310101_Compliance Evaluation Inspection_20200901

W Division of Water Resource's`
Facility Number 3 U Division 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: la,s County: EbQj j)n Region: WP,6
Farm Name: F2mo L 6 Q01 NO Owner Email:
Owner Name: E'(Lf, 01_ %) I tjli) i AAM Phone:
Mailing Address:
Physical Address:
Facility Contact:
Onsite Representative: Er rd 1 0. V ► 11 V
Certified Operator: Err- p > QV ) n 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" ,
Title:
Latitude:
Phone:
Integrator: Pre s to
Certification Number:
Certification Number:
Longitude:
Design Current- • Design,. Current
Wet Poultry Capacity ° ° Pop. Cattle .Capacity •$'.Pop..
Layer
Non -Layer
• Design ° , Current °
Dry Poultry Capacity : Pon.
Layers
Non -Layers
Pullets
Turkeys
Turkey Poults
Other
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
�No
❑ 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
[D/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
No
❑ NA
❑ NE
2. Is there evidence of a past discharge from any part of the operation?
❑ Yes
�lo
❑ NA
❑ NE
3. Were there any observable adverse impacts or potential adverse impacts to the waters
❑Yes
[Po
❑ NA
❑ NE
of the State other than from a discharge?
Page 1 of 3 21412015 Continued

Facility Number: 31 - l O Date of Inspection:
Waste Collection & Treatment
4. Is storage capacity_ (structural plus storm storage plus heavy rainfall) less than adequate? ❑ Yes �VNo
a. If yes, is waste level into the structural freeboard? ❑ Yes
Identifier
Spillway?:
Designed Freeboard (in):
Observed Freeboard (in):
❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ NA ❑ NE
Structure 1 Structure 2 Structure 3 Structure 4 Structure 5 Structure 6
-_ 3 --t
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 No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes [O/No ❑ NA ❑ NE
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
[-IVo
❑ NA
❑ NE
8. Do any of the structures lack adequate markers as required by the permit?
❑ Yes
[Ilo
❑ 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
Ejj/N0
❑ NA
❑ NE
maintenance or improvement.
11. Is there evidence of incorrect land application? If yes, check the appropriate box below. ❑ Yes E24o ❑ 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): ?,)-k lTI
13. Soil Type(s):
14. Do the receiving crops differ from those designated in the CAWMP?
❑ Yes
allo
❑ NA
❑ NE
15. Does the receiving crop and/or land application site need improvement?
❑ Yes
53"No
❑ NA
❑ NE
16. Did the facility fail to secure and/or operate per the irrigation design or wettable
❑ Yes
�No
❑ NA
❑ NE
acres determination?
17. Does the facility lack adequate acreage for land application?
❑ Yes
E�No
❑ NA
❑ NE
18. Is there a lack of properly operating waste application equipment?
❑ Yes
EKO
❑ NA
❑ NE
Required Records & Documents
19. Did the facility fail to have the Certificate of Coverage & Permit readily available?
❑ Yes
[D,�4o
❑ NA
❑ NE
20. Does the facility fail to have all components of the CAWMP readily available? If yes, check
❑ Yes
Flo
❑ 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 o ❑ 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 [2/No ❑ NA ❑ NE
23. If selected, did the facility fail to install and maintain rainbreakers on irrigation equipment? ❑ I�'l�c Yes ❑ NA ❑ NE
Page 2 of 3 21412015 Continued

Facility Number: k - l O Date of Inspection: - I - _�o a o
24. Did the facility fail to calibrate waste application equipment as required by the permit? ❑ Yes 0❑ NA ❑ NE
25. Is the facility out of compliance with permit conditions related to sludge? If yes, check ❑ �Z_
Yes ❑ 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?
27. Did the facility fail to secure a phosphorus loss assessments (PLAT) certification?
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 Ek�o
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Yes—Fo
®DNA
❑ NE
7 q -I-ad>
❑ Yes 09401
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Yes B]"No
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Yes []/o
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Yes ❑ No ❑ NA �TE
❑ Yes
❑ Yes
❑ Yes
❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ 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).
— �AG. s � a; � � S+® C-1C rnor61' }'y reCo r d s
�vr'rn
� - s13�" if-.tz --) S,
V Se owrc'ge.� fir` Wee k-1 y SiVCK I
Reviewer/Inspector Name: 7SoHN pfl-`f Phone:
Reviewer/Inspector Signature: Date: 9 — 1 -' aO
Page 3 of 3 21412015