310175_Compliance Evaluation Inspection_20200730

„ 'Divisioirof•Water Resources ”
Facility Number - j a 0 Division of Soil, gild Waterp Conservation 9
0 Other,Agency
Type of Visit: Co liance 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: D Arrival Time: Departure Time: County: l i
Farm Name: co d Sm . `H -E'r vm Owner Email:
Owner Name: 1 O U Se= Phone:
Mailing Address:
Physical Address:
Facility Contact:
Onsite Representative: Wm ec
Certified Operator: Sv s�i,l •wP new]
Back-up Operator:
Location of Farm:
Title:
Latitude:
Phone:
Integrator:
Certification Number: �� S
Certification Number:
Design.' Current, .` a ° ° Design Current
Swine Capacity Fop: ° Wet, Poultry ° °Capacity Pop.. `°•
Wean to Finish Layer
Wean to Feeder Non -Layer
Feeder to Finish
Farrow to Wean Design 'Current'
Farrow to Feeder I Dry Paultry ° canaeity 'Pon.
Farrow to Finish
Gilts
Boars
Other:
Other
Layers
Non -Layers
Pullets_
Turkeys
Turkey Poults
Other
Longitude:
Region: JAI I Z®
°Design °Current:
Cattle ° Capacity '
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 ONo
❑ 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 VN
❑ 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
❑ NA
❑ NE
2. Is there evidence of a P ast discharge from any part of the operation?
❑ Yes VNNo
❑ 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: - ITS jDate of Inspection:
Waste Collection & Treatment
4. Is storage capacity (structural plus storm storage plus heavy rainfall) less than adequate? ❑ Yes
a. If yes, is waste level into the structural freeboard?
Identifier:
Spillway?:
Designed Freeboard (in):
Observed Freeboard (in):
Structure 1 Structure 2
t
3F
Structure 3 Structure 4
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
Structure 5
LEIN ❑NA ONE
No ❑ NA ❑ NE
Structure 6
❑ Yes No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes [2/No ❑ NA ❑ NE
If any of questions 4-6 were answered yes, and the situation poses an immediate public health or environment threat, notify DWR
7. Do any of the structures need maintenance or improvement? ❑ Yes [o ❑ NA ❑ NE
8. Do any of the structures lack adequate markers as required by the permit? ❑ Yes V 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 to ❑ 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):
J
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
N
❑ 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
+/ No
❑ NA
❑ NE
18. Is there a lack of properly operating waste application equipment?
❑ Yes
Fg/No
❑ NA
❑ NE
Required Records & Documents
�
19. Did the facility fail to have the Certificate of Coverage & Permit readily available?
❑ Yes
L✓J N 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
No
❑ 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
No
❑ NA
❑ NE
23. If selected, did the facility fail to install and maintain rainbreakers on irrigation equipment?
❑ Yes
ffNo
❑ NA
❑ NE
Page 2 of 3
21412015 Continued

Facility Number: 3 1 - 'S I Date of Inspection:-3o-`ar)a
24. Did the facility fail to calibrate waste application equipment as required by the permit? El No ❑ NA ❑ NE
25. Is the facility out of compliance with permit conditions related to sludge? If yes, check ❑ Yes [lo ❑ 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 WNA ❑ 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
❑ Yes
ffNo
❑ 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
2 NE
❑ Application Field ❑ Lagoon/Storage Pond ❑ Other:
32. Were any additional problems noted which cause non-compliance of the permit or CAWiVIP?
❑ Yes
2 o
❑ NA
❑ NE
33. Did the Reviewer/Inspector fail to discuss review/inspection with an on -site representative?
❑ Yes
Evi/No
❑ NA
❑ NE
34. Does the facility require a follow-up visit by the same agency?
❑ Yes
EfNo
❑ 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).
—L;,,ne os (e_conmenAed
-° Ltiar e �� W
I
Reviewer/Inspector Name: Phone: (�I
Reviewer/Inspector Signature: Date:
Page 3 of 3 21412015