified Operator: C'$eVv- S 1, ° K Certification Number: 1 I l-n
Back-up Operator:
Location of Farm:
Design Current
Swine Capacity Pop.
Wean to Finish
Wean to Feeder
Feeder to Finish ,
Farrow to Wean
Farrow to Feeder
Farrow to Finish
Gilts
Boars
Other
Other
Certification Number:
Latitude:
Design Current
Wet Poultry Capacity Pop.
Layer
Non -Layer
Design Current
Dry Poultry Capacity Pon.
Layers
Non -Layers
Pullets
Turkeys
Turkey Poults
Other
Longitude:
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
ZNo
1. Is any discharge observed from any part of the operation?
❑ Yes
❑ NA
❑ NE
Discharge originated at: ❑ Structure ❑ Application Field ❑ Other:
a. Was the conveyance man-made?
❑ Yes
dNo
❑ NA
❑ NE
b. Did the discharge reach waters of the State? (If yes, notify DWR)
❑ Yes
YNo
❑ 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
o
No
❑ NA
❑ NE
2. Is there evidence of a past discharge from any part of the operation?
❑ Yes
k"
❑ NA
❑ NE
3. Were there any observable adverse impacts or potential adverse impacts to the waters
❑ Yes
FZ No
❑ NA
❑ NE
of the State other than from a discharge?
Page 1 of 3 21412015 Continued

Facility Number: - '� 2 Date of inspection: JO 0
Waste Collection & Treatment
4. Is storage capacity (structural plus storm storage plus heavy rainfall) less than adequate? ❑ Yes WN
a. If yes, is waste level into the structural freeboard? ❑ Yes V
Structure 1 Structure 2 Structure 3
Identifier: V
Spillway?:
Designed Freeboard (in): I 0 ,
Observed Freeboard (in):�
❑NA ❑NE
❑ NA ❑ NE
Structure 4 Structure 5 Structure 6
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 UdNo ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes E2/No ❑ NA ❑ NE
If any of questions 4-6 were answered yes, and the situation poses an immediate public health or environment 1 threat, notify DWR
7. Do any of the structures need maintenance or improvement? ❑ Yes 7No ❑ NA ❑ NE
8. Do any of the structures lack adequate markers as required by the permit? ❑ Yes Ea/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
N
10. Are there any required buffers, setbacks, or compliance alternatives that need
❑ Yes [�]o
❑ NA
❑ NE
maintenance or improvement?
11. Is there evidence of incorrect land application? If yes, check the appropriate box below. ❑ Yes M 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): (7-6 C
'
13. Soil Type(s):
14. Do the receiving crops differ from those designated in the CAWMP?
❑ Yes EKNo
❑ 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 LJ No
❑ NA
❑ NE
acres determination?
17. Does the facility lack adequate acreage for land application?
❑ Yes E N
❑ NA
❑ NE
18. Is there a lack of properly operating waste application equipment?
❑ Yes LOCI 1V 0
❑ NA
❑ NE
Required Records & Documents
19. Did the facility fail to have the Certificate of Coverage & Permit readily available?
❑ Yes
Z o
❑ NA
❑ NE
20. Does the facility fail to have all components of the CAWMP readily available? If yes, check
❑ Yes
[ 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
ETNo
❑ 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
ZNo
❑ NA
❑ NE
23. If selected, did the facility fail to install and maintain rainbreakers on irrigation equipment?
❑ Yes
F!(No
❑ NA
❑ NE
Page 2 of 3 21412015 Continued

Facility Number: `-131 `391 1 jDate of Inspection: a
24. Did the facility fail to calibrate waste application equipment as required by the permit? ❑ Yes � o ❑ NA ❑ NE
25. Is the facility out of compliance with permit conditions related to sludge? If yes, check El Yes VNo ❑ 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 ❑ No FOINA ❑ 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 [] No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes ENo ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes [O]No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes ❑ No ❑ NA 2NE
❑ Yes 1 No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes WNo ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes �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\S ne.e roc 4
®c) no+ ct_4Qiy Mes-9. _'Iva► a 5 Its 4W on S (-o �v�d►�� ���e�A IJ ®�
bF 1 v® its A-mtn' a cq"n- '
Reviewer/Inspector Name: �M H IJ Phone:
r
Reviewer/Inspector Signature: Date:
Page 3 of 3 ( 21412015