310435_Compliance Evaluation Inspection_20200902

`U Division of Water Resources
Facility Number 31 - 43 5 0 Division of Soil -and Water Conservation L� i f��h d
0 Other Agency
Type of Visit: Co
Hance Inspection 0 Operation Review 0 Structure Evaluation 0 Technical Assistance
Reason for Visit: 0 Complaint 0 Follow-up 0 Referral 0 Emergency 0 Other 0 Denied Access
Date of Visit:-e,-a.�0 Arrival Time: EnffyA Departure Time: County:
Farm Name: 3 6-14 rA A yyN — LOU/ S Hw-wA D -4;'� Owner Email:
Owner Name: Louis Q NA.,, 4R D Phone:
Mailing Address:
Physical Address:
Facility Contact:
Title:
Onsite Representative: ` UU I S No'.'rd Integrator•
Certified Operator: Lou I S (Q Cl -P-V>
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
Latitude:
Phone:
�►v� Region: W jkO
Certification Number: I$o 33
Certification Number:
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
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
o
❑ NA
❑ NE
b. Did the discharge 'reach waters of the State? (If yes, notify DWR)
❑ Yes
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
EdNo
❑ NA
❑ NE
2. Is there evidence of a past discharge from any part of the operation?
❑ Yes
53�No
❑ NA
❑ NE
3. Were there any observable adverse impacts or potential adverse impacts to the waters
❑ Yes
U40
❑ NA
❑ NE
of the State other than from a discharge?
Page 1 of 3 21412015 Continued

Facility Number: 3 I - '3 Date 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? ❑ Yes
Strucrre 1 Structure 2 Structure 3 Structure 4
Identifier:
Spillway?:
Designed Freeboard (in): _
Observed Freeboard (in): _
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?
Structure 5
[j2/No ❑ NA ❑ NE
EVo ❑ NA ❑ NE
Structure 6
❑Yes EjjZo ❑NA ❑NE
❑ Yes M 1"e ❑ 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
dNo
❑ NA
❑ NE
8. Do any of the structures lack adequate markers as required by the permit?
❑ Yes
�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
�To
❑ 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 im rovement?
P
11. Is there evidence of incorrect land application? If yes, check the appropriate box below. ❑ Yes Eg 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): C., W
13. Soil Type(s):
14. Do the receiving crops differ from those designated in the CAWMP? ❑ Yes [0 No ❑ NA ❑ NE
15. Does the receiving crop and/or land application site need improvement? ❑ Yes [4o ❑ NA ❑ NE
16. Did the facility fail to secure and/or operate per the irrigation design or wettable ❑ Yes L.,4o/ ❑ NA ❑ NE
acres determination?
17. Does the facility lack adequate acreage for land application?
❑ Yes
❑ NA
❑ NE
18. Is there a lack of properly operating waste application equipment?
❑ Yes
VN
❑ NA
❑ NE
Required Records & Documents
19. Did the facility fail to have the Certificate of Coverage & Permit readily available?
❑ Yes
? No
❑ NA
❑ NE
20. Does the facility fail to have all components of the CAWMP readily available? If yes, check
❑ Yes
EJ4
❑ 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 B2�]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: - Date of inspection: '
24. Did the facility fail to calibrate waste application equipment as required by the permit? 0 Yes E�,No ❑ NA ❑ NE
25. Is the facility out of compliance with permit conditions related to sludge? If yes, check ❑ Yes F24o ❑ 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 o ❑ NA 0 NE
27. Did the facility fail to secure a phosphorus loss assessments (PLAT) certification? ❑ Yes o eNA ❑ NE
Other Issues ;r 9-a-aa
28. Did the facility fail to properly dispose of dead animals with 24 hours and/or document [—]Yes []Z 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?
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 0�0 ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes B✓ _No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes ❑ No ❑ NA
❑ Yes [V(No
❑ Yes dNo
❑ Yes [j2/No
❑NA ONE
❑ 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).
5iook-o) Imorfol,4 CcL,o.t4r b✓ee,t/-� o��Pc� 740
w K off- 5V� , �Se the
Cavc.r 6 U ��y � 6e-�ore nerd �-S f e r
i1-,a.. nor�a VJA
�folN 4111C 3- dB_ l q WA . MA to svye wM
GLe'S-a��I� 11 it-. lov (eeeive a h Ar
Reviewer/InspectorName: 7 54m FcmtJ-/ Phone: q6��
Reviewer/Inspector Signature: Date:
Page 3 of 3 21412015