310419_Compliance Evaluation Inspection_20200903

° (9`DiAsion of Resources .
_Facility Number o0 Divisio°n of Soil and Water Conservation
0 Other. Agency
r
Type of Visit: ED Co pliance 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: pw,� County: ( j %-, Region: (A)
e- ET
Farm Name: fl►ele.C^fiYr� Owner mail:
Owner Name: 4 ne+A Brcrwy\✓ Phone:
Mailing Address:
Physical Address:
fFacility Contact:
Onsite Representative:
Title:
Integrator:
Phone:
Certified Operator: E_ NN�`rN (� 2c,.a ,� Certification Number:
Back-up Operator:
Location of Farm:
Latitude:
Certification Number:
Longitude:
Design Current : " Design• 'Current 'Design -Current
Swine Capacity' Pop., Wet Poultry . ° rapacity Pop Cattle Capacity a Pop. °: :.
.Wean to Finish
Wean to Feeder
Feeder to Finish b d O
Farrow to Wean
Farrow to Feeder
Farrow to Finish
Gilts
Boars
Other _
Other
Layer
Non -Layer
Design ° Current
Dry Poultry, ` Ca' lAcity- ° °Po ..
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 o ❑ NA ❑ NE
b. Did the discharge reach waters of the State? (If yes, notify DWR) ❑ Yes Wo ❑ 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 d o ❑ NA ❑ NE
2. Is there evidence of a past discharge from any part of the operation? ❑ Yes rNNo ❑ NA ❑ NE
3. Were there any observable adverse impacts or potential adverse impacts to the waters ❑ YesWr'N'o ❑ NA ❑ NE
of the State other than from a discharge?
Page I of 3 21412015 Continued

Facility Number: _-,� I - 41 S jDate of Inspection: -
Waste Collection & Treatment
4. Is storage capacity (structural plus storm storage plus heavy rainfall) less than adequate? ❑ Yes E� o ❑ NA ❑ NE
a. If yes, is waste level into the structural freeboard? ❑ Yes [V ❑ NA ❑ NE
Structure 1 Structure 2 Structure 3 Structure 4 Structure 5 Structure 6
Identifier:
Spillway?:
Designed Freeboard (in):
Observed Freeboard (in): ;ZZL-
5. Are there any immediate threats to the integrity of any of the structures observed?
❑ Yes
[2rNo
❑ 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
dNo
❑ 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
4
No
❑ NA
❑ NE
8. Do any of the structures lack adequate markers as required by the permit?
❑ Yes
dNo
❑ 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 dNo ❑ NA ❑ NE
maintenance or improvement?
Waste Application
10. Are there any required buffers, setbacks, or compliance alternatives that need [:]Yes dNo ❑ NA ❑ NE
maintenance or improvement?
11. Is there evidence of incorrect land application? If yes, check the appropriate box below. ❑ Yes �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):�,
13. Soil Type(s):
14. Do the receiving crops differ from those designated in the CAWMP? ❑ Yes dNo ❑ NA ❑ NE
15. Does the receiving crop and/or land application site need improvement? ❑ Yes [� o ❑ NA ❑ NE
16. Did the facility fail to secure and/or operate per the irrigation design or wettable ❑ Yes *NNo ❑ NA ❑ NE
acres determination?
17. Does the facility lack adequate acreage for land application?
18. Is there a lack of properly operating waste application equipment?
❑ Yes ['No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes [ No ❑ 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 dNo
❑ NA
❑ NE
the appropriate box.
❑ WUP ❑ Checklists ❑ Design ❑ Maps ❑ Lease Agreements
❑ Other:
21. Does record keeping need improvement? If yes, check e appropriate box below.
dyes ❑ 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 E�No
❑ NA
❑ NE
23. If selected, did the facility fail to install and maintain rainbreakers on irrigation equipment?
❑ Yes [ Io
❑ NA
❑ NE
Page 2 of 3 21412015 Continued

Facility Number: j - jj jDate of Inspection:
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 [/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:
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 dNA ❑ NE
Other Issues
28. Did the facility fail to properly dispose of dead animals with 24 hours and/or document ❑ Yes J'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 [/No
❑ Yes [�(No
❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes [:]No ❑ NA �Ns
❑ Yes D/No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes E! No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes allo ❑ 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).
, ►o�- d Y-0
S'�,ti
M;ss�•-.r, VAb kor a �'���`•� event � a 0\0 faWAI
Reviewer/Inspector Name:
Reviewer/Inspector Signatw
Page 3 of 3
Phone:
Date:
21412015