310407_Compliance Evaluation Inspection_20200727

(9 Division of Water Resources fr;
Facility Number Tj - 0 Division of Soil and Water Conservation
0 Other Agency
Type of Visit: C mpliance 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: E>0pQW Region:
Farm Name: 1b S k I LP ATP_j CK Owner Email:
Owner Name:
Mailing Address:
Physical Address:
Facility Contact: b Nl p_p k,-j L f A7_K 1 GK Title:
Onsite Representative:
Certified Operator:
Back-up Operator:
Location of Farm:
Latitude:
Phone:
Phone:
Integrator: I
Certification Number: l --7 ;� 5 F
Certification Number:
Longitude:
Design Current Design Current
Swine Capacity Pop. Wet. Poultry Capacity Pop. Cattle
Wean to Finish
Wean to Feeder
Feeder to Finish
Farrow to Wean
Farrow to Feeder
Farrow to Finish -a 000 (Z
Gilts
Boars
Other
Other
Layer
Non -Layer
Design Current
Dry Poultry Capacity Pon.
Layers
Non -Layers
Pullets
Turkeys
Turkey Pouets
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?
Design Current
Capacity Pop.
Dairy Cow
Dairy Calf
Dairy Heifer
Dry Cow
Non -Dairy
Beef Stocker
Beef Feeder
Beef Brood Cow
❑ Yes [B No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes �o ❑ NA ❑ NE
b. Did the discharge reach waters of the State? (If yes, notify DWR)
❑ Yes
I_JFNo
❑ 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
❑ NA
❑ NE
2. Is there evidence of a past discharge from any part of the operation?
❑ Yes
[jlo
❑ NA
0 NE
3. Were there any observable adverse impacts or potential adverse impacts to the waters
❑ Yes
D Ko
❑ NA
❑ NE
of the State other than from a discharge?
Page I of 3 21412015 Continued

Facility Number: '-b - Date of Inspection:
Waste Collection & Treatment
4. Is storage capacity (structural plus storm storage plus heavy rainfall) less than adequate?
❑ Yes
do
❑ NA
❑ NE
a. If yes, is waste level into the structural freeboard?
❑ Yes
�j/No
❑ NA
❑ NE
Structure 1 Structure 2 Structure 3 Structure 4
Structure 5
Structure 6
Identifier:
Spillway?:
Designed Freeboard (in):
Observed Freeboard (in): Li Q
5. Are there any immediate threats to the integrity of any of the structures observed?
❑ Yes
[j3/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
[yNo
❑ 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 �No ❑ NA ❑ NE
8. Do any of the structures lack adequate markers as required by the permit? [:]Yes 52/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 M No ❑ NA ❑ NE
maintenance or improvement?
Waste Application
10. Are there any required buffers, setbacks, or compliance alternatives that need [:]Yes MNo ❑ NA ❑ NE
maintenance or improvement?
11. Is there evidence of incorrect land application? If yes, check the appropriate box below. ❑ Yes E3/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): 8 17 S 6-U
13. Soil Type(s):
14. Do the receiving crops differ from those designated in the CAWMP?
❑ Yes
ED"No
❑ NA
❑ NE
15. Does the receiving crop and/or land application site need improvement?
❑ Yes
t[/No
❑ NA
❑ NE
1.6. Did the facility fail to secure and/or operate per the irrigation design or wettable
❑ Yes
D4-
❑ 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
[2/No
❑ NA
❑ NE
Required Records & Documents
19. Did the facility fail to have the Certificate of Coverage & Permit readily available?
❑ Yes
❑ NA
❑ NE
20. Does the facility fail to have all components of the CAWMP readily available? If yes, check
VININ
❑ Yes
❑ 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 EdNo
❑ 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 [i/'No
❑ 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: 3 - ( Date of inspection:--X -oZ©a0
24. Did the facility fail to calibrate waste application equipment as required by the permit? ❑ Yes E/No ❑ NA ❑ NE
25. Is the facility out of compliance with permit conditions related to sludge? If yes, check ❑ Yes E4"'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: 1
26. Did the facility fail provide documentation of an actively certified operator in charge? ❑ Yes ET<o ❑ NA ❑ NE
27. Did the facility fail to secure a phosphorus loss assessments (PLAT) certification? ❑ Yes ❑ No F21NA ❑ 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)
❑ Yes [ <o
❑ Yes a To
❑ NA ❑ NE
❑NA ❑NE
❑ Yes No ❑ NA ❑ NE
31. Do subsurface tile drains exist at the facility? If yes, check the appropriate box below.
❑ Yes
❑ No
❑ NA
NE
❑ Application Field ❑ Lagoon/Storage Pond ❑ Other:-
32. Were any additional problems noted which cause non-compliance of the permit or CAWMP?
❑ Yes
E]"No
❑ NA
❑ NE
33. Did the Reviewer/Inspector fail to discuss review/inspection with an on -site representative?
El Yes
El o
❑ NA
❑ NE
34. Does the facility require a follow-up visit by the same agency?
❑ 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).
tAlOcsn (marked WctS S.rvelco q`�b�a0�� wecs. Marl.-e' - (n�S �" jel,-W /0'WEC
�; r$- ar d�00a17, a
tAr w% 0,T4 NCosJ S are in 7fq,+ Sh^(p— 4
Reviewer/InspectorName: -7s'Ao ?F_�'y
Reviewer/Inspector Signature:
Page 3 of 3
Phone:
Date: 7- 3 - 02 6aZ
21412015